Oklahoma Beats Missouri: Links And Reflections
by Bill C. on Sep 25, 2011 11:44 AM CDT
in Mizzou Football 2011
Email
Print
Oklahoma 38, Mizzou 28
The Trib: With focus back on football, Tigers can’t keep pace with No. 1 OU after hot start
The Trib: GAME NOTES
The Missourian: Oklahoma far superior in its 38-28 win over Missouri
PowerMizzou.com: Fast start, but a disappointing finish
PowerMizzou: Sunday Grade Card
KC Star: No. 1 Oklahoma gets revenge with win over Missouri
KC Star: Missouri’s ho-hum effort vs. Sooners means progress
Daily Oklahoman: Ryan Broyles leads No. 1 Oklahoma to 38-28 win over Missouri
Daily Oklahoman: Sooners scarcely resemble No. 1 team in win over Missouri
Multimedia
PowerMizzou: PMTV-HD: Pinkel post-game
PowerMizzou: PMTV-HD: Henry Josey
The Missourian: PHOTO GALLERY: Missouri falls to No. 1 Oklahoma 38-28
An Explosion And A Drought
Post-Dispatch: Mizzou's quick start is only a mirage
Mizzou Offense
First three drives: 13 plays, 146 yards (11.2), 14 points
Next nine drives: 47 plays, 206 yards (4.4), 0 points
Final two drives: 17 plays, 162 yards (9.5), 14 points
Even in the moment, we knew after Mizzou exploded for two early touchdowns, Oklahoma was going to adjust. Mizzou was going to have to adjust to the adjustments ... and they really did not. The Sooners over-compensated for Henry Josey on zone reads, and they were fast enough to corral James Franklin after decent but less than explosive gains. Meanwhile, Franklin looked mostly toward his seniors to get Mizzou through a rough patch ... and they mostly failed.
Here are Franklin's passing stats for those nine middle drives: 4-for-19, 84 yards. Here is the target data:
* Passes to Jerrell Jackson: 1-for-5, 25 yards
* Passes to Wes Kemp: 1-for-5, 22 yards
* Passes to T.J. Moe: 2-for-4, 37 yards
* Passes to Michael Egnew: 0-for-1
* Passes to Marcus Lucas: 0-for-1
* Throwaways: 0-for-3
Passes to Jackson, Kemp and Egnew went 2-for-11 for 47 yards during Mizzou's drought. I do love how many sophomores are coming through for the Tigers -- Franklin, Henry Josey, Washington, Lucas (well, he did two games ago, anyway), Andrew Wilson, E.J. Gaines, etc. -- but if Mizzou is going to reach their ceiling over the last eight games, whatever that may be, seniors are going to have to follow Luke Lambert's lead and raise their game.
Jaz Reynolds Was The Key
Daily Oklahoman: OU receiver Jaz Reynolds takes advantage of first career start
SI.com: Oklahoma Sooners' arsenal of weapons pays dividends
I will be recycling this tidbit for tomorrow's Numerical at the mothership, but...
Oklahoma Drives In Which Jaz Reynolds Had A Reception: 5 drives, 320 yards (8.0 per play), 21 points (4.2 per poss.)
Other Oklahoma Drives: 8 drives, 45 plays, 278 yards (6.2), 17 points (2.1 per poss.)
With Kenny Stills and Trey Franks out, Mizzou was able to manage Oklahoma's other weapons reasonably well. Ryan Broyles clearly got his catches, and Dom Whaley did some interesting things out of the backfield, but still, Mizzou held a strong offense mostly in check. But when Reynolds stepped up after a shaky first quarter, Mizzou was officially saturated. OU had too many weapons for the Tigers to stop at that point, and they coasted.
There is some context here, obviously -- Reynolds' biggest catches corresponded with Mizzou's biggest offensive droughts. Still, OU clicked when Reynolds clicked.
Should We Be Worried About Grant Ressel?
The Missourian: Missouri's kicking troubles continue
The Good: Grant Ressel is 18-for-18 on PATs and 5-for-5 on FGs under 40 yards.
The Bad: Ressel is 1-for-5 on FGs over 40 yards.
