Mizzou Links, 10-24-11

by Bill C. on Oct 24, 2011 6:05 AM CDT in News

Mizzou needed more from Richardson and the Mizzou defense a little earlier than they got it.

It's a MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA™-free zone today, which can only mean one thing: there's more stuff about realignment coming later in the day. But for now, here's (mostly) talk of only things that happen on a field or a court.

Mizzou Football Links

OSU
The Trib (Dave Matter): Emptying the Notebook: Not a luck thing

Let's not leave Missouri's defense out of the blame game. The Tigers made a handful of momentum-swinging stops Saturday and held OSU to less than 10 yards on six different possessions. But it took almost a quarter and a half for the defense to come alive. It's no coincidence it started with some bursts from the defensive line, a group that's underachieved through the first half of the regular season. Brad Madison, my pick for preseason defensive player of the year, had two tackles and didn't get much heat on the quarterback. In his first career start, Sheldon Richardson didn't notch his first and only tackle until midway through the fourth quarter. Linebacker Zaviar Gooden, a preseason All-Big 12 pick, led MU with nine tackles, but you're not seeing the junior make the kind of game-changing plays he made occasionally last year and were expected of him this year. The same goes for both safety positions. Outside of cornerback E.J. Gaines, I'm not seeing a defender attack the ball in the air.

At this point, if I'm filling out a two-deep All-Big 12 ballot, my Missouri defensive candidates are Gaines and perhaps nose guard Dominique Hamilton, who quietly leads all Big 12 interior linemen with 33 tackles. Madison and linebacker Andrew Wilson could make a push with some more production in the coming weeks.

Among Big 12 teams, Missouri still ranks third in scoring defense (23.9) and fourth in total defense (365.7), but only three teams have forced fewer turnovers than MU's 11. Plus, the Tigers have the league's worst third-down defense.

We Are Mizzou: Mizzou vs. OSU
Cowboys Ride For Free: Oklahoma State Defeats Missouri; Some Rambling Reflections
A&M Up Next
San Antonio Express-News: Mizzou digs up bad memories for Aggies
Recruiting
PowerMizzou: Following the Future

Mizzou Basketball Links

When they announced at the OSU game that Kim English had led the way at the previous night's Black & Gold scrimmage with 27 points, somebody in the stands behind us said, "27? Pssh. That's more than he's going to score all season." Call me crazy, but I think this squad still has some work to do in the "winning back the fanbase" category after last season's collapse. Never mind all the awful luck/news Missouri may have had since then -- this was still a rather awful team in March.

(That, and Mizzou fans are crabby jerks sometimes.)

Black & Gold Game
MUtigers.com: Black Squad Takes Black and Gold Scrimmage
MUtigers.com: Post Game Quotes
MUtigers.com: Mic'd Up: Kim English
The Trib: English gets taste of playing time with the giants
PowerMizzou: PMTV-HD: Kim English
PowerMizzou: Black and Gold gallery
The Missourian: Rosburg and Jorgensen commit to Missouri, attend Black and Gold game together
MUtigers.com: Senior Interview: Ricardo Ratliffe
The Trib: Tigers' Kim English looking forward to new season
Rush the Court: The Big 12's New Faces: Missouri's Frank Haith

Do you like this story?

Comments

matter is spot on in his assessment of the defense's performance saturday.

gaines was a stud, hamilton was steady, everybody else was MEH. you can say the offense squandered opportunites to come back (which is true), but when you start out in that big a hole, it’s tough to see the light at the end of the tunnel against a team of osu’s caliber.

well, blimey.

by threadkiller on Oct 24, 2011 7:20 AM CDT reply actions

This year was a throw-away (reloading) year at the start

When we came into this season—especially with the injuries we had before the first game—it had all the markings of a “throw-away” (aka “reloading” or in some cases “rebuilding”, but not ours anymore) year: one that would be inconsistent with our expected (accepted?) level of performance. In other words, this was a year where we put the back-ups and “plan c’s/d’s” out there and hope for the best since some critical starters were down. It turns out “plan d” in the back field was named “Henry Josey”, and he’s overachieved with respect to expectations: and gives a great hope for the O in the coming seasons.

With a new QB, we knew (or at least shouldn’t have expected that) he wasn’t going to perform on par with the peak performances of Smith/Daniels/Gabbert, but we hoped for the best. When put into the perspective of how those guys did at this point in their careers, I try to be patient (and we all should probably be, too, but it’s natural to wonder “what could’ve been”).

