Mizzou Football Links

• The Trib: Navy present unique battle
• PressBoxOnline: Unflinching Midshipmen Face One More Obstacle
• The Annapolis Capital: Navy circles wagons for big Texas test
  (If nothing else, read this article for it's hilarious description of Danario Alexander as a 6'4, 230-pound sophomore...clearly mistaking Alexander for Wes Kemp.)
• Sporting News (STATS): Navy-Missouri Preview
• Rivals.com: 2009 All-Big 12 freshman team
• PowerMizzou: Recruiting Mailbag
  PowerMizzou: Different paths, same destination (James Franklin & Tyler Gabbert)

  "As a quarterback, it helps to know what it's like as a running back, wide receiver, even as a lineman," Young said. "[Franklin] never played line, but as a tight end, he was able to see what they do, blocking wise. What might be more important was James' time on defense, when he played linebacker and defensive back. He knows the fundamentals of those positions. He knows what to look for."
  
  That's the main difference between Gabbert and Franklin. While Franklin dabbled in other positions, quarterback runs through Gabbert's veins. Since he started football, Gabbert has been the signal caller, following in big brother Blaine's footsteps. When Blaine began to work with renowned quarterback guru Skip Stitzell as a junior in high school, Tyler joined as well.
  
  "He had a lot of natural ability," Stitzell said of Tyler, "what I call a very good foundation. He had a good idea of how to do things. We worked on taking all the mechanics he had, refining them, and introducing some new ones that maybe he didn't have."

• PowerMizzou: Freshman video report: Donovan Bonner

Big 12 Football Links

• KC Star (Campus Corner): Big 12 Below .500 in Bowls
• San Antonio Express-News: Audit says A&M has problems
• Crimson and Cream Machine: Offensive Line Could Determine Murray's Return

Big Ten Talk

• Rush the Court (seriously, a wonderful blog...I've been linking to them about six times a week lately): A Closer Look at Big Ten Expansion -- here's a blurb, but read the whole thing
  

  Missouri
  For: Solid programs in both football and basketball, large stadiums with big budgets, and a decent size school/city.

  Against: No real relationship with any of the Big Ten schools and a question of what will happen with their rivalries with Big 12 schools (Kansas? Nebraska?)

  Verdict: Our most likely choice. The Tigers seem like the perfect fit with the exception of the rivalry issue. I think they can get around it in basketball, but football will be tough with its smaller schedule.

• The Trib (Dave Matter): Four and Out: What else? Big Ten talk

  [B]efore anyone starts making 2013 travel plans for Columbus, Madison and Ann Arbor, let’s not lose sight of 1993, 1998 and 2003. In each of those years, the Big Ten explored expansion and said no thanks. The league has gone down this road before and come home content with its party of 11 … though this time the path is paved in flashier gold, in the form of Big Ten championship game ticket sales and untapped TV markets.

• The Trib (Steve Walentik): Changing conferences would have drawbacks

  There are also downsides. A big one, I believe, has to do with Missouri's ability to recruit football players from the state of Texas if the Tigers aren't in the Big 12, which is clearly the most visible league in the Lone Star State. Now, this more my colleague Dave Matter's area of expertise, but I do think it's silly to quickly dismiss this premise.

  I see at least two other significant drawbacks closer to the team I cover. The biggest has to do with the Missouri-Kansas rivalry, which would be dramatically altered by a move to the Big Ten. Sure, the Tigers and Jayhawks could schedule a Braggin' Rights-type game to be played on a neutral court over the holidays, but it would have no where near the same meaning as a home-and-home series with a conference title on the line. I can't imagine Missouri fans not missing the chance to see their team get Kansas in its own backyard, a scenario that has produced some of the most memorable victories in school history. The other thing I see affected by a move to the Big Ten is the conference tournament. Now, Missouri gets a bit of an advantage getting to play it two hours from campus in Kansas City. I don't think the Tigers could expect the same in the Big Ten, where Chicago and Indianapolis will also be more natural destinations for the league tournament.

• Chicago Tribune: How about Big 14?
• Post-Dispatch: Would move to Big Ten be good for Mizzou?
• Topeka Capital-Journal: Call border patrol on Big 10 raiders

Mizzou Basketball Links

• The Missourian: Missouri players enjoy Hickman-Rock Bridge rivalry
• PowerMizzou: J.T. Tiller suspended for Tigers' next game
  The Missourian: Face of Missouri men's basketball suspended one game
• The Missourian: Missouri men juggle finals and practices

Other

• StateCollege.com: There is no 'A' in BCS (by Jay Paterno)
  

  I am proposing a solution, a new way to determine who plays for the national title. It is an idea that would alter the BCS ranking formula and also allow the reformers at the NCAA to take a big step forward.

  With the selection of a new NCAA president on the horizon, the new leadership could take up a new cause.

  The new BCS ratings would include a third component to rank the teams. While computer polls and human polls make up the current rankings, my new BCS poll would utilize those rankings as 2/3 of the equation while adding the graduation rates of the top 25 BCS schools into the formula to come up with a complete ranking.

• San Diego Union-Tribune (via @dmatter), Costly kick in the teeth to bowl teams
• SI.com: Tim Tebow, USC Trojans dominate college football decade

And of course...