So ... is this a problem? Clearly Ressel is not at the top of his game, but in missing three huge road field goals, what can we expect from him moving forward? If he makes those three kicks, Mizzou beats Arizona State, and the entire fourth quarter of last night's game plays out with a different narrative. Only the best kickers in the country are automatic on long field goals, but ... damn those were some costly misses.
We know how fragile the generic kicker's psyche is, but we have to hope that, at the very least, Ressel still remains automatic on the more makeable (i.e. under 40 yards) field goals. It's a rhetorical question to wonder if he's going to keep it together or fall apart; we just have to hope for the former.
Time To Move Forward
Post-Dispatch (Bryan Burwell): There's no reason for Tigers to mope
The Trib: Missouri won’t get any breathers as the schedule only gets tougher
KC Star (Campus Corner): What we can say about Mizzou at 2-2
KBIA Sports Extra: Just one little thing missing from Mizzou football—consistency
My biggest fear headed into the season was that Mizzou would start 2-2, losing to two solid teams on the road, but the narrative would to some degree end up "Mizzou in crisis!" Mizzou is indeed 2-2, but they appear to have shown more than enough promise to keep fans in good spirits. Their two losses ensure that they will not be ranked anytime soon, which is a shame because in their two losses, they probably proved more Top 25 bona fides than some undefeated teams have. With Illinois' schedule (Arkansas State, South Dakota State, Arizona State at home, Western Michigan), for instance, the Tigers would probably be 4-0 and ranked in the mid-teens. Alas, that's a flaw of the human polls (lose, and you drop, no matter what), and all Mizzou can do is take care of business against Kansas State and Iowa State and get to the Oklahoma State game with momentum.
It really is interesting to think of the players who have shown flashes of greatness in their careers, even just on offense. Mizzou has all the components of a really good team: the James Franklin of the last three games, the Henry Josey of the last three games, the Jerrell Jackson of last year's Oklahoma game, the Wes Kemp of last year's Texas A&M game, T.J. Moe, the Michael Egnew of 2010, the Marcus Lucas of the Arizona State game, the L'Damian Washington of the last three games, the Kendial Lawrence of last November, the De'Vion Moore of last year's Oklahoma game, etc. The weapons are significant ... they just all need to show up, healthy, at the same time. If they do, Mizzou could win out the rest of the season. They probably won't, obviously, but the ceiling is high, as it is for the Mizzou defense. But I'll talk more about them in the BTBS post.
76 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You Are a Positive Man Bill
Youve made me feel better better……but I am extremely fearful of the list of QBs and WRs still on the schedule. With no pass rush and limited ball skills on the corner I tend to fear the worst.
Actually this is the thing that reassured me most about that game – the cornerbacks were giving great coverage. There were quite a few very good passes that they broke up.
Yes, the secondary looked at times much better than the ASU game.
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Sep 25, 2011 8:55 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought so too
I said it during the game but I still think it’s true. Steck is right to put his young secondary in man coverage as much as possible. They have speed and their coverage skills are very good. If Gaines, etc keep making good progress on their ball skills, they could be scary good.
by mizzousundevil on Sep 25, 2011 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions
I feel very strange about the season right now.
We’re where I thought we would be, which I’m not thrilled with, but it’s ok. I don’t feel like “Mizzou in crisis” at all. But at the same time, I feel like a lot of people are already banking a lot of wins against teams that are undefeated (ISU, KSU, TTU). Don’t get me wrong, I’ll be disappointed if we don’t win those, but some people seem to think these are foregone conclusions. That’s tough for me to say as a fan of a 2-2 team. Don’t even get me started on the people who seem to think that we will “clearly” beat Texas, aTm, OSU, and/or Baylor. Those are all very tough games. But at the same time, I honestly don’t think there’s an unwinnable game on the schedule.
As you can see, I’m just a mess.
hear us roar
Atleast you're being a realist.
There are so many chronic pessimists along side the blinded optimists (which I tend to be guilty of the latter) when it comes to Mizzou fans.
by McZou on Sep 25, 2011 1:23 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I think it’s fair to say that all remaining games are reasonably winnable… if I’m optimistic I’d say we even had better than 50/50 odds in all of them. But that still means we’ll probably lose at least one, if not two. Analogy: It’s possible to flip a coin and get 4 heads in a row. Each coin flip is “winnable”, but the overall odds are still greatest that it’ll come out as a mixed result.