Yeah, the schedule sucks, and we’re very Jekyll & Hyde on the field and on both sides of the ball. We’ll be good: we got good players who are young and make dumb underclassmen mistakes, but it’s not the second coming of the Woodenhoffer or Stull eras: the coaches (hopefully) will coach them in practice and they will get over it.

It’s just this year isn’t our year, and if we do get to be bowl-eligible, we won’t get underbowled again. Probably.

Otherwise, it should be an interesting day: anybody got an idea of when the Board of Directors is meeting? I’m guessing that when I wake up this afternoon (I work overnights), it’ll probably be a whole different world.

by tigerdog9396 on Oct 24, 2011 7:56 AM CDT reply actions

You are a better man than I, Bill C.

That comment would warrant the proverbial “look” and ensuing shake of the head in disgust. Granted K. English played like crap last year but I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt under a new coach.

by McZou on Oct 24, 2011 8:33 AM CDT via mobile reply actions

In fairness

OSU is a really good team. The biggest problem I saw, as noted above, was the D line. I left in the 3rd quarter (had to go see my game which turned out even worse than yall’s) but I don’t remember pressure getting to the OSU QB even once.

Also, when OSU is throwing on you all day, why did they stick with a 4-3 defense through the second quarter? Go AT LEAST to a Nickle

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 8:39 AM CDT reply actions

Their Nickel and 4-3 look very similar...

…depending on who’s manning one of the OLB/S spots.

Follow me at @SBN_BillC!

SB Nation
Rock M Nation
Football Outsiders
Football Study Hall

by Bill C. on Oct 24, 2011 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions

They had one sack early in the first, but otherwise, not much until the second half

by Gaknar on Oct 24, 2011 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions

My assessment is that we can with anybody but we can't beat anybody.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:30 AM CDT reply actions

oops "play" with anybody

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:31 AM CDT reply actions

didn

well, blimey.

by threadkiller on Oct 24, 2011 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions

BCS possiblity

please comment on this. It seems to me there is a reasonable chance that even though LSU and Bama play each other depending on what others do they could possibly rematch in the NC game? Any thoughts.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:35 AM CDT reply actions

I doubt it

if OSU finishes undefeated, they go to the BCS over a one-loss LSU or Alabama.

by jschooltiger on Oct 24, 2011 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions

I was assuming an OSU loss to OU.

OU played poorly but it could still happen.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions

Maybe...

If there aren’t any other undefeated AQ schools. Even then, the SEC loser would have to have looked a lot better than the other AQ 1-loss champs.

I could see a non-AQ undefeated getting shunted off to a secondary BCS bowl. Considering how (5th in SEC?) stomped the non-AQ undefeated (Hawaii?) a couple years back, that wouldn’t bother me.

by galactahack on Oct 24, 2011 9:52 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions

that is where I was going.

In this case it probably actually benefist LSU and Bama to be in the same division regarding the NC. It seems to me in a conference title game if you have 2 undefeated teams playing the loser of that game is probably out with that lose even if it is in favor of another 1 loss team.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions

This sorta happened in the B10 a few years ago (06 I think?)

#1 OSU played #2 Michigan the last weekend of the season, and both were pretty far ahead of #3 FL (a one-loss team). Michigan lost a nailbiter by 3 (IIRC) and looked good in the loss. However, FL jumped them the last weekend, and made it to the title game, largely b/c no one wanted to see a OSU-Michigan rematch. (I realize that FL curbstomped OSU in the NC, but leading up to the game, there were a LOT of people that wanted one-loss Mich in the game over one-loss FL*, even though they were in the same conference). The human element doesn’t like conference re-matches to decide the NC, for better or worse.

*Not me.

by JAThomp33 on Oct 24, 2011 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions

This case could be different.

Since they won’t meet in the conference champ.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah, it's a little different.

But I’m stil skeptical that they’d put two conference mates in the NC regardless. I think if it was going to happen though, it would be in the SEC, and I could see it happening this year too if things break the right way (i.e., OK St, Stanford, & probably KSU losing).

by JAThomp33 on Oct 24, 2011 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions

OSU played TAMU close

they didn’t exactly destroy Texas. They get KSU at home with OU and Baylor they still have to go to TT so I think they have plenty of opportunities to lose. Then again I suppose so do LSU or Bama.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions

Depends

An undefeated anyone (looking at you boise) gets in ahead of a 1 loss team. The pundits will say “that’s been decided on the field, why have a rematch?”. However, they will both play in BCS bowl games and they will both win.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions

