If you're betting "Alabama or the field," you bet the field because the Tide has won the last two and no team has won three in a row since the Spurrier-era Gators. But articles like this are why I want to strangle so many pundits.
1) Fourth QB in four years.
Sounds good except for the parts he doesn't bother to mention. First, Alabama has won THREE SEC titles with a FIRST-YEAR QB and the one who didn't win it his first year only won a NATIONAL title, so yeah, I guess he's right. Also, did you realize that in the four years we've had a RETURNING starting QB we have NOT won the SEC three times and the fourth time was McCarron winning in 12 after NOT winning it in 11.
In other words, a returning QB (using this logic) means we lose the SEC (Wilson/McElroy/McCarron).
2) Breaking in a new center
Weren't we breaking in an nearly new offensive line in 2013? That team didn't win it all, but it wasn't the O-lines fault by the end of the year.
3) No Derrick Henry
Last year we got ripped for giving one guy the ball too often and now he's gone so.....we get ripped because he's gone. Well, Henry wasn't even a Hesiman contender until that incredible drive against LSU, and then he was money in the bank. Besides, I don't recall the other QBs having near the developing receiving corps that we had by the end of the year.
Remember when the loss of Amari Cooper meant we had no shot in 2015? yeah, me neither.
4) Defensive coaching staff turnover
I'd have to look, but I don't think Saban has had the entire top to bottom coaching staff for two straight years ever. Saban couldn't win without Will Muschamp, remember that? While I think the loss of Kirby is bigger than, say, when we lost McElwain or Nussmeier, the fact is that Saban is still the head honcho there.
5) Challenging schedule
I'm using Sagarin.
So let's see. Alabama was 10-1 against Top 30 teams last year, so we must not have played anyone. In 2014, we had the SECOND toughest schedule and went 12-2 and won the SEC. In 2013, we actually had the 39th ranked schedule for the year and went 11-2 and DID NOT win the SEC. In 2012, we had the 19th ranked schedule and won it all. In 2011, we had the number 15 schedule and won it all but lost the SEC.
Yeah, he has a point, not.
But here's what really gets me - BAD arguments like the following:
a) Even if 'Bama gets by that first game against USC (not a given, with all the talent the Trojans are returning) there are still tough games all over the schedule
What does this have to do AT ALL with winning the SEC? Unless I'm missing something, USC is a NON-CONFERENCE game that really has no bearing at all on the SEC title.
But here's the one that REALLY ticks me:
b) Just two weeks after playing USC, there is an SEC opener at Ole Miss, a team that has beaten the Crimson Tide the last two years.
So he spends the article telling us we're not the same team and replacing a bunch but then he brings in the Ole Miss team that beat us that IS NOT THE SAME TEAM!!!! (Yeah, makes sense to a moron maybe).
c) The matchup with the Vols comes just one week after a visit to face the physical Arkansas Razorbacks.
Well, last year there was the ROAD game against perennial underachiever Georgia followed by a home game against Arky and then a ROAD game against another QB who was going to eat us like pork sausage and pass us and whom we killed in College Station and then we faced the Vols, who had a week off.
Should I point out that Tennessee's record against Alabama without having an off week while Alabama is slugging it out is less than stellar?
Besides, Tennessee faces Alabama after three straight games against Florida, Georgia on the road, ATM on the road, too. Whatever team they have left will get to face 'the red team' as they call us.
And as far as LSU, well, LSU has been going to beat Alabama in 2012, 2013, and had us a sneeze from defeat in 2014, and had the greatest running back since Bo Jackson........and they're still 0-5 in the last five games against Alabama.
