You ruined it.

It’s not that they are anti-fullbacks per se. As I understand it the argument goes like this:

When you run a system like, oh, say, I dunno, the spread, it isn’t just a matter of training everyone what to do, you also select players who have mental and physical attributes that pay off the most within your system. So for the spread that basically means that where there is a tradeoff at any given between speed and strength, you’re mostly going for the fast guy over the strong guy (within the limits of, y’know, nose tackles can’t be 120 pound sprinters, etc). Your offensive line needs to spread out and the react fast to manipulate the gaps that this opens up, your receivers have to get places in a hurry, blah blah blah.

To use a fullback well it isn’t just a matter of finding one sufficiently tough fast solid guy and handing him the football, you have to have some power blocking that will shove a big hole for him and such… and Mizzou just isn’t equipped to provide that support, because the players are all optimized for a spread offense instead. And you can only have so many players under scholarship, so it’s not like you can go out and get a whole spread #1 offense and then a second smashmouth #1 offense too.

But fans watching from the stands don’t see all of that, they just look out at a short yardage situation and say “y’know what works in these situations? A fullback. I’ve been saying this for years and Pinkel still hasn’t got one, he’s so stubborn, RAWR!!1” And then follows on RMN the great rolling of eyes… And a tight end is sent out to pick up the short yardage anyway… or at least, that’s what happened when we had Coffman. Last year we just panicked slightly and looked lost. hopefully things are looking up a tad more this year.

The people of greater football wisdom than I (and there are many) will now proceed to tell you all the ways in which I got this wrong :)