SB Nation - Dominique Hamilton

Mizzou-KSU: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:00:14 -0000

Confused? Catch up with the BTBS Primer.

As always, it is much more fun to analyze a win, isn't it?

	Mizzou (38)	K-State (12)
Close %	81.2%
Field Position %	36.0%	57.5%
Leverage %	72.0%	69.9%

TOTAL
EqPts	30.9	13.5
Close Success Rate	55.6%	41.8%
Close PPP	0.61	0.18
Close S&P	1.167	0.601

RUSHING
EqPts	10.0	4.4
Close Success Rate	50.0%	29.4%
Close PPP	0.37	0.13
Close S&P	0.870	0.425
Line Yards/carry	3.94	2.75

PASSING
EqPts	20.8	9.1
Close Success Rate	59.3%	61.9%
Close PPP	0.77	0.27
Close S&P	1.364	0.885
SD/PD Sack Rate	0.0% / 0.0%	5.3% / 0.0%

STANDARD DOWNS
Success Rate	66.7%	45.1%
PPP	0.76	0.12
S&P	1.430	0.567

PASSING DOWNS
Success Rate	28.6%	40.9%
PPP	0.24	0.35
S&P	0.528	0.755

TURNOVERS
Number	0	3
Turnover Pts	0.0	16.9
Turnover Pts Margin	+16.9	-16.9

Q1 S&P	0.957	0.493
Q2 S&P	1.197	0.573
Q3 S&P	1.756	0.742
Q4 S&P	1.190	0.598

1st Down S&P	1.639	0.574
2nd Down S&P	0.692	0.622
3rd Down S&P	0.757	0.506

Projected Pt. Margin	+34.3	-34.3
Actual Pt. Margin	+26	-26

Quick reactions...

Kansas State can thank special teams for keeping this game at a smaller margin (26 instead of the projected 34). With solid kick returns and only decent Mizzou punting, they ran well over half of their plays from Mizzou's side of the field, which put a lot of pressure on Missouri's defense not to break down, especially considering how KSU thrives on the "geology" style of offense (pressure + time). Eventually, Mizzou could have worn down, given in, and allowed a couple of killer touchdowns, but they did not. Meanwhile, barely over one-third of Mizzou's plays were run from KSU's side of the field, but thanks to Danario Alexander, that didn't really matter. With #81, Mizzou was more capable of scoring touchdowns from their own side of the field than KSU was in Mizzou territory, and that clearly made the difference in the game.
This game really was decided by explosiveness. Missouri had it, K-State didn't. Mizzou was content to allow a ridiculously high passing success rate to KSU in exchange for not giving up any big plays and making KSU drive the length of the field. How many times did KSU convert a 3rd-and-6 with exactly a 6-yard pass? Plenty. And how many touchdowns did KSU score? Zero. Watching Mizzou allow huge cushions on opposing wide receivers, especially on third down, is amazingly frustrating to watch. But in the last two weeks, we've seen why they do it. Without two long bombs, Baylor doesn't beat Missouri no matter how many short passes they complete. If Missouri can make you drive the length of the field without bombs or missed tackles, their run defense will make it very hard for you to convert those drives into touchdowns instead of field goals.
Missouri's 1.639 S&P on first downs really tells you all you need to know about how well David Yost and company did in their offensive game-planning last week. They nailed it. Mizzou was only decent on second and third downs, but first downs are the most likely "straight from the script" down, and Mizzou was wonderfully successful there. Meanwhile, they completely stuffed KSU's offensive gameplan as well, limiting them to a 0.574 S&P on first downs. Think about that--Mizzou was almost three times more successful on first down than KSU. That's how you win road games by 26.
That, and winning the turnover battle by 17 points certainly helps, huh?

"This Team Can't Score in the Second Half"

Football's the funniest sport to analyze because we are dealing with such laughably small sample sizes. Take any team from the NBA (or Major League Baseball). With a 12-game sample I could show you a squad that is great in the first half, or terrible in the second half, or terrible on the boards, or great shooting. Then, with a different 12-game sample, I should show you a team that is terrible in the first half, great in the second half, great on the boards, or terrible shooting. Figuring out what is true and what is within the margin of error is a crap shoot when the margin of error is gigantic.

