Utah defensive line coach Morgan Scalley says he is “not concerned one bit” about sack drought from defensive ends

Utah has entered the 2026 season with expectations for pressure off the edge, yet through the first five games of the schedule, the production gap is plain: no Utah defensive end has registered a sack. Morgan Scalley, Utah’s defensive line coach, addressed the concern directly and said he is “not concerned one bit,” framing the lack of sacks as something his group can manage while still executing the defensive priorities he values most.

Scalley’s point centers on outcomes other than sacks. According to the report, the Utes’ defensive staff is emphasizing run defense and the ability to disrupt plays early, and Scalley believes those choices show up in the way Utah has performed against opponents, even if sack totals do not yet reflect it from the edge spots. In other words, the sack column is not the only scoreboard that matters to him when evaluating defensive ends and the defense as a whole.

From a personnel and role standpoint, defensive end production can be influenced by how opponents attack a defense. If offenses consistently avoid putting quarterbacks in positions where edge rushers can win quickly, or if the game plan leans into the interior and the middle of the line, edge sacks can lag while other facets of the pass rush still develop. Scalley’s comments, as summarized in the coverage, suggest he believes Utah’s end play contributes to the team’s bigger goals rather than existing solely to tally sacks.

The sack drought also matters because it can become a storyline as the season goes on, especially when fans and media look for tangible pass-rush markers. A team that cannot generate sacks may still keep drives alive if it can limit explosive runs or prevent sustained passing attacks, but late-season matchups often magnify the cost of missed pressure. Scalley’s stance indicates Utah’s staff is comfortable with the current balance, but it also sets up an environment where defensive end production may need to show up more clearly as opponents become more decisive.

Utah’s defensive identity is shaping the interpretation of the numbers. The report links Scalley’s confidence to “Utah’s excellence in stopping the run,” implying that the defensive ends’ impact may be showing up in the run game first, perhaps by clogging lanes, setting the edge, or forcing plays back inside. If that run defense continues to hold, Utah can treat sack totals as a process milestone rather than an immediate crisis.

At the same time, a sackless edge group can raise a practical question for the coaching staff: how much of the pressure is arriving from other spots, and how much is being delayed? Defensive schemes often distribute the work among linebackers, interior rushers, and secondary blitzes. If sacks remain absent from the defensive end position, Utah may need to increase the variety of ways its edge players get into the quarterback’s path, whether through stunts, timing changes, or different coverage-to-rush looks.

What to watch next is whether the lack of defensive end sacks persists as the season moves deeper. If Utah’s run stopping continues to be its calling card, Scalley’s “not concerned” posture will feel validated. If sack totals remain flat from the edge, the pressure narrative is likely to intensify, and the coaching staff could adjust how defensive ends are used in high-leverage situations, especially against teams that protect well and win with passing efficiency.