Right. Some recruiters are great at selling their product to a player, and, as hard as it as for a Bama fan to believe, some players have their own good reasons for choosing another school.Exactly, recruiters are master salesmen , they are good at what they do
Its not that bad Chop. DLine won't be a strength but linebacker and QB will.Uncertain how we will field a d line next year.
Chop worries more than most. I never worry anymore because I know he's doing enough worrying for several of us. It's actually a liberating feeling not to have to worry about it.Its not that bad Chop. DLine won't be a strength but linebacker and QB will.
Just saying three straight years of "next year defensive line will be a priority" is a trend that will kill us in SEC play down the line.Chop worries more than most. I never worry anymore because I know he's doing enough worrying for several of us. It's actually a liberating feeling not to have to worry about it.
I tend to agree Chop, we've been on the wrong end of these more often than not. Really, when compared to every position, I think D-line may be the weakest position consistently recruited over the course of the Saban era. I'm not saying we haven't gotten our fair share of pure beasts, but other than Hand we don't ever sign the top rated guys from each class. They always give us a look, but we've lost many head-to-head battles with Clemson, Georgia, Auburn, Florida State, and a few others for the guys at the top. I've always scratched my head at this with the talent we've placed in the NFL. It's like every other position gets it except those guys.Just saying three straight years of "next year defensive line will be a priority" is a trend that will kill us in SEC play down the line.
I wonder if it is because of the function of Bama's DL: eating up blockers, thus, less aggression, less opportunity to "make plays"? I wonder if that is the reason for Tosh's reported "change in DL philosophy"? If I were a DL, I wound not want to play in Bama's scheme. OTOH, LB is another story, thus, the great LB recruiting.I tend to agree Chop, we've been on the wrong end of these more often than not. Really, when compared to every position, I think D-line may be the weakest position consistently recruited over the course of the Saban era. I'm not saying we haven't gotten our fair share of pure beasts, but other than Hand we don't ever sign the top rated guys from each class. They always give us a look, but we've lost many head-to-head battles with Clemson, Georgia, Auburn, Florida State, and a few others for the guys at the top. I've always scratched my head at this with the talent we've placed in the NFL. It's like every other position gets it except those guys.
That`s an interesting thought. I wonder if the staff gathers any " intelligence " as to why kids, in this case D line, don`t sign with us? It`d be fascinating to know if they`ve ever heard anything like this.I wonder if it is because of the function of Bama's DL: eating up blockers, thus, less aggression, less opportunity to "make plays"? I wonder if that is the reason for Tosh's reported "change in DL philosophy"? If I were a DL, I wound not want to play in Bama's scheme. OTOH, LB is another story, thus, the great LB recruiting.
It has always been that way. If coaches can get players to believe Bama doesn't play freshmen, how hard do they have to sell low sack numbers (what defensive players all want because it makes sports center) for our defensive linemen?I wonder if it is because of the function of Bama's DL: eating up blockers, thus, less aggression, less opportunity to "make plays"? I wonder if that is the reason for Tosh's reported "change in DL philosophy"? If I were a DL, I wound not want to play in Bama's scheme. OTOH, LB is another story, thus, the great LB recruiting.
You make a good point but on the other hand almost all of our inside guys go onto the NFL. It is probably a combination of this and having a DL coach who is not a great recruiter over the past several years.I wonder if it is because of the function of Bama's DL: eating up blockers, thus, less aggression, less opportunity to "make plays"? I wonder if that is the reason for Tosh's reported "change in DL philosophy"? If I were a DL, I wound not want to play in Bama's scheme. OTOH, LB is another story, thus, the great LB recruiting.
You make a good point but on the other hand almost all of our inside guys go onto the NFL. It is probably a combination of this and having a DL coach who is not a great recruiter over the past several years.
Cody
Chapman
Robinson
Reed
Payne
I obviously didn't mean they sign no one. And as you insinuated, the NFL recognizes that good DL play is not necessarily reflected in stats. I'm talking about perception, not real production. It seems that over Saban's years that Bama's DL recruiting has not been as fruitful as one might have expected - certainly not like LB and secondary, where there are top 100 players all over the place. Only Allen, Robinson and Payne were highly ranked. (The JCs are hard to consider since many schools don't even consider them and they aren't compared to the HS kids.) I just would have expected far more highly regarded DL. I realize there are many factors involved, but Bama couldn't even sign Miller and Langham from the state this year. (It may not be fair to refer to them, since it's just a couple, and each individual recruitment has a story of its own.)You make a good point but on the other hand almost all of our inside guys go onto the NFL. It is probably a combination of this and having a DL coach who is not a great recruiter over the past several years.
Cody
Chapman
Robinson
Reed
Payne