Agreed on both
(1) all remaining games are reasonably winnable and (2) it would be optimistic to say that we have better than 50/50 odds in all of them.
I mean, last night’s game was reasonably winnable, in that it could have easily been a 4-point game twice in the fourth quarter.
hear us roar
Lets assume for a second that we have a 50% chance of winning at aTm, 50% at OSU and 50% at Baylor. So if we played each of these games 50 times over we’d win be 25 and lose 25.
But what are the odds that we win all 3? If you put the numbers into a binomial probability calculator you get these probabilities:
odds of 0 wins are 12.5%
odds of 1 win is: 37.5%
odds of 2 wins are: 37.5%
odds of 3 wins are: 12.5%
(total is 100% – you absolutely have to have one of those outcomes)
So even though all 3 of the games are individually “winnable” – it is not a foregone conclusion that we lose them – it’s still quite likely (87.5% chance) that we come out with one or more losses.
In order to have a really good chance at running the table the rest of the season we need as many games as possible to be tilted as heavily as possible in our favor. If we become a more dominant team and had a 75% chance in each of our individual games against OSU, Baylor, and aTm, then we come out of that stretch with a 42% chance of running the table on them, and only a 1.5% chance of going 0 for 3 (to put that into perspective, it would be approximately like shuffling 2 decks of cards together, then reaching in and blindly pulling out the ace of spades from deck 1 – it could happen but we’d have to be really snake bit).
To put it further into perspective, if we were so dominant that we had a 90% chance of winning each of those 3 games, we’d STILL have a 17% chance of losing at least once (that is, if we replayed our season over and over again, we’d have a perfect record only 5 times out of 6).
This is why small sample sizes can be very misleading.
by Wan Ihite on Sep 25, 2011 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I hope we beat aTm so bad.
"If I ever saw an amputee getting hanged, I'd probably just start calling out letters" - Demetri Martin
"Eggs this guys overdone, then I hit the slope on them call it rise over run"- Chiddy
O I E M I Z Z O U
by pinkelposse on Sep 25, 2011 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well that’s typically considered, what, a 6 point swing right (-3 points goes to +3 points, something like that?). I’m not sure what that does to the probabilities but it probably moves it from 50 to 60 or something like that… though I’m pulling numbers out of my behind here. I’m sure Bill would have a far more informed read on that.
I think people are massively underestimating Oklahoma State
Again, they’re a top 10 team, people. We’re .500, having lost the only two real tests on our schedule. We’re in a rebuilding year with a sophomore quarterback. The program’s come a long way, but not enough to justify thinking we have better than even chance of beating a top-10 team at home in a rebuilding year.
Agree
however, the two real road tests, were REAL FREAKEN TESTS.
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Sep 26, 2011 10:51 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree
Last year’s OU game is a good example. If you play that game 100 times, you can’t tell me that we win a majority of them. But you only play the game once.
I’d say we have about a 2.24% chance of being 10-2 and a .0116% chance of being 2-10.
But the real question is…can you extrapolate those made up percentages into my made up percentages for each game. That’s Good Will Hunting stuff there.
GO!
hear us roar
James Franklin finally excites me.
That’s the biggest thing I took out of last night. He can be very, very good.
Twitter: KeysMyaths
by KeysMyaths on Sep 25, 2011 12:48 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
rec'd
I know he still needs some polish, but seriously, this is his baseline with a bit of a MASH unit for the O-line? That’s crazy to me.
hear us roar
I’m seriously about as pumped for next year as you can get for something that’s a whole year away and in a sport where so much is uncertain and unstable over even much shorter time lines.
Ha - me too
Two years ago, Bill did a depth chart of the upcoming years & pinpointed 2012 as an amazing year. It seemed so long until then but now it’s around the corner.
by tigers and chiefs fan on Sep 25, 2011 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions
he's like the nostradamus of football!
