📡 Injury updates on DJ Dale, Terrell Lewis, Will Reichard

[PurlJam]

Kudos to Bulovas on coming in for Reichard. He seemed to be hitting the ball good on his kicks, pushing it right a little but still making good contact. He looked and seemed much more confident.

 

[rick4bama]

Back up has always been the best!!

 

[BamaFan334]

Are you not comparing a Bama team in 2019 versus, say, a Bama team from 2012 (or any year like that?) Bama isn't playing Bama leaving comparisons to past teams out of the question at hand, does it not?

Step back for a minute and consider this.

If you saw one, you saw 10's of dozen's of people fretting over "Bama gave up 23 points to UofSC." Never mind it was on the road against a decent team.

Where are the "UGA only scored 23 at home against Notre Dame?" Or, where is the "LSU allowed Vandy 38 points while giving up 374 yards?"


No. I don't think so. I think it's the lens you're viewing football through. As one example, how often do you see people searching for areas where they can critique Bama's play this season? And, in those observations, how often have they been comparing two different teams from different years? We're literally seeing people saying "it's bullshit to say the offensive line needs time to gel" when every coach in collegiate football—yesterday, today, and forever for that matter—say "it takes time for the offensive line to gel?"

I've seen some say "Bama fans are spoiled." That's true, to an extent, in my view. I think it's the safest statement that can be made to say, "a lot of fan have lost their perspective."

So you can sit there and say to yourself that this is the same type of Alabama team we've seen in the Saban era? We have absolutely zero pass rush, dealing with countless injuries, and for the first time our entire defense seems to be a liability against a throwing quarterback. Our offensive line is the total opposite of anything we have seen in the last ten years. We have three five stars and two All-Americans on our line, yet we can't find an open running lane.

South Carolina a decent team? Please, they have gotten beat by North Carolina and Missouri.

We have such an easy schedule this year that it's impossible to know where we are at and we won't know until we play an LSU team that has already beaten a decent contender. But as I look at it now, we are lacking big time on defense. Maybe it's the playcalling where we are offering no pressure to create a boend but no break approach, and I've never been a big fan of that because in a crunch we have got to know if we can apply pressure and get it.

As far as your Georgia comments, last night showed a lot of vulnerability with them. I don't think their passing defense can hold our jock and we just outscore them. We always make fun of the Big 12, but that is probably where we are at this year with 'just outscore them'.

LSU, I agree that I couldn't believe they gave that many points up, but I also feel they took the 'play everyone' approach after being up 20 points. They also scored 66 and covered. I don't think anyone is waking up today seriously questioning their defense.

I know you want to take up for this team, and that is fine, they are our boys and I have their backs big time. I'm just expressing an opinion that we are not near as dominant as years past. To be fair, Clemson isn't either, Georgia isn't either. Oklahoma and Ohio State, both have played zero, but they look solid, as does LSU whom people here love to hate, and Wisconsin may be a tough out now. I have faith we will be there when it counts, but with our injuries, inability to dominate either line of scrimmage, I am less inclined now than before that we win all of our games and make the Playoffs.

I also feel we are slowing big time in recruiting with linemen on both sides. Who's getting them and who has appeared to close the gap with us, Clemson and Georgia. Just an observation of course.

 

[TerryP]

Are you not comparing a Bama team in 2019 versus, say, a Bama team from 2012 (or any year like that?) Bama isn't playing Bama leaving comparisons to past teams out of the question at hand, does it not?

So you can sit there and say to yourself that this is the same type of Alabama team we've seen in the Saban era? We have absolutely zero pass rush, dealing with countless injuries, and for the first time our entire defense seems to be a liability against a throwing quarterback. Our offensive line is the total opposite of anything we have seen in the last ten years. We have three five stars and two All-Americans on our line, yet we can't find an open running lane.

You've answered my question. You are comparing the 2019 team to teams of the past when trying to judge what this team may accomplish. Therein is my point. Is if a fair judgement? No. There's a reason we've heard, time and time again, references to "that was last year's team" and "this team hasn't accomplished anything yet."

Harken back to "is this what you want football to be?" For years we talked about how other teams changing systems to RPO and HUNH left their defenses at a disadvantage. Now, seeing it close to home, have you forgotten what was espoused for years? No. You haven't. But you know this.

We always make fun of the Big 12, but that is probably where we are at this year with 'just outscore them'.

LSU, I agree that I couldn't believe they gave that many points up, but I also feel they took the 'play everyone' approach after being up 20 points. They also scored 66 and covered. I don't think anyone is waking up today seriously questioning their defense.

You'd be wrong. I did and it elicited your response. According to what I've read Nessler said the same thing last night during the broadcast.