What this means is, narratives form and disintegrate in less than a month's time. The first month of the season, Missouri had a slow-starting offense that was impeccable in the second half. A month later, they were outstanding in the first half and horribly inept in the second ("HALFTIME ADJUSTMENTS!!!!"). We all saw the graphic Versus threw up in the third quarter, showing how Missouri had not yet scored a touchdown in the second half of a conference game. And then they scored three touchdowns in the second half. And like that, the narrative died. At this point in the season, Mizzou has had three major letdowns in the second half (OSU, Colorado, Baylor...Nebraska and Texas don't count, as they were no worse in the second half as in the first half) and four games in which the second half offense was as good as (Illinois, Nevada, KSU) or better than (Bowling Green) the first half offense. Rest in peace, "No Halftime Adjustments" narrative.

(Major disclaimer: I half-mock the "halftime adjustments" meme, but I don't want to pretend that there wasn't something going on to send the team into a second-half funk. Gary Pinkel was worried enough about it that he brought in Lorenzo Williams to give a Thursday pep talk and let Sean Weatherspoon do all the talking at halftime in Manhattan. He knew something needed to be done, and he deserves to be commended for trying to address the issue. Did those pep talks have anything to do with the team's better performance? Possibly, possibly not. We obviously don't really know, but it certainly didn't hurt, huh?)

So now that we're done with five-sixths of the season, we can see the true narrative for this offense: 1) they've got a sophomore quarterback whose pocket presence is improving by the week, but still has plenty to learn, 2) they've got an All-American caliber receiver who can score from any point on the field at any time, and 3) they are LOADED with youth, and therefore maddeningly inconsistent. Blaine Gabbert? Sophomore. Derrick Washington, De'Vion Moore, and Kendial Lawrence? Junior, sophomore, true freshman. Wes Kemp, Jerrell Jackson, and (yes) Andrew Jones? Sophomore, sophomore, sophomore. Elvis Fisher, Austin Wuebbels, and Dan Hoch? Sophomore, sophomore, sophomore. Heading into this season, Missouri's offense had about roughly 101 career starts (Kurtis Gregory 28, Jared Perry 20ish, Derrick Washington 14, Tim Barnes 14, Elvis Fisher 14, Danario Alexander 11, and I may be forgetting some here and there). Now? 211 career starts. They will lose Alexander, Gregory, and Perry ... and that's it. Yes, we're leaning heavily on Danario right now, and justifiably so, but it's amazing what experience can do. For no single reason, you just become more consistent (and your offensive coordinator becomes a lot smarter) over time with this little turnover.

What does this mean for the rest of the season? Who the hell knows? With three games now remaining, odds are in favor of at least one more stinker and at least one more explosion. Figuring out the games in which those will happen is impossible.

Three Positives

Danario Alexander. It's predictable, and you could have made this judgment without any statistical analysis whatsoever, but he just has to lead off this list, no? He has upped his game in the last couple of weeks, but his season-long output has just been insane. He will absolutely end up with the Mizzou single season yardage record, locking it down as soon as his first or second catch this coming Saturday, but he needs 22 catches to top Jeremy Maclin's single season record. At 7.3 per game, that's certainly within the realm of possibility, but he'll probably need one more big game to lock it down. And who's betting against him at this point?

You just have to hope and pray that the leadership-by-example that he is showing right now is rubbing off on guys like Wes Kemp, Jerrell Jackson, Rolandis Woodland, and T.J. Moe, as he will not be around to carry this offense next year.
Missouri defensive line. Lost amid Alexander's recent surge is the performance Dominique Hamilton has come up with recently. He and Jaron Baston have led what has just been a superb rushing defense over these past few weeks, and if you are ranking the North's best defensive linemen for next season, Hamilton is almost starting to make a case for the #3 slot behind Jared Crick and Aldon Smith. The future is extremely bright for the Missouri defensive line, with Hamilton and Jacquies Smith making plays as sophomores and Aldon Smith becoming an all-conference level performer as a redshirt freshman.
First Downs. I already referenced it above, but against a Bill Snyder-led coaching staff, Mizzou's staff put together virtually perfect offensive and defensive gameplans, and it shined through in the first down performance on both offense and defense. Mizzou's offensive is still only average at best on passing downs, but with such great success on first-and-10, they faced minimal awkward situations.

(And because we won, a fourth positive...)
Offensive Line. No sacks and a 3.94 line yardage average? Wow. KSU's defensive line isn't great, but that was still a dominant performance.

