clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Rock M Roundtable!

1 - Alright, let's get the obvious one out of the way: where did Mizzou's win Saturday night rank among your own personal Faurot Field moments?  (For Doug ... um ... how's the food in Albuquerque?)

2 - Somebody offers you $2 million to correctly pick the winner of this Saturday's game in Lincoln.  Head over heart: who do you choose?

3 - Switching to basketball for a moment: The USA Today Coaches poll is out, and the Big 12 is heavily represented.  Kansas State is 3rd, Kansas 7th, Baylor 14th, Missouri 15th, Texas 25th.  Which of these surprises you the most?

4 - Seriously, how freaking great was Homecoming... (sorry, Doug) ...

The Beef: 1 - The win ranks up there, but not as much as the weekend does.  It was the perfect weekend for Mizzou fans.  Askren wins on Thursday night.  Kinsler makes a World Series on Friday.  The rain holds off and the University looks damn near perfect on Saturday for their free 3-hour commercial.  The rain holds off during the day and we have an enormous tailgate.  The rain (for the most part) holds off and the game is what it was.  And we beat the line at Shakespeares on Sunday before heading out of town.  And I took this picture

2 - I am not so sure they differ at this point.  Don’t get me wrong, I think NU is going to present us some very different challenges than OU did, especially in the places where MU fans trumpeted our play (in the trenches).  But I like the matchup of our defense against theirs because of how sure our secondary and LB’s have been tackling.  That gives me faith we can stack the box against the run and dare NU to beat us over the top.  If they can do that, I say good for them.

3 - I suppose the kSU placement surprises me the most, just because I tend to think preseason polls are reserved for the long-time royalty of college basketball and kSU is certainly not a member of that club currently.

4 - I am sure Albuquerque was just as nice as Homecoming, and hey…kU held their first conference opponent to under 50, so things are looking up.

The Beef: And wow…add another to the group of Sooners which got killed this past week.

Michael Atchison: 1.  Keeping in mind that in my seven years on campus, there were no good wins, this fits somewhere in the top three.  For sheer catharsis, I don’t think it quite matches 2003 vs. Nebraska, and 2007 vs. Nebraska was just bonkers fun (how many times did the wave go around?), but this was something a little different.  The Tigers looked as balanced and as good as I’ve ever seen them against a really good team, and I don’t think any team was a bigger symbol of Mizzou’s past football futility than Oklahoma.  At the end of the game, I really didn’t know what to do with myself.  In fact, with about two minutes left in the game, when it was clearly won, I turned to my wife and said “I don’t know what to do,” and several people in our section laughed in recognition of the feeling.  I don’t know if this was number one at Faurot for me, but it’s pretty clearly in the top two.

2.  This one is so hard because I think it’s a coin flip of a game.  I just don’t know what we’re going to get from Nebraska from week to week.  But I’ll say this:  If the Missouri defense I’ve seen the last three weeks shows up, I like the Tigers’ chances.  Zavier Gooden and Will Ebner could have a huge impact on this game.

3.  I don’t think any of those poll positions is much out line, but they depend a lot on two guys.  If Josh Selby isn’t eligible, Kansas probably slides a little.  If LaceDarius Dunn is gone, Baylor slides off the chart.  They’ll have a terrific stable of big guys and absolutely no guard play.

4.  I’m sorry that I couldn’t be there for more than the game.  I watched all of GameDay, and I get it.  That was a spectacular site.  Homecoming was great enough that I started the #GreatestHomecomingEver hashtag on Twitter, though it seems not to have caught on.

RPT: 1. Beef is absolutely right about the entire weekend. My family came in town Thursday night, so my brother and his wife tossed a few back with the roommates and I and laughed hysterically at The League (which you NEED to be watching, by the way). The next day, after giving a campus tour in beautiful weather, we had an incredible early-graduation meal at CC's, did the house decs run, then made the from Harpo's to McNally's, in which I saw my baseball team beat the Yankees and win the ALCS. Then Saturday happened, and for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that. I should say though that I think the Nebraska 2007 game is in the conversation as well for the whole "block party" feel it had.

2. Nebraska. I would have said that with me head a few weeks ago. Now I'm saying it because there's no way karma doesn't kick us in the junk because of last weekend. Never forget: Mizzou fans were assigned Crazy Old Testament God.