I know you want to take up for this team, and that is fine, they are our boys and I have their backs big time. I'm just expressing an opinion that we are not near as dominant as years past. To be fair, Clemson isn't either, Georgia isn't either. Oklahoma and Ohio State, both have played zero, but they look solid, as does LSU whom people here love to hate, and Wisconsin may be a tough out now. I have faith we will be there when it counts, but with our injuries, inability to dominate either line of scrimmage, I am less inclined now than before that we win all of our games and make the Playoffs.

No. It's not a case of "taking up for the team."

It certainly is a case of suggesting that people stop for a minute and consider what I mentioned earlier. This 2019 team isn't playing the Bama of 2012. It'll be playing the UGA's of '19, the OU's of '19, the LSU's of '19.

Through four games can any of those teams be judged accurately? Again, no. I don't believe they can. In Bama's case, you know why. This week is a good example with talent returning to the offensive line.

I do believe we're seeing weaknesses come to light in their teams just like we're seeing youth have is drawbacks with Bama.

There are a lot of examples of us seeing improvement within the first four games this season. Just as one example, among all the complaints you've seen about the offensive line on yesterday's game have you seen anyone mention the false start penalties against Bama? No. Formation penalties? No. Because there weren't any. An improvement that easily could be noted but we have those who'd rather continue on their mantra of "how bad they are."

There are also a lot of examples with folks complaining about things and their complaints are not in context with what they know. Pass rush fits this to a "T." Yes, we don't see as much as we've seen in the past. However, when you're playing two true frosh in the middle of the linebacking corps as well as another two on the line a team doesn't have the liberty to "pin their ears back." It's too easy for receivers to take advantage (just as we saw in the South Carolina game...a game against, yes, a decent team.)

 

[Tidestalker]

There are also a lot of examples with folks complaining about things and their complaints are not in context with what they know. Pass rush fits this to a "T." Yes, we don't see as much as we've seen in the past. However, when you're playing two true frosh in the middle of the linebacking corps as well as another two on the line a team doesn't have the liberty to "pin their ears back." It's too easy for receivers to take advantage (just as we saw in the South Carolina game...a game against, yes, a decent team.)

That could be a reason TO pin their ears back....

I think the bigger weakness is 2 dudes on the back end... Which again, a legit pass rush helps mask.

There's 2 sides to it though. Against good offense you can not rush the passer and die a slow death... AKA bend but don't break. Or you can roll the dice and die quickly or create negative plays that destroy drives of cause TO's. I saw a few blitzes yesterday that had me excited moving forward... But at the same time I understand that because we score quickly that Saban's MO is more likely to be a slow death than a roll of the dice.

Just so we're all on the same page though - A legit pass rush makes the LB's and DB's a hell of a lot better players. So to get that with 4 guys would be ideal.... RTR

 

[NickelDoubleDog]

All the continued lamenters either sont watch other teams or just like to be intellectually dishonest.

A&M was terrible. LSU gave up 38 to Vandy. Auburn has a limited offense.

Everyone has their issues

 

[JoshB]

We're literally seeing people saying "it's bullshit to say the offensive line needs time to gel" when every coach in collegiate football—yesterday, today, and forever for that matter—say "it takes time for the offensive line to gel?"

I feel like you're taking a shot at me there but when you use the word "literally" you should probably be literal... you're taking what I've been saying extremely out of context. I haven't said "saying an O-line needs time to gel is bullshit." I've been saying that saying THAT is the issue with this group - or at least the only issue - is bullshit. "Gelling" has nothing to do with guys standing there and watching as a pass rusher blows past them or getting bullied into the backfield. Technique, effort, certain guys playing out of position, etc. has just as much - if not more - to do with the issues that I've been seeing as much as "gelling."

 

[TerryP]

Just so we're all on the same page though - A legit pass rush makes the LB's and DB's a hell of a lot better players. So to get that with 4 guys would be ideal.... RTR

We've been watching run fits/gap responsibility for four games now. We're still seeing what appears to be a missed game with the interior linebackers. (Now, I say that with the quotation marks because we don't know who is supposed to have that gap or fit. Without knowing the details of the set, we're left judging by what we're seeing without knowing what they intended (or were supposed) to do.

There is no doubt in my mind the interior guys are still a step slow in recognition and reaction. Game reps is the only thing that will correct and improve that.

With that in mind, and acknowledging your point about offenses we've seen and will see, given Saban's MO what does he do? It's my view he's taking a precautionary approach. Yes, they have the ability to rush the passer a lot more than we've seen done. Against a USM team known for quick strike passes (as we'll see with RPO teams) better to keep as much of it in front of you and wait for their mistakes.

The offenses we've seen so far have made it a point to get movement out of the linebackers. Hell, it's no different than Lane and his jet sweeps. It's all about moving one or two guys to a different spot. If they are sending LB'ers and DB's ... leaves little for back end support without giving up significant gains.

The thing is, stalker, we are not talking about something we didn't know, or something we didn't expect. In fact, we've discussed these little things in detail leading up to games ... games, where I see complaints and criticisms about things we knew were there. If we know it, you think another collegiate coach can't see it as well?