Three Negatives

Field Position. Iowa State doesn't have the return threats that Kansas State and Baylor had, and that will help, but Missouri has done itself no favors whatsoever in the field position battle this year. Mizzou is solid in a lot of special teams aspects, but kick coverage has not been one of them. Kick returns and ill-timed three-and-outs by the offense led to K-State's domination in this category last Saturday, and while the Mizzou defense responded time and again, you're just adding to the degree of difficulty by letting this happen, especially on the road. Thanks to Danario Alexander, Mizzou more than overcame their field position deficiencies, but even going back to the Oklahoma State game this has been a consistent issue.
Passing Downs (Offense). With experience should come improvement in this category, but it is certainly still a lingering issue on offense this year. We were very spoiled by Chase Daniel's proficiency on passing downs, and we should see the numbers improve as Blaine Gabbert gets more and more comfortable in the pocket and the coaching staff takes the reins off of the play-calling, but for now it is a well-defined weakness.
Passing Downs (Defense). KSU's 40.9% success rate on Passing Downs was very frustrating, but as I mentioned above, we know why they allowed that--the coverage cushions set up a series of easy conversions, and against KSU that was fine because they were not capable of running the ball and putting the ball in the endzone, but while it made strategic sense, it was annoying to watch.

Three Keys Revisited

Seen here.

MU Defensive Line vs KSU Offensive Line

KSU will continue to use Daniel Thomas to pound away at opponents until they absolutely have to pass. If Missouri holds Thomas to what they've been holding other opponents, Kansas State will really struggle to move the ball. As I said, Brandon Banks has been inconsistent in the passing game, and they don't have another go-to passing weapon. If the Wildcats can't run the ball, they will face a lot of passing downs; and if they face a lot of passing downs, guys like Aldon Smith are going to have another huge day, and Mizzou will likely win.

KSU indeed couldn't run, and while Aldon Smith didn't have a Colorado-esque game, Mizzou still won easily.

Standard Downs

Against the run or pass, KSU's defense has been below average in terms of defense on standard downs (i.e. first downs, 2nd-and-6 or less, 3rd-and-4 or less). As you would expect from a Bill Snyder team, they take advantage of mistakes, but if Missouri can generate consistent yardage on standard downs, run or pass, then they should be able to move the ball rather well. This goes for any game, but especially one that includes a Missouri offense that is talented and fast, but young and lacking confidence.

Mizzou had a 1.430 S&P on standard downs. 'Nuff said.

Brandon Banks

Quite simply, if KSU makes a big offensive play or scores an easy touchdown, the odds are good that Banks was behind it. Granted, he has only one receiving touchdown on the year (how does that happen??), but he is quick and fast, a lot like Baylor's Kendall Wright, only faster and smaller. If KSU is able to get him in the open field, then this offense becomes infinitely more dangerous. And, um, I think I've already covered how scared of him I am in the kicking game. Seriously, just kick it out of bounds.

It ended up being about a 50-50 proposition whether kicking it out of bounds would have been smarter than kicking it deep, and while it was a relief that he never broke a big return (at least, not without an illegal block bringing it back), he was still KSU's best threat for winning this game, and his presence still resulted in a massive field position advantage for the WIldcats. Again, fortunately for Mizzou, Iowa State has nobody this dangerous.

Summary

Winner, winner. Not much else to say at this point. This has been a bit of a frustrating season, simply because of the youth on the display and the inconsistency that comes with that, but Saturday's win was quite satsifying, not only because it was on the road or because it was against Bill Snyder, but because it signified that this team's long-term trajectory has not been damaged by the loss to Baylor or the overall poor performance against the Big 12 South. Missouri still looks beyond dangerous in 2010 and 2011, and "Don't screw up future seasons" really was one of the main goals for 2009.

Mizzou Links, 11-12-09

Bill C. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:49:26 -0000

First things first: just so you know, the Unholy Alliance has officially been suspended. Adapt accordingly.

K-State Links!

KC Star: Snyder's faith in Josh Cherry boosted kicker's confidence
Palestra.net: Missouri Reevaluating Goals

MIZZOU-BAYLOR: ROCK M PHOTO GALLERY

Bill C. — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:00:59 -0000

I can't wait until Bill Carter can take pictures of another win, huh? What a great thing that would be...

As always, click on the pic for a bigger version.

Mizzou-Baylor: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Bill C. — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:15:23 -0000

As we enter the second game of what Gary Pinkel is calling Mizzou's second season, let's take a look at where Art Briles' Baylor Bears present a threat, and where they've been hurt worst by the loss of Robert Griffin to a season-ending knee injury.

It was supposed to be different this year. Thanks to Hot Tub Griffin III, Baylor was going to threaten for a bowl game. They were actually exciting to watch for once, and Hot Tub was Rock M Nation's unanimous favorite non