I am not a non AQ basher but

If Boise does get to the NC I don’t see them doing anything with that chance. It is hard to measure them against the likes of Big 12, SEC or Big 10 teams.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions

Also though in defense of Boise

I know that trying to schedule a tough Non con schedule is really tough for them. Teams like USC would never schedule them for one of their non con games. They might get one good one a year but not 3 or more ranked teams.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions

I am an AQ basher

not because of skill but because they’re a wild card. Boise going undefeated is likely. Their signature win? 35-21 over a crap UGA team. TCU is the only other team worth a damn on their shedule, and they’ve lost to SMU. However with all the hubbub over the past few years about AQ/nonAQ schools, an undfeated Boise has to make it in if there aren’t two undefeated AQ teams. Boise’s got enough history now.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions

I guess TCU is the only one even close to beating them at this point in their sched.

"The power of the force has stopped you, you hosers."

by drewder on Oct 24, 2011 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions

All they ever do is win

Put them in the Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma? Win. Start the season against Georgia? Win. No one ever thinks Boise will do anything with their opportunities, and yet all they do is win.

by Gaknar on Oct 24, 2011 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions

College football's Wiz Khalifa!

#WinWinWin

/endbadjoke.

by JAThomp33 on Oct 24, 2011 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions

What win on their schedule makes you think they could handle a MNC bid against LSU? Bama?

OSU? Wisconsin? Stanford? Boise just isn’t there. I think they should get the bid if they’re one of two undefeated teams. But I also think they’ll get smoked.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions

What exactly about them makes you think that they can't?

I never try to make the point that you can definitively say that Boise can compete with these guys, but the problem with our current system is that nobody can tell definitively that they CAN’T. If you’re good enough to win your conference then you’re good enough to play it off on the field agains the best in the country … THE END!

I’m known as a bit of a dreamer!

by MizzouRah04 on Oct 24, 2011 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions

The ACC disagrees.

This is the ultimate argument for a playoff (which as a fan of a team that has gotten burned by the current system, I support) in order to get the best possible match up in the MNC game. I say take the top 8 and have them play off. That would solve the current problem. But right now they’re fighting for 2 spots, and putting Boise in there makes me fear a repeat of 55-19 in 2004.

Instead, we can get those kinds of matchups over with in the playoffs. If the BCS system started with a playoff we would be able to get Alabama’s 49-7 thumping of Michigan state overwith before hitting the big game. TCU would have made the semi-finals last year, and so on.

It’s time for a playoff.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions

I agree that with the current system we have where we're fighting for 2 spots

That a non-AQ team would rarely deserve a spot. The problem is with sample size. At the end of 12 (or 13) games there’s no way to tell with any certainty who the two best teams in the country are. So you have to look at things like SOS and because Boise (and others) can’t schedule stronger IN conference and have problems scheduling stronger OUT of conference, you almost have to always go with the bigger school.

I’m a fan of Dan Weitzel’s proposal in his book Death to the BCS. I recommend this book to every college football fan no matter what side of the debate you’re on b/c it lays out the case against the BCS better than any thing I’ve read.

The reason I like the idea of opening it up to all conference champions is (1) b/c of anti-trust matters … everybody has to have an equal shot at getting to the title and (2) b/c no matter what number you decided on (4, 8, 16) you still run into the same sample size issues that I mentioned above. But regardless of what plan we decide to go with … the only certainty is that we need some sort of playoff.

I’m known as a bit of a dreamer!

by MizzouRah04 on Oct 24, 2011 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions

We're on the same page for the most part.

I don’t think the MAC conference champions should be involved in a playoff or anything. We have to limit it to a degree just because of the nature of the sport. If you add too many more games, you’re going to drastically increase the number of injuries in a sport that’s already known for season and career ending injuries.

As an Auburn guy who was a student there in 2004 and had to watch us settle for the Sugar Bowl, I’m adamant about the need for a playoff. F you oklahoma. F you USCw.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions

If that's the case though

Then I don’t see how you can continue to call the MAC a Division I conference. If you want to start limiting what conferences can get in (ala what we have right now) then I think you need to raise the requirements for a conference to be called “Division I”.

I would throw one caveat in there, however. The MWC just released a playoff proposal that you can find the outline of here. The main thing that it changes from Weitzel’s proposal is that all conference champions get an auto-bid into the tournament … as long as that champion is ranked in the top 30 nationally. Then the remaining seats in the 16 team tournament are filled out with at-large teams.