3. Probably Texas, to be honest. I know a lot of people are surprised to see K-State up there, but that's a damn good basketball team.


Michael Atchison: I doubt that goes in the media guide.  I love this quote from the Supreme Court:  "there is no evidence in the record to suggest that the drug [to be used in carrying out the execution] is unsafe."

Lethal, but not unsafe.

RPT: "Lethal, but not unsafe."

You rang?

Michael Atchison: Yeah, the other night when the Heat and Magic canceled their preseason game for unsafe playing conditions, I noted that all Mizzou opponents face unsafe playing conditions.  We call them “Will Ebner.”

I’m beginning to think that the 3-2 on his uniform isn’t a number; it’s a countdown to detonation.

ghtd36: Hi, fellers. Don't count on me answering the questions. I just need to write.

There have been a lot of times in my sportslife where I've questioned if there was a SportsGod. That's part of the reason why I wrote the Missouri Fan's Letter to God in the RMN Football Preview Magazine . I think in a lot of ways, there are major parallels between my two favorite sports franchises. The Rangers and Mizzou are perpetual underachievers, to the point where fans become not just jaded, but easy contenders for "Most Jaded Fanbases Ever." And who can blame them? Both the Rangers and Mizzou have disappointed their fans in sensationally cruel and continuously creative ways for years.

So you'll have to excuse me if, entering Friday, I braced for the worst. Here were my two favorite franchises who, within 24 hours of one another, would face the team that has always had their number. They'd each face them at home in front of capacity crowds. And I was convinced, despite any evidence to the contrary, that both would lose. I was convinced that SportsGod would make last weekend the worst sports weekend of my life. The Yankees would win two straight in Arlington, beating Cliff Lee in Game 7 and sending the Rangers back to where they belong. Oklahoma would toy with Mizzou before ultimately beating them by two touchdowns, quashing any lingering hope that Missouri fans had of a dream season and sending Mizzou into a tailspin in which it loses four of its final six games to earn another sexy trip to El Paso.

I was on a plane on Friday night. The last thing I saw before I had to turn off my iPhone was David Murphy flying out to end the 7th inning with the Rangers leading 6-1. I'd watched the pivotal 5th inning in the Love Field terminal, causing everyone around me to wonder who the kid with the emotional problems was. I knew the Rangers -- the team whose logo was once a baseball with a cowboy hat on it -- were six outs away from the World Series, with a five-run lead, at home. Yet I was still convinced they would blow it. They'd bring in Alexi Ogando, who would somehow give up eight consecutive solo homers, and that would be that. With six outs to go (and nine outs total, counting the bottom of the 8th), I knew that it should last about 25 minutes or so if it all went right. So I waited for the pilot to announce the score. 30 minutes passed. 45 minutes passed. At this point, I was convinced that the Rangers had blown it. That was the only way. That's how it always happened.

About five minutes later, the pilot came over the speaker, with the tone of a guy who was selling a muffler.

"For those of you interested, the Rangers beat the Yankees, 6-1."

There was a smattering of applause, a few whoops, some high-fives. But none from me. I sat there, awestruck, a couple of tears welling up, grinning like an idiot. I didn't know how to react. That was, without a doubt, the most emotionally confusing moment of my life.

After sharing a bottle of champagne on Friday night, the girlfriend and I made our way to Columbia. With all due respect to my fellow Tiger fans, I was now playing with house money. If Mizzou had lost, sure, I'd be disappointed, but that would be the return to reality. That would be the moment that the world made sense again. It's like SportsGod was flying the plane, and he came over the loudspeaker:

"Sorry about that turbulence last night; don't know where that came from. Anyway, normal sailing from here on out. Don't expect anything else to go all wacky."

And, well, you know what happened. Missouri, in front of a national audience in what Bill appropriately characterized as a three-day commercial for the university, won. It didn't become real for me until I was down on the field -- moments after yelling "Phil Pressey, you are the TRUTH!" to Michael Dixon, who politely corrected me. In the span of 25 hours, my two favorite sports franchises had each notched wins that, without a doubt, fall in the top 5 of all-time franchise moments (or, for the Rangers, the No. 1 spot).