"If I ever saw an amputee getting hanged, I'd probably just start calling out letters" - Demetri Martin
"Eggs this guys overdone, then I hit the slope on them call it rise over run"- Chiddy
O I E M I Z Z O U
I'm collecting donations for the "Help Frank Alexander Graduate Fund"
Seriously, we need to get that guy out of there.
The play I remember
is the one where he started on one end of the line, ran all the way across the field, through traffic, avoiding Mizzou chip blocks to tackle Josey behind the line. That was impressive athleticism there. No disrespect needed.
by mizzousundevil on Sep 25, 2011 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Random, unrelated question.
Is Blaine the first Mizzou quarterback to start an NFL game at QB?
Twitter: KeysMyaths
Nope
Steve Pisarkiewicz, Paul Christman to name two.
by Sheriff Blalock on Sep 25, 2011 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Didn't Chase start one the year the Saints won the Super Bowl?
Late in the season?
I believe Brunell did
He was the #2 that season.
by Sheriff Blalock on Sep 25, 2011 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
To me, last night was a bit of validation
It is no longer 2006. We are not a standard deviation worse talent-wise all over the field. We lost last night because OU was a better team. We can point to missed field goals, Broyles’ TD that wouldn’t have been overturned no matter which way the original call was, or any number of things that turned the scales. But the fact is they were better, and better teams end up with those “breaks”. That said, they are a better team more because of where the two teams are in their “cycle” that teams go through than a structural difference in talent. Barring realignment, we’ll play OU again next year, and we’ll be the ones with the returning starter at QB playing at home against a QB making his 4th career start. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if we were favored. Because we belong in that company now.
by Transmogrified Tiger on Sep 25, 2011 1:08 PM CDT reply actions 10 recs
YES
We need to appreciate where we are. Even with Daniel at QB we collapsed on the national stage against big time programs. Not any more: on a 100 degree Friday night we should have beaten an ASU team in Tempe that just smoked a ranked USC team by three touchdowns; and yesterday we made OU look flat on a Saturday night in Norman. We may not have turned the corner, but we’re at least on the right curve. BTW, I say made OU look flat because if OU began the game in man and then switched to zone…that adjustment completely changed the game and has nothing to do with psyche.
Yeah, I wouldn’t say we’re completely level with OU yet in terms of talent, but now we’re more like a quarter standard deviation behind instead of a whole one. And that puts us in a range where the top of our talent cycle lining up with the trough of theirs is going to produce a very competitive game that we have reasonable odds of winning, whereas previously it would have meant a certain loss that merely wasn’t a total blowout.
On a positive note
We made OU lose their #1 ranking two years in a row now
by MizzouRugby on Sep 25, 2011 1:30 PM CDT reply actions 7 recs
For the most part...
I can understand every point made on this thread. But for me, I just thought the defense would be far superior to what it is right now. I really expected the D to carry Mizzou as Franklin and the offense got their feet under them. So, at this point I’m really concerned. I also feel that they could win every game left on the schedule. However, with all the really good offensive teams, they could very easily lose 6 or 7 of them. Steck needs to squeeze more pass rush and much better run defense from that side of the ball.
I'm surprised by the lack of a pass rush
by Gaknar on Sep 25, 2011 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I don't know either
even a couple of the CB blitzes took too long to get to Landry, those were the same blitzes that I thought got to the QB at A&M last year.
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Sep 26, 2011 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions
I was actually surprised by the run defense
we held them to under 4 yards a carry. That isn’t great, but that’s not bad. I’m sure the fancy stats will prove me wrong though.
In all honesty....
All this game showed to me, and maybe I’m way to optimistic, but I think we honestly can win the rest of our schedule this year. The only game I think we might drop from here on out is at Waco since Baylor always seems to give us trouble and RGIII is an ok QB I guess.
Oklahoma State is kinda ranked in the top 10
And A&M has been colossally overrated, but we DO have to go to college station to face them.
Yea I realize Okie State is ranked, but we have them at home and I honestly think Brandon Weeden is very overrated and I really don’t think their defense is that good.
It wouldn't surprise me if we swept or were swept by OSU, aTm, UT and Baylor.
So I’ll be thrilled if we split them.
hear us roar
Some thoughts I have...
Yost gets paid a lot to call the offense, and answers to one man. And that man does not read this site (that I know of). Please folks, calm yourself.
