re: Why is Steele getting a pass?

quote:

---

Were do you think our Dline players would rank in the SEC?

---

I have no idea. I think our starters would start for most SEC teams. Its not like they are scrubs.

quote:

---

And to stop Bama you have to have better than ok players on your D-line.

---

Is our dline better or worse than last year?

quote:

---

Because the Dline doesn't require double teams the Oline is free to head hunt the LB'rs.

---

I can't remember seeing any middle lb's handled like he was on that play...at any level. Maybe it was one bad play.

quote:

---

If you're referring to the first half of last year, I agree. But through the second half of 2014, our defense was incredible. Definitely beats this year.

---

I'm talking about comparing last year as a whole to this year as a whole. Why is everyone complaining about Steele getting a pass while simultaneously giving Chavis a big pass? If Chavis were still here, it wouldn't have helped at all against the gumps, and it might have been worse since Chavis couldn't figure out how to get pressure on the QB.

This. Steele needs an opportunity to get his and O's players worked into the system. He has no depth to deal with. And that is not on him or Coach O or coach Raymond.

When Steele gets his depth and size then judge. Chavis left us light in the arse and thin.

quote:

---

Were do you think our Dline players would rank in the SEC? Neal is the only one that would be in the top 20. They are ok players but nothing special. And to stop Bama you have to have better than ok players on your D-line.

---

Davon Godchaux is the most underrated DT in the conference and Neal is having a All-SEC season. To say the starters on the Dline are "nothing special" is beyond ignorant.

The depth is the problem for that unit, not the starters.

As everyone has mentioned, we had a very young, no-depth, poorly-matched up (their o-line quite obviously oversized our d-line; we matched better for pass rush, and we got some sacks no less) front seven working for forty minutes against those big boys. They had a handful of stops, too.

I said during the game that it looked a little like the championship again (but with a half competent qb able to make that pass and a well-placed turnover to give us our two touchdowns). Can't run. Couldn't get some passes we needed. Small margin of error. No TOP. The D had no help.

And it IS ol' boy's first year. That can make a difference, whether you want to admit it or not. I feel he had our D do fair work, considering. I and others had been concerned with the lack of depth throughout the year, as covered up as it was by the players' talent. Still, when you're undersized in totality like we were, it's hard to do work ALL of the forty minutes, regardless of athleticism.

The REAL question is why our offensive line was so ABSOLUTELY dominated. Even Fournette's lone scamper toward the end zone came from a bounce off the edge of the wall of bodies. We lost the line of scrimmage on both sides, and only one of them makes sense, both on paper and to the eye.

I'll give Steele this one. Again, the real problem was our O-line in the run.

I agree with the comments about a depleted roster and TOP, and I will add another, simple reason: the defense in the Alabama game benefits from the comparison to the offense. The D played, let's say at a C- level, but the offense, was a flat F. So, you're naturally going to see more complaining about the offense.

quote:

---

Agree.

---

Along with with Steele and O teaching technique, something that was a foreign concept to the previous defensive staff.

Steele couldn't have done anything. We got dominated in the trenches.

This staff is built solely to recruit and the rant still defends them by saying "well but bama has better players!"