I guess what I'm saying is, I don't know where to go from here. Part of me wishes this had all happened a little slower. I haven't had time to soak it all in, and I feel bad about that, because this is a once-in-a-lifetime thing. The Rangers are never going to earn their first pennant again. Mizzou, in all likelihood, will never beat No. 1 on homecoming with the whole world watching again. And they damn sure aren't going to do it in 25 hours again.

My sports paradigm shifted on Friday and Saturday. And now, thanks to Neftali Feliz' unfair slider and Gahn McGaffie's breakaway speed, I'm pretty sure there's a SportsGod.

ZouDave: 1 - Well it's certainly pretty damn high especially if we're talking specifically about Faurot Field victories.  Really the two biggest I've been to at Faurot are the wins over Nebraska in '03 and this one.  I rushed the field in '03, did not on Saturday.  Some of that had to do with my age, some of it had to do with who I was with, but in both cases I went into the stadium just simply KNOWING we were coming away with a win.  In the Nebraska '03 game, we went into the 4th quarter down by 10 and I was not nearly as certain about the outcome.  Then on the first play Brad Smith went for a long TD and I was certain again.  This one...Gahn McGaffie pretty much removed all doubt for me on the opening touch of the game.  I knew we were going to win, I just needed to wait to see how it was all going to happen.

So really, it's probably about a tie.  It's hard for me to call one bigger than this one, but it's REALLY hard for me to say anything was better than that '03 Nebraska game.  As far as what it means to the program, this one is probably bigger.  But really, it's pretty similar steps.  Both were hurdles we had to clear to take the next step for the program.

2 - Missouri is winning this game.  That's the bottom line.

3 - Texas is in the top 25 because of who they are.  They've not done anything recently to really DESERVE that ranking, but it's like the voters basically tell themselves they HAVE to include that team in the Top 25.  Not really a surprise, just an observation.  I'm not going to get too worked up about the rankings.  It's a long season that will take care of itself.  I'm glad we're starting out ranked, just because it puts us in a higher profile from the start.


(15 minutes later...)

The Beef: I feel as if we are emotionally drained here and the Roundtable is going to suffer for it.  We cannot afford to come out flat this week boys…we need to power through this.

Michael Atchison: What was the most stunning thing on Saturday?

1. McGaffie’s return;
2. Aldon’s interception;
3. The way the offense gashed the middle of OU’s defensive line on long runs; or
4. Stoops’s decision to punt down two scores with no timeouts and less than three minutes on the clock?

I really couldn’t believe my eyes when the punt team came on.  I thought it was a trick.  And then they kicked, and I said “Stoops tapped out.”  And I don’t even know anything about mixed martial arts.

Most underrated pivotal play in the game:  Second quarter, 7-7, OU driving, and DeMarco Murray falls down in the flat on a play where he could have scored.  Next play, Aldon makes the pick.  Game changer.

The Beef: I know Bill C (if we hear from him today) may disagree with me potentially on this, but I was the most stunned by the decision to go for 2 down 9 with 6 to go.  At that point, you cannot tie the game, but you sure as hell can hamstring yourself, and that was exactly what OU did.  Kick the extra point, kick off deep and try to get the ball back.  The pressure would be ALL on us.  As is stood, we ended up punting, but because they did not get the 2, and the decision was made to onside kick it, we pinned them deep.

Also, I was stunned at how OU basically wasted 4 of their 6 timeouts.  One was used to ice Ressel, and the other was used with about 5 to go in the 2nd half in an attempt to get the ball back, but the other 4 were absolutely called at times when they should not have been.  Just staggering stuff to me.

But to answer your question specifically, I go with #4.

RPT: Or, we can play a fun game of "What were your exact thoughts when Gettis muffed the punt?"

But to answer Atch's question, it has to Stoops, right?

The Beef: My thought initially was, “Holy crap that was some gust of wind”

ghtd36: First, to Atch's point:

The punt was absolutely stunning. I, too, was convinced that Bob Stoops somehow knew some loophole rule that punting would benefit his team. But when Gettis fair-caught it, my mind went blank. That was one of the more dumbfounding things I've ever seen live in a football game.

And to RPT's point:

When Gettis muffed that punt, I was 1,000% sure that Mizzou would lose by 60.