Stating that Josey needs to get the more is true, but without a change of pace back, you just can’t keep giving it to him. I think a bigger concern is Franklin getting a bit too jumpy and willing to run out of the pocket. Most of those deep throws came from when he stuck in there. Granted, I’m not breaking down film, so maybe there’s a reason for all the runs. But he’s getting to much Brad in his head, and that’s not good.
I don’t know that the defense isn’t getting a bad pass rush. I think it’s more quick passes, a few uncalled holds (well, maybe more than a few), and lots of play-action. Last night, when Landry did stay in there and felt pressure, he air-mailed most of those throws.
FX, I get that the main branch has been doing football games for years, and you’ve got your graphics and sound effects where you’re happy. And some of those translate to any level. And yes, Gus Johnston got a little lovey with OU towards the end of the game. But his excitement during the big plays was enjoyable. But wow, the camera work was really subpar. If you want to compete with the mothership, you can’t have these sophomoric efforts.
What do you mean I can't retire at 32?
by Ausgiano on Sep 25, 2011 3:52 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Josey carried the ball 14 times last night
14 is not a heavy load for a tailback. For most of Pinkel’s tenure we’ve featured a back who carried the ball more often than that, and almost always with less success. Josey carried the ball 11 times for 69 yards in the first half, then touched the ball 3 times the rest of the way, as the game slipped away from us. Josey carried the ball 7 times in our four scoring drives and 7 times in the other 10. In a game where we were killed by high variance, he was our most consistent weapon.
He’s also a small very young guy, and Pinkel will have had a FAR better read on how tired and banged up he was, and what his endurance conditioning is like (remember, YOUNG). If he starts losing a step or two from fatigue he becomes a much less effective weapon, and if his body is built on a smaller frame and less used to extreme wear, he might become rapidly more prone to injuries from further hits. This is all just conjecture – we haven’t seen his performance curves in practice and they have – but coaching is in many many ways an elaborate balancing act.
I get that we want to protect him given our depth problem, but...
…an even smaller guy named Jacquizz carried the ball 20-30 times a game at Oregon State for 3 straight years.
all I'll say is expect him to get more carries against ksu.
I bet the coaches also realize that his play has been demanding more carries.
"If I ever saw an amputee getting hanged, I'd probably just start calling out letters" - Demetri Martin
"Eggs this guys overdone, then I hit the slope on them call it rise over run"- Chiddy
O I E M I Z Z O U
If Culver isn't a change of pace runner to Josey, I don't know what is. ;-)
Transformers 2: Greatest movie or greatest movie ever? --Mizzou2396
tTSTC Don't Tread On Me. Roll Tire.
by Spider_Monkey on Sep 26, 2011 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions
SEC officially announces Texas A&M as its 13th member institution.
They will join July 1, 2012. Now we just need to get Mizzou there as #14.
From what I had read (not from Vahe)
it seems the Curators are in favor of the move, Alden & Pinkel are in favor of the move, and Deaton is not in favor of the move.
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
reading between the lines my guess is that the reason nothing is being announced about Mizzou right now has a lot to do with the negotiations that are currently happening over the B12’s future. Their natural inclination is to say “OU and Texas are splitting the money, and all other big decisions are whatever Texas’ wants. Now sign on the dotted line or good luck in conference USA.”
But they can’t risk Mizzou calling their bluff on that kind of hardball to the extent that all of the following things are true. Mizzou:
a) has a bona fide SEC offer, and
b) is seriously considering it, and
c) that it would be painful to lose Mizzou.
If any one of those things fall apart, then Texas & OU know they have a gun to Mizzou’s head, and the negotiations are short, sharp, and brutal. If they seriously thought that Mizzou did not have a real offer and/or wasn’t willing to take one, then this would be over already, and we would already have signed over 6 years of our media rights along with whatever else Texas wants. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.
Now my guess is that the big 12 power brokers are probably relatively well aware of how firm an offer Mizzou has – I’m sure their people have had quiet conversations with SEC on the down low. They had no idea that the nubs were going to split to the B1G, but Mizzou’s situation is pretty much an open secret right now. So given that we haven’t signed anything final yet, I infer that Mizzou probably does have a good offer (to the best extent of the insider B12 power-broker’s knowledge), and that Mizzou really is considering it (or at least, a lot of smart, powerful, and well informed people believe so).
