Swampdog wrote:
It is a difference of opinion. I don't think our defense has the raw talent to stay on the field with anyone except Sister Mary's Academy. I think that when a coaching staff recruits all of their talent onto only one side of the ball then the burden of protection falls upon the coach who gets the talent. Our offense did nothing to help our defense.
The offense has all the talent. The defense has very little. It is the offense's job not only to score points but to control the tempo and momentum of the game. They did not do that. At all.
You mention the Bama game. Perfect example. Our defense never had a chance to slug it out against Bama and we all knew that. The only chance our defense ever had was to stay off the field as much as possible. When the defense did go onto the field then we needed to throw everything we had into a high risk blitzkrieg. Our offense needed to control the tempo of the game so that our defense could take risks. With the offense going 3 & out the defense never had a chance. Now why did they go 3 & out? If you go back you will see that they spent most of the first half trying to establish the play action pass. With our OL versus Bama DL? Give me a break. It was one of the most ill conceived gamplans I saw all year.
The talent may not be there but rivals rankings say otherwise. I think for the most part the Dawgs have been recruiting consistently 4 star players for the past 3 or 4 recruiting cycles. Its up to the coaches to find that potential. After going down 31-0 at the half you can throw the running game out the window and forget about tempo.
I guess we can agree to disagree. I just feel in the Bama game the D holds in the second half and the Dawgs possibly pull out the win.