ZouDave: I don't know if it's emotionally drained or just changed.  Greg's words ring true, for sure, there may well be a SportsGod.  RPT's words also ring true, we've been assigned Angry Old Testament God.  But putting away all of that for a moment to understand that Gary Gaines is correct:  "Ain't no curses."

There aren't any curses.  There's just sports.  And we're not ants trying to stay out of the way of God's magnifying glass for fear that he'll burn our feelers off, we're just fans.  Some have it easy, some don't, through circumstances beyond our control.  As fans, we can only affect so many things about how a team performs.  We have a say in the general outcome of a program in our financial support, because every little bit matters.  We have a tiny role to play in the stadium at home games because there is a home field advantage as it pertains to energy, loud crowds on 3rd down, etc.  But in the end, it's up to Coach Gary Pinkel and his staff to get the best players possible, teach them how to play this game as team, motivate them to execute as intended, and it's up to the players to understand what it means to have these opportunities, to have focus, determination, guts, will (Ebner) and desire.

Was Saturday the biggest win in Missouri history?  No.  Bill C (I believe) accurately put that to rest days ago, pointing out that this is a program that has won conferences before, has beaten highly ranked teams in bowl games before, has been to the Big XII Championship before, etc.  It's ONE OF the biggest wins in Missouri history, yes.  It MAY be the biggest win in the last 30 years.  It IS (so far) the biggest win in Gary Pinkel's tenure.  But I think as fans, this win was a tipping point.  This game was proof that there isn't always a shoe about to drop.  Who didn't think it was about to happen after taking the lead 36-21 and watching OU muff a kick return only to end up getting the ball at the 15 after-the-fact.  Then 2 penalties later OU was at Missouri's 2.  They'd gotten to our 2 yard line and hadn't had to complete a single offensive play to do it.  They score, of course, and what happens?  Missouri calmly goes about its business.  No panic.  No fear.  No pucker factor.  Just take the field, run the offense, take care of the ball, and trust each other.  It was like the entire Missouri team, from Coach Pinkel down to the walk-ons not even in full pads on the sidelines, already knew what we would find out minutes later:  "we've got this."

Missouri fans gained a lot of perspective on Saturday.  I know I did, anyway.  We can't just keep waiting for these bad things to happen.  It's not healthy, first of all, and there's nothing we can do about it even if it is going to happen.  Expecting bad things to happen to our program for no reason (as they've appeared to for so many years) is akin to waiting for us to win for no reason as well.  We didn't win on Saturday because of trick plays, bad calls, luck or because some omniscient being willed it so.  We won because we were better than they were.  In almost every single facet.  It's a nice feeling to know that.  There wasn't anything Oklahoma could have reasonably done different, despite what their fans say.  Missouri was better, from start to finish and from top to bottom.  That's why we won.  In the past, the fact that we couldn't say that is why we lost.

Missouri fans probably also lost a bit of their identity on Saturday.  I know I did, anyway.  I'm not waiting for the bad luck anymore.  I believe we have a program in place that CAN be better than our opponents.  It's time to start expecting that.

ghtd36: Yes, Beef, going for two was wrong as well. The girlfriend even pointed it out.

Her: "Why would they go for two here? Can't you score eight points if you have the ball once?"
Me: "Welcome to the desert of the real."

/conversation that didn't actually happen, but pretty much sums up my thoughts

Michael Atchison: I actually agreed with Stoops’s decision to go for two.  He needed two TDs and he needed at least one two-point conversion to tie it.  I think it’s the right play to go for the two first because then you know what you have to do the rest of the way.  You make it, you know you need one score; you miss it, you know you need two, and you can manage the game accordingly.  It does you no good if you’re down eight with thirty seconds to go and you score a TD and then blow the conversion.

As for the Gettis muff, my thought was “what a way to waste two spectacular minutes.”

ZouDave: The most stunning thing to me was #1.  That's the kind of stuff there's no accounting for, and we might not see it again for quite some time.  The kick went to an up-man, and he just flat-out beat everyone into the endzone thanks to great blocking and killer moves.  It was an opening people had joked about wanting, but NOBODY would ever actually guess we're going to see the opening kickoff of the game returned for a touchdown.  Maybe if Jeremy Maclin was back there you can at least hold out more than blind hope for it, but the fact remains it's really freaking hard to return a kick of a TD even against an average opponent.  Against a team as talented as Oklahoma, you pretty much would just never expect to see it.  It sent a message that lasted the entire game:  we're not scared of you, and we are here to win.  Stop us, if you can.