Hence...what are you comparing this team to? What we've discussed about this team, this year? Or, what we've seen in past teams? In my opinion, only one is fitting.

On a side note: Perhaps the worst thing Saban has said was returning to the "Bama standard." It's such a vague term we could take a dozen people and ten would have different answers. He set a goal that's undefined especially when considering "this isn't football the way a lot of want it to be."

 

[TerryP]

I feel like you're taking a shot at me there but when you use the word "literally" you should probably be literal... you're taking what I've been saying extremely out of context. I haven't said "saying an O-line needs time to gel is bullshit." I've been saying that saying THAT is the issue with this group - or at least the only issue - is bullshit. "Gelling" has nothing to do with guys standing there and watching as a pass rusher blows past them or getting bullied into the backfield. Technique, effort, certain guys playing out of position, etc. has just as much - if not more - to do with the issues that I've been seeing as much as "gelling."

I don't know why you think that's a shot at you. When you've said things that didn't fit or I thought were incorrect I've never hesitated tagging you on those comments.

 

[JoshB]

I don't know why you think that's a shot at you. When you've said things that didn't fit or I thought were incorrect I've never hesitated tagging you on those comments.

Because you've responded to me talking about the o-line and "gelling" before.

 

[TerryP]

Because you've responded to me talking about the o-line and "gelling" before.

'fraid you've got me confused with someone else here, Josh. I've seen you mention it in the Duke thread but didn't respond. A quick search shows you're talking about it in the game thread. I didn't respond to you there either.

You made mention of Owens getting bulldozed last week and I remarked about that happening when your foot gets stepped on. You've said Dickerson wouldn't see the field and we discussed that.

I can't recall us talking about the unit gelling; until now.

The notion that it doesn't take a few games for a line to work together (in this conversation, gel) when you've got three new starters is "out there" in my view. This again is something we've discussed for weeks now and seeing a few struggles now isn't unexpected. Hell, I"ve been pointing to week five all along, have I not?

And, if I may add, we saw a lot of improvement this past weekend. We didn't see dumb mistakes because, through their growth, these things are being corrected.

 

[BamaFan334]

You've answered my question. You are comparing the 2019 team to teams of the past when trying to judge what this team may accomplish. Therein is my point. Is if a fair judgement? No. There's a reason we've heard, time and time again, references to "that was last year's team" and "this team hasn't accomplished anything yet."

Harken back to "is this what you want football to be?" For years we talked about how other teams changing systems to RPO and HUNH left their defenses at a disadvantage. Now, seeing it close to home, have you forgotten what was espoused for years? No. You haven't. But you know this.




You'd be wrong. I did and it elicited your response. According to what I've read Nessler said the same thing last night during the broadcast.


No. It's not a case of "taking up for the team."

It certainly is a case of suggesting that people stop for a minute and consider what I mentioned earlier. This 2019 team isn't playing the Bama of 2012. It'll be playing the UGA's of '19, the OU's of '19, the LSU's of '19.

Through four games can any of those teams be judged accurately? Again, no. I don't believe they can. In Bama's case, you know why. This week is a good example with talent returning to the offensive line.

I do believe we're seeing weaknesses come to light in their teams just like we're seeing youth have is drawbacks with Bama.

There are a lot of examples of us seeing improvement within the first four games this season. Just as one example, among all the complaints you've seen about the offensive line on yesterday's game have you seen anyone mention the false start penalties against Bama? No. Formation penalties? No. Because there weren't any. An improvement that easily could be noted but we have those who'd rather continue on their mantra of "how bad they are."

There are also a lot of examples with folks complaining about things and their complaints are not in context with what they know. Pass rush fits this to a "T." Yes, we don't see as much as we've seen in the past. However, when you're playing two true frosh in the middle of the linebacking corps as well as another two on the line a team doesn't have the liberty to "pin their ears back." It's too easy for receivers to take advantage (just as we saw in the South Carolina game...a game against, yes, a decent team.)

In just responding to one point, I think we in fact need to send those two, because then, they're just playing football, using their speed, strength, and just football mentality that made them recruits we wanted. Allow a more veteran part of the team pick up the pressure of what a blitz bring, which would be the secondary. We have to scare teams to think we can do it all on defense. Notre Dame lost last night because they had zero deep threat and did not attempt to go deep. So what happened, Georgia stacked the box, sat on the short stuff, and gave Notre Dame's offense fits most of the night. Good offensive coordinators and a good quarterback will pick our asses a part of they know we don't have a rush and won't send guys.

 

[TerryP]

Good offensive coordinators and a good quarterback will pick our asses a part of they know we don't have a rush and won't send guys.

and on the same note we've been seeing teams running with 3 and 4 wides along with TE and RB's hitting pass routes. If they start bringing safeties up where's the back end coverage? Beaten.

These blitz packages Saban likes to run often come from his defensive backs. Can't rob Peter to pay Paul.