I’m known as a bit of a dreamer!

by MizzouRah04 on Oct 24, 2011 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions

I'll sign off on making D1 more selective

I worry a bit about the kids having an extra 4 games to pop an ACL, break something, etc. That sounds like a pretty interesting proposal and I’m not immediately opposed to it. Everything that’s D1 should be a BCS AQ. Either expand the AQ pool or drop conferences from D1. There’s no reason for those two segments not to match up perfectly.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions

Again, all they do is win

Everyone throws out these excuses about Boise can’t do this and can’t do that. And yet Boise beats all comers. Everyone always says they aren’t there yet, and yet they beat every big time team they play against.

by Gaknar on Oct 24, 2011 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions

But then they lose to Nevada

They don’t beat all comers. They’re great against the teams they play. But they play 1 major school a year. I’m saying they should get in if they’re undefeated and only 1 AQ team is undefeated. But I’m also saying they’ll get slaughtered.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions

Nevada was a legit Top 25 team last year.

As good or better than, say, Arkansas or Kentucky were in 2007 when they beat LSU.

Of course, you HAVE to reference Nevada because that’s the only regular season game they’ve lost in three years.

I know that there’s a chance I end up a fan of an SEC school soon, and therefore I’m supposed to dump on Boise State and all … but screw that. They are legit, and all they’ve done is prove it over and over again.

Follow me at @SBN_BillC!

SB Nation
Rock M Nation
Football Outsiders
Football Study Hall

by Bill C. on Oct 24, 2011 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

I've said it before

and I’ll say it again. They’re not awful. I wouldn’t want to play them, but then again, I didn’t want to play Florida this year. Put them in the Big12-4+.5 and contend there week in and week out. But these conferences are AQ or nonAQ for a reason.

My reasoning goes back to 2004. Maybe I’m still a bit butthurt over it. But having been told going undefeated in the SEC wasn’t good enough to get into the MNC? Then to see USCw slaughter Oklahoma, then have the win vacated? That’s crap. Absolute crap. So if we’re going to go straight to a national title game with no playoff, I want 2 undefeated AQ teams. If there aren’t two, then yeah, bring in Boise, or TCU or whoever. But until they play a challenging schedule week in and week out, putting themselves in a position to lose on any given saturday, they don’t deserve to jump an undefeated team that has done that.

by SEC Supremacist on Oct 24, 2011 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions

Is anyone saying that Boise isn't a really good team?

There’s lots of those every year. Their problem is that their undefeated seasons are simply not as impressive as one loss teams from real conferences. Boise would still be a Top 10-15 team in any conference, but you can’t convince me they’d be undefeated and not trip up and end up in Outback/Cotton Bowl level games.

Proud owner of a brand new Kadlec

by Transmogrified Tiger on Oct 24, 2011 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions

And as long as they are locked out of AQ conferences, that's a convenient excuse to keep them out

The truth is that we don’t know how they would handle a tougher schedule because they can’t play one. They tried to get into a better conference by joining MWC at which point BYU, Utah and TCU bolted. So all we have to go on is their record against AQ schools – which is very very good. At this point, the only way to know for sure if they are a NC caliber team is to let them play in the NC.

by Gaknar on Oct 24, 2011 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions

It's not an excuse, it's the reality of the situation

Their resume doesn’t warrant a NC berth. It never has, and it won’t going forward if they stay in the revamped MWC. That doesn’t mean they can’t play with the teams that do make the NC game, but they haven’t earned the opportunity over other schools.

On a related note, it’s interesting to me how many of Boise’s showdowns with BCS schools come with a built in month of prep time. There’s not much of a sample regardless, but just skimming their schedule it’s interesting to see the difference in the results in Week 1/Bowls v. Weeks 2/3/4.

Proud owner of a brand new Kadlec

by Transmogrified Tiger on Oct 24, 2011 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions

If the 2011 Missouri team, beat Georgia and the rest of Boise's schedule,

I wouldn’t think they were more deserving of a spot in the national championship game than an LSU team whose only loss was to Alabama. I just wouldn’t. (And I actually think we’d have a decent shot at that, even with all of our struggles.)

by IHatedHarpos on Oct 24, 2011 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm sure there's a way for it to happen...

…but I doubt it. What’s funny, though, is that if it DID happen, it would be cited as proof of “OMG SEC SUPERIORITY” when, in actuality, this year it’s a sign that only two teams are really good.

Follow me at @SBN_BillC!

SB Nation
Rock M Nation
Football Outsiders
Football Study Hall

by Bill C. on Oct 24, 2011 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions