I simply looked up rankings. I can state that I looked up something. There are a lot of positions on a football team so a handful of good players still isn't enough. You need some quantity
Arkansas: 21 first half, 10 second half Ole Miss: 24 first half, 14 second half Texas A&M 7 first half, 0 second half Alabama scored a few more points. Most of the second halves we just had to defend a lead, so the defense didn't have to be as stingy. So what if we allowed a couple of South Carolina touchdowns after the game was over? So what if Western Kentucky scored 13 in the second half when we were way ahead? So what if we ONLY beat Auburn by 24? The defense improved in the second half in most of games that were competitive or that we were hoping to make competitive. You don't adjust better than the other guy every single time. Florida scored only 7 points against the defense in the second half, and the defense allowed nothing for the last 23 minutes of the game. The punt team allowed 7 though.
I didn't say he was, but the defense tended to improve as the game went on unless we went into some kind of soft coverage to protect a lead. He's made better adjustments than at least a few decent offensive coaches did.
Mississippi St. and Syracuse were the only ones where the adjustments were a problem, but when you hold a team to 3 points in a half, the other team hasn't highlighted weaknesses for you to correct.
I'm not sure yet if Steele is a bad DC but it's more important to keep O than it is to keep Steele. If making O the DC is what it takes to keep him then so be it.
Agreed. Steele wasn't my first choice, and he's still not. We can win with him though. I think he's less of an impediment to winning than the quarterback situation by far.
