I've always wanted him there. I wonder why he didn't get a chance since he did see the field.

"We need to have the mindset that what we have on our roster won't win anything, nearly every position group should be replaceable."

Absolutely, anybody not willing to fight for a job can hit Hwy 6. We still have major holes in the roster. Especially need at least one 230 lb or so power back.

We don't have an issue at safety. We have an issue at CB and LB.

PeekingDuck said:

---

We don't have an issue at safety. We have an issue at CB and LB.

---

What?

We don't have an issue with Safety?

PeekingDuck said:

---

We don't have an issue at safety. We have an issue at CB and LB.

---

So you are not happy with Lee? And Chappell will be back next year.

vander54 said:

---

PeekingDuck said:

---

We don't have an issue at safety. We have an issue at CB and LB.

---

What?

We don't have an issue with Safety?

---

Have you given up on Brooks and Anderson?

Lee is great. Happy to have Chappell back but it shows the lack of depth. And no, Vander, we don't have an issue at safety. Anderson and Brooks combo is as solid as it comes.

LB12Diamond said:

---

vander54 said:

---

PeekingDuck said:

---

We don't have an issue at safety. We have an issue at CB and LB.

---

What?

We don't have an issue with Safety?

---

Have you given up on Brooks and Anderson?

---

No but they were an issue

PeekingDuck said:

---

Lee is great. Happy to have Chappell back but it shows the lack of depth. And no, Vander, we don't have an issue at safety. Anderson and Brooks combo is as solid as it comes.

---

Solid as it comes? Maybe in potential but their play wasn't good this year

Bryce was injured and they are trying to cover for bad LB and CB play. Sort LB out and watch. Ricks and York were the main problems in the USC game. Anderson and Brooks are both NFL caliber talent. (let me pick a less firm word)

Don't agree on York. York is fine. The 4-2-5 requires solid run support from the secondary and a dominant D line. Both were lacking at times at the end of the season.

LB12Diamond said:

---

Don't agree on York. York is fine. The 4-2-5 requires solid run support from the secondary and a dominant D line. Both were lacking at times at the end of the season.

---

Agreed on York. He's not elite but he's fine. Our biggest issue in my opinion was our NB. We went small and more of a cover back this year but it is a position that's massive in run support.

We have a ton of talent in the secondary but their level of play was not there.

You guys are sitting here arguing that "it's this guy's fault. No, it's this guy's fault". The truth is that it was a bad defense that could use upgrades across the board. Including at DC.

I actually stated multiple guys. See secondary and D line.

But more specifically. I hate our scheme. Not a fan of the 4-2-5 at ALL times.

I'm all for dumping Bateman.

What was Shaw's rating coming out of HS?

I'm sure you could school these D1 athletes up on how to play DB.

Over or under 300 lbs?

Composite #613
CB #61

I wouldn't want anyone that is on their second visit to the portal.

vander54 said:

---

TxAg76 said:

---

vander54 said:

---

Zuhn and Bisontis will almost definitely be drafted next year unless Bisontis comes back.

Reed Admas has a shot if he shows improvement next year but as of right now he'd be a very late draft pick to UDFA.

Also.when you have a decimated DL and horrible secondary they take massive priority over LB.

---

We need help at LB, but there's some pups on the roster that could surprise some folks next year.
We didn't see him much this year, needs more Moffitt time, but the kid that wore #45 has a little something to him

---

I agree on LB. Play wasn't great and yes we have some young players that showed some promise. I'm concerned woth CB play outside Lee but we've added some help there. Safety still concerns me but we must land at least 1 or 2 DT

---

We need to find a better DB coach in the portal.

LB12Diamond said:

---

I actually stated multiple guys. See secondary and D line.

But more specifically. I hate our scheme. Not a fan of the 4-2-5 at ALL times.

