clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Mizzou Destroys Western Illinois: Beyond The Box Score

New, 9 comments
Photo via Bill Carter.
Photo via Bill Carter.

Hey, remember these pieces? Remember what life was like before MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA™ 2011 took over? That's okay. I really didn't have much to say about this one.

Missouri 69, Western Illinois 0

WIU Missouri WIU Missouri
Close % 37.0% STANDARD DOWNS
Field Position % 2.2% 61.7% Success Rate 13.6% 54.2%
Leverage % 47.8% 72.8% PPP -0.01 0.59
S&P 0.131 1.129
TOTAL
EqPts 0.4 53.4 PASSING DOWNS
Close Success Rate 17.7% 60.0% Success Rate 4.2% 36.4%
Close PPP 0.06 0.79 PPP 0.02 0.85
Close S&P 0.237 1.385 S&P 0.064 1.217
RUSHING TURNOVERS
EqPts 1.5 28.6 Number 1 2
Close Success Rate 27.3% 70.6% Turnover Pts 4.0 11.0
Close PPP 0.09 0.72 Turnover Pts Margin +7.0 -7.0
Close S&P 0.358 1.425
Line Yards/carry 2.11 4.96 Q1 S&P 0.025 1.497
Q2 S&P 0.324 1.231
PASSING Q3 S&P -0.195 0.889
EqPts -1.1 24.8 Q4 S&P 0.026 0.931
Close Success Rate 0.0% 46.2%
Close PPP 0.02 0.87 1st Down S&P 0.164 1.059
Close S&P 0.015 1.333 2nd Down S&P 0.110 0.991
SD/PD Sack Rate 0.0% / 25.0% 0.0% / 7.1% 3rd Down S&P -0.011 1.510
Projected Pt. Margin: Missouri +46.0 | Actual Pt. Margin: Missouri +69

I mean ... other than turnovers, Mizzou pretty much pitched a perfect game in this one. They were efficient on standard downs, explosive on passing downs. They allowed next to nothing on defense, their offensive line cleared almost five yards per rush (a staggering total), and even when they were consciously trying not to move the ball too quickly in the second half, they still generated an S&P that is far above average. WIU proved unready for the challenge, but these numbers would be semi-impressive against a high school team. The passing success rate was a hair low compared to everything else, but ... that's the best I could do to come up with a complaint.

Targets And Catches

Mizzou Targets Catches Catch% Target% Rec. Yds. Yds. Per Target
T.J. Moe (WR)
5 4 80.0% 18.5% 68 13.6
Marcus Lucas (WR) 5 2 40.0% 18.5% 24 4.8
L'Damian Washington (WR) 3 3 100.0% 11.1% 61 20.7
Wes Kemp (WR) 2 2 100.0% 7.4% 47 23.5
Michael Egnew (TE)
2 1 50.0% 7.4% 18 9.0
Bud Sasser (WR) 2 1 50.0% 7.4% 6 3.0
Eric Waters (TE)
2 1 50.0% 7.4% 4 2.0
Henry Josey (RB)
2 2 100.0% 7.4% 2 1.0
Jimmie Hunt (WR) 1 1 100.0% 3.7% 54 54.0
Rolandis Woodland (WR) 1 1 100.0% 3.7% 16 16.0
Greg White (RB) 1 1 100.0% 3.7% 13 13.0
Jerrell Jackson (WR) 1 1 100.0% 3.7% 3 3.0
TOTAL 27 20 74.1% 100.0% 316 11.7
TOTAL (WR) 20 15 75.0% 74.1% 279 14.0
TOTAL (RB) 3 3 100.0% 11.1% 15 5.0
TOTAL (TE) 4 2 50.0% 14.8% 22 5.5

I don't know ... do you think Mizzou's receivers held a little bit of an athletic advantage?

(One slight concern: Marcus Lucas did not have the best of games. But after what he did at Arizona State, I think we can give him a pass.)

WIU Targets Catches Catch% Target% Rec. Yds. Yds. Per Target
Terriun Crump (WR)
6 1 16.7% 40.0% 1 0.2
Charles Chestnut (WR)
3 0 0.0% 20.0% 0 0.0
Myles Daughtry (WR)
2 2 100.0% 13.3% 12 6.0
Justin Morgan (WR)
1 1 100.0% 6.7% 7 7.0
Josh Gabelmann (FB)
1 0 0.0% 6.7% 0 0.0
Bryce Flowers (RB)
1 0 0.0% 6.7% 0 0.0
N/A 1 0 0.0% N/A N/A N/A
TOTAL 15 4 26.7% 100.0% 20 1.3
TOTAL (WR) 13 4 30.8% 86.7% 20 1.5
TOTAL (RB) 2 0 0.0% 13.3% 0 0.0
TOTAL (TE) 0 0 N/A N/A 0 N/A

I don't know ... do you think Mizzou's defensive backs had a bit of an athletic advantage?

Summary

Destruction, carnage, etc. This game was fun to watch but hard to elaborate on in any great length. Mizzou completely destroyed a hapless opponent, and now they go on the road to face what I'll conservatively call a less than hapless opponent.