As I say it’s reading between the lines, and could be absurdly wildly wrong… but I suspect there’s something in it.
Even if Mizzou stays, I don't think they shouldn't sign away their media rights
Oklahoma and Texas wouldn’t do that last year, but now that Oklahoma has their backs to the wall, they want everyone else to sign their rights away. Screw that.
I think the same thing
Tell them we’ll stay but hell no as far as signing any rights away. That seems to have a bigger potential negative impact for us than any other team.
If we had done it last year, that would have been fine, but
a) The conference is less stable now and I would hate to be locked in, especially given
b) you can’t trust either UT or OU at this point
We sign our revenue over in return for league business going to majority votes, not requiring a super-majority that give OU and Texas effective pocket vetos.
by Wan Ihite on Sep 26, 2011 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I like that idea Wan.
Transformers 2: Greatest movie or greatest movie ever? --Mizzou2396
tTSTC Don't Tread On Me. Roll Tire.
by Spider_Monkey on Sep 26, 2011 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I think you are spot on . . .
. . . with this analysis. And I am perfectly content to believe all our leaders have in mind what is best for the institution and will make a wise choice.
Go Mizzou!
This game was not a blow out like some MU v OU games
For that I am excited for the rest of this year, next year and the year after.
by MarioVanPeebles Republic of China on Sep 25, 2011 9:09 PM CDT reply actions
I share that enthusiasm.
We could be on the way to getting to be the team we need to be.
"Gentlemen, this is a football."-Vince Lombardi
"Slow down coach, you're going too fast."-Max McGee
I feel good about our team.
Sometimes its not if you win or lose but how you play the game and to me that is so true for our Tigers so far this season.
I like our team and though they’ve lost, I like how they are playing. It might even get worse with how tough the Big 12 is this year but if we can go 8-5, 5-4 on the season, I’ll think of it as a success (of course we have to beat Kansas, lol).
The Tigers are playing good ball. There were a few mistackles are the young secondary are hanging with the receivers but just not able to locate and knock away some of those balls. I think it will start coming together as the year goes on, especially if the D-Line can come out of its funk and get some pressure on opposing QB’s.
Sure there have been a couple tough losses and a sluggish first game win but I really don’t have any complaints. All I care about is that they are playing really hard and competing. I am really excited about the rest of the season and I love this group we have this year. There are some big time games left on the menu and I can’t wait.
I don't know how I feel about the loss, but I'm not ticked off.
Everyone had their moments of brilliance and moments of calamity.
I was pleased to see a power running formation on the goal line!!! I can’t tell you how much!!! And to see it again with the I formation on third and one, I got excited and…whoops: 5 yards false start on young Mr. Hoch. That ticked me off for two reasons: one, the lost yardage and, two, I wanted to see the play out of the I formation! It seemed to me the team definitely went into a funk after that missed opportunity.
If I read the MU roster correctly Hoch is a Fr DE. I don’t know if he’s now playing TE or they just put him in for the beef. In any event he should still know better, but c’est le guerre. Might have been a different ball game if we pick up that first down.
After their disappearing act the Tigers came back, didn’t quit. I like that.
Josey needed a few more touches. If we can’t get him 20 to 25 touches, it’s just a tease.
"Gentlemen, this is a football."-Vince Lombardi
"Slow down coach, you're going too fast."-Max McGee
re hoch
i believe he was recruited as a te. last year there was talk of using him in an h-back role, but then he switched to d.
one thing about the jumbo/i formation- i wish they would snap the ball quickly instead of trying to draw the d offsides. seems like our extra big guys can’t hold their water that long.
m-i-z... z-o-u!
by Wooderson on Sep 25, 2011 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Mizzourah Blog Post
Check out my analysis on the game…Please let me know what you think!
http://www.mizzourahblog.com/ben-wilson.html
http://mizzousportswriters.com/2011/09/26/after-strong-start-mizzous-flaws-exposed-by-oklahoma/
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Rock M Nation
Related FanShots on Rock M Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