They couldn't.

Aldon's interception, while an awesome play, has been done before.  Jacquiese had an INT return for a TD last year, I remember Xzavie Jackson picking off Graham Harrell in Lubbock in 2006 and returning it for a TD, and one of our DE's (Zach Ville, maybe?) intercepted Jamal Lord in 2003 (once the route was already one, but still).

Our gashing the middle of OU's defense wasn't stunning, but it sure was nice to see.

Stoops' decision to punt, to me, was evidence that he is not the great coach everyone thinks he is.  That's just a terrible decision, and he's all but admitted he did it with the polls in mind.  Dude, that's a terrible way to coach a game.  You go for it there, because your best chance to win the game is to try to keep scoring.  YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!  HELLO?!

Doug: 1 - Food's pretty good. Did I mention we have Whataburgers down here? After a decade-plus of Big 12 Network basketball games, I've finally gotten a chance to try a freaking Whataburger. Also, chilies? Big down here. Very big. Like on everything. For no damn good reason. Got some eggs? Put some chili sauce on 'em. Got some pizza? Red or green for that? Beautiful porterhouse steak? Hand me the red. (That guy I stabbed to death with my fork.)

2 - Well, Colin Cowherd, who picks with neither, is choosing Nebraska, so congratulations on the winning streak continuing.

3 - I think you could make the arguement KU and K-State a ranked a little too highly. Kansas will need to find it's way without Collins on the perimeter and Aldrich on the inside. And, I think, K-State, and especially Jacob Pullen, will miss Denis Clemente a lot.

4 - I don't think you really are sorry, not in the least.

Bill C.: I've spoken my piece on the two-point conversion.  I personally wouldn't have been brave enough to do it, but I didn't hate it -- if it works (and it damn near did), then not only would there be a ton of pressure on Mizzou, but then Oklahoma would have the option of going for two AGAIN and giving us the stomach punch loss to end all stomach punch losses.  But it didn't work, and OU obviously had to live with some pretty steep consequences.

1 - In terms of Faurot experiences, I have to be predictable and compare it to the only two that can remotely compare: 2003 Nebraska and 2007 Nebraska.  I'm going to rank them all as tied for first just because I don't want to choose between them, but yeah ... this was something.  From the chaos following McGaffie's touchdown, to the fourth-quarter realization that, holy crap, we are dominating Oklahoma on both lines, to the swift and unfair realization that I really wished our friend Jeffrey could see this, Saturday night had about every emotion you can have as a football fan, and in the end it was so unbelievably satisfying.

And it resulted in an even bigger game just a few days from now.  Funny how that works.

2 - I pick Nebraska, for two reasons: 1) I think they match up better than Oklahoma did (will talk about this tomorrow), and, primarily, 2) I've had my doubts about each of the last two games, so why stop now?  I am NOT, however, worried about the letdown that talking heads have been predicting, and for one simple reason: Mizzou didn't play at a super-human level on Saturday.  They made mistakes and relied on their identity -- cannon-armed QB, depth at skill positions, increasing strength in the trenches, strong special teams -- to win.  They weren't amazing, they were just good.  They can duplicate that effort.  If they lose, it's because Nebraska beat them, not because they were hungover.  I think Saturday was much more emotionally draining for the fans than the players.

3 - I had KSU pegged as Top 10, but No. 3 surprised me.  Not saying they do or don't deserve it -- just saying I didn't expect it.  That said ... yeah, Texas at No. 25 is nothing but name recognition.  They obviously have the talent to make it into the Top 15, much less the Top 25, but they should have to earn the respect instead of it just being handed to them.

4 - Yeah.  It was nice.

ZouDave: What was I thinking after Gettis muffed the punt?


But I also was playing the roll of cheerleader in Section C, and just told everyone around us "that's all right, we just forced them to a 3 and out.  We just have to do it again."

We didn't, but I still said it.

ZouDave: I personally think Stoops' decision to go for 2 was the right decision.  It means you know what's ahead of you.  If they get it, you kick deep and put the pressure on Mizzou to do something.  It puts a LOT of the momentum back in OU's corner.  By not getting it, you know you have to have 2 posessions to win the game.  So you have to onside kick and/or get a turnover/quick stop.  It defined the situation.  I would (like to think that) have done the same thing in his position.

And I'm obviously glad it did because of how it all worked out.

Michael Atchison: I swear I saw that conversion try in slow motion.  I was thinking about Nebraska’s kicked ball before the nose of the ball even touched the turf.

The Beef: I see it, but with that much time to go, I just think it was wrong to change the landscape for your own team like that, as you are tremendously lowering the percentage of your being able to win.  Onside kick recovery?  Low.  2 scores in 6 minutes with ONE timeout left?  Low.  Both of those, to me, seem much less likely than getting the ball back after kicking off normally and needing to get one score with a two-point conversion.

And playing to win the game there, and then playing to not lose by so much later also is tough to wrap my head around

Bill C.: Oh there's no doubt about that.  He followed an extremely aggressive call with a giant wave of the white flag.  It was interesting.  I still think he's a great coach, but he's a great coach because he has built a program that wins a lot of blowouts and can turn small leads into big ones.  He hasn't had to prove himself as a late-Q4 genius too many times, and it showed there.

ZouDave: like I said, I don't think Bob Stoops is nearly as good a coach as he's gotten credit for.

Good coach?  Obviously.  He rescued Oklahoma from a flatline and has won NUMEROUS conference championships and the national title.  But Knute Rockne, he ain't.

ghtd36: I've always been of the school of thought that difference in percentages between PAT conversions and two-point conversions is so vast that you don't go for two until you absolutely need to.

ZouDave: I've seen other statistical references that show the success rate of going for 2 is enough that teams should always go for two, because you only need to be at 50% to break even.  ANYTHING above 50% success rate is a gain.

I don't agree with it, just saying I've seen people break it down statistically.  Bill should do that.

Doug: Seriously, the Wednesday after one of the program's biggest wins, and you guys are breaking down if the opposing coach went for 2 too early.

Only Missouri fans.

ZouDave: Stoops has never really had to prove his mettle in anything overly challenging.  I mean, yeah he was on the staff at KSU when Bill Snyder went there but does anyone actually think Bob Stoops was the reason for Bill Snyder's success?  It continued, and in fact improved, after Stoops left.

He coached under Spurrier at Florida, where anyone not named Ron Zook has overwhelming success.  Then he went to Oklahoma, one of the winningest and most tradition-rich programs in all of college football.

Again, I'm NOT saying Bob Stoops isn't a good coach.  He very obviously is.  But his actual coaching ability has been a bit over-estimated in my opinion and is masked by the fact that he has better talent than his opponents 10+ times every season.

The Beef: Tepper and I agreeing?

Makes me think of a Bill Murray movie line…

RPT: Did anyone else have Cotton Bowl flashbacks on the Gooden pick? Replace Casey Dick with Landry Jones, Spoon with Jacquies, Peyton Hillis with Trey Millard, and Gooden (had he been able to stay upright) with Willy Mo.

ZouDave: that's a big twinkie

Bill C.: He proved to me all he needed to prove in 2000.  Yes, John Blake left some talent there, and yes, he had a helluva coaching staff, but he's still one of the best in the game to me because of that.  Now ... at the same time ... he hasn't really improved since then ... so there's that, I guess.

ghtd36: I think the answer is obvious: Missouri needs to fire Gary Pinkel because he can't win the big game, David Yost because he can't produce against Big XII defenses, and Blaine Gabbert because James Franklin is way better.

/never change, haters, and yes, I'm using the term haters because that is what you are, sorry to go all LeBron on you, but how many times can you be proven unequivocally wrong before you change your tune

ZouDave: to a hater, they have an infinite timeline to be right.  They're never wrong, they're just waiting.  All it takes is once.  Sometime in 2012 Missouri is going to hit a skid and lose like 3 in a row that will confound everyone.  At that point the haters will say "SEE?!  I TOLD YOU!  WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN RID OF THESE CLOWNS YEARS AGO!"

Michael Atchison: At this risk of dragging this to a halt (and feel free to edit this out), I don’t understand at all Beef’s assertion that “you are tremendously lowering the percentage of your being able to win” by going for two on the first score.  From a mathematical point of view, the only way that your chances are lowered is if you have a better chance to convert the two on the second touchdown, and I can’t think of any rationale for why that would be.

The Beef: I will concede the point of what happens if you score with :30 to go and don’t get your 2 points, but I look at it as, what is more likely to happen:

Kick off deep with 6 minutes to go and 1 timeout, hold them, score and get two points


Onside kick with 6 minutes to go and 1 timeout, hold them, go a longer field, score.  Onside kick again, hold them, go a long field, score.

That is my assertion.

The Beef: Though I will say I was proud of some of the haters in our section, as some moron, after a false start or delay of game penalty in the 1st half yelled out, “C’mon Pinkel” and it was not just Bill and I who went nuts.

And the moron was never heard from again in the game I believe.

Bill C.: He handled the mocking well, however.  He knew to just blend into the surroundings.

(I also loved whoever it was that booed when Gabbert fumbled on the two-point conversion.  That was one of the two or three best crowds I've ever seen at a Mizzou game, but it still had its moments.)

Michael Atchison: I’m going to agree with Tepper about Stoops.  OU may be a traditional power, but they went though a decade of mediocrity before Stoops got there, and he won a national title within three years, and has been consistently in contention since.  Winning at that high a level, for that long a time is hard, even with built-in advantages.

Michael Atchison: Actually, that was Bill I was agreeing with.  I continue not to have ever agreed with Tepper about anything.

Bill C.: That's fine--I'm pretty sure I was given credit for something Beef said earlier, so it all evens out in the end. 

ghtd36: The Atchison-Tepper streak of disagreement now faces its toughest test:

Baby Beef is adorable.

The Beef: Thank God for the mute button on my phone, or most of India would have just heard me spit water out on to the phone itself

ZouDave: well, you can't disagree with facts (not easily anyway).  I mean, if you're just trying to stack the deck you might as well have said:

"The moon is closer to us than the sun."  Beef wouldn't disagree with that, either.

Michael Atchison: This may be a pivotal moment in makind’s history.  A child has brought us together, and that child is half-Beef.  Could that baby be The One?  Or could that baby be The Other One?

The Beef: Don’t call her Baby Beef around RPT’s mom :-)

I will have you know, the Tailgate Queen did everything but lick the container clean of corn dip.

ZouDave: I honestly considered slamming my face into that bowl and eating my way out.  It would have been bad form, obviously, but it still wasn't a bad idea.

ghtd36: I showed up late and did not get any corn dip. This now displeases me.

The Beef: And trust me (and Bill, and Dave, and Ross, and everyone else)…this SHOULD displease you.  Especially when I tell you there was corn dip when you were there, but it was probably too close to the ribs for you to notice.

ZouDave: I was gonna say...I don't remember it running out.  I had plenty, and wanted more, but didn't want to ACTUALLY eat the whole thing.

ghtd36: I was too busy being disrespected by Tim Lincecum's brother. (Ed. Note: To understand this comment, read this, then read this.)

The Beef: Man…that had so much more potential, but poor TLB just could not keep it together.

ZouDave: kinda like his team on the field!  WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Two hours later...)

The Beef: So I would hate for this roundtable to end on a ZD joke, so I will add to the fun and point out…

…references to my prostate have us 2-0 so far in our Bible Belt Death March.

ZouDave: well the BBDM must continue.

Doug: I guess we can all go home now.

ghtd36: I guess we can all go support the Texas Rangers now.


The Beef: Please remember this should NOT start any sort of political debate or in any way represent the political views of those involved in this roundtable discussion

Doug: Commie Fascist.

ZouDave: Nazi Socialist.

ghtd36: Liberal conservative.

/right? fellas?

ZouDave: Us:

The Beef: Somehow I am guessing Bill uses a little editorial power on this one

Doug: Oh, I'm sorry.  So, discussion about your colon is fine, as long as the winning streak continues.

But, Dave, Greg and I try to hurl some pointless political insults at each and suddenly it's a crisis of concious for you.

No justice!  No peace!



The Beef: Depiction of this person by no means indicates political affiliation of this website

ghtd36: Lord, now you've done it, ZD. You've acknowledged that the United States has a President. Remember the last time that happened?


Doug: That fateful Round Table of '86.  I still get the cold shakes at night.