---

That's fine. The question Aggies should have about every starter should be "would this guy be starting on any of these teams that have a legit shot at winning a championship". If not, then they should be trying to upgrade, or be damn sure in their confidence that that player will develop into that caliber of a player.

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

I actually stated multiple guys. See secondary and D line.

But more specifically. I hate our scheme. Not a fan of the 4-2-5 at ALL times.

---

That's fine. The question Aggies should have about every starter should be "would this guy be starting on any of these teams that have a legit shot at winning a championship". If not, then they should be trying to upgrade.

---

It is not that easy. If you have infinite resources sure it may be an option but no one does. You upgrade positions that give you the most improvement.

vander54 said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

I actually stated multiple guys. See secondary and D line.

But more specifically. I hate our scheme. Not a fan of the 4-2-5 at ALL times.

---

That's fine. The question Aggies should have about every starter should be "would this guy be starting on any of these teams that have a legit shot at winning a championship". If not, then they should be trying to upgrade.

---

It is not that easy. If you have infinite resources sure it may be an option but no one does. You upgrade positions that give you the most improvement.

---

The key word is "trying". I'm not saying they will be able to upgrade at every position, because that is just not realistic. They should always be trying, though.

Well can agree to disagree on York. He's a quality SEC starter.

If your scheme requires a LB to be an All American such as Coop last year for it to work, than the scheme is off.

Someone ping Elko and let him know we need more talented players.

LB12Diamond said:

---

Well can agree to disagree on York. He's a quality SEC starter.

If your scheme requires a LB to be an All American such as Coop last year for it to work, than the scheme is off.

---

I don't think Elko's defense requires All-American LB play. His defense relies heavily on strong DB play, especially at Nickel, and the DL holding their gaps to contain and stop the run. Unfortunately, Bateman is not Elko. He may be running Elko's defense, but he does not have the feel that Elko had when he was DC. Remember how many well timed CB and safety blitzes we had when Elko was DC? That's about having a feel for the flow of the game and knowing your defense so well.

I agree

I posted above the D line and D Backs were the main issues with this 4-2-5 scheme this year. Not LB

LB12Diamond said:

---

I agree

I posted above the D line and D Backs were the main issues with this 4-2-5 scheme this year. Not LB

---

The LB's were not good in some of those losses. South Carolina ate us alive, running on the outside, because the LB's lack of speed horizontally and poor tackling. York had an especially rough game that weekend in both the run and pass. The DE's did a piss poor job of containing, but the LB's could have negated that with better sideline to sideline play. My point is that you still need good linebackers.

I got it

And I disagree on that point as far as York as I pointed out earlier. And that's OK.

Bryce Anderson has regressed big time

jt16 said:

---

Bryce Anderson has regressed big time

---

He was really bad this year. Tackling, tracking ball flight etc. Not sure deep safety is his position. Seemed to do better closer to line of scrimmage

Tackling is pathetic across entire defense. Watching sips Georgia Ohio state makes me sick. Their players actually wrap up and tackle without needing 3-4 guys helping them.

vander54 said:

---

Agvet12 said:

---

Why?

We were always in the market for 2 CB's, Kiffin ruined the original one

We weren't in the market for a S after until after USC

---

Because of who we have and our issues with safeties. Also safeties weren't all the sudden an issue after USC

---

Safeties have been an issue all year despite what TexAgs tells you.

AWP 97 said:

---

vander54 said:

---

Agvet12 said:

---

Why?

We were always in the market for 2 CB's, Kiffin ruined the original one

We weren't in the market for a S after until after USC

---

Because of who we have and our issues with safeties. Also safeties weren't all the sudden an issue after USC

---

Safeties have been an issue all year despite what TexAgs tells you.

---

Exactly. Our starting CB where decent but there was a drop off from 1st to 2nd but our safeties were not good most the year.

vander54 said:

---

Composite #613
CB #61

---

On its face that doesn't look like help for the secondary. Or he was way under the radar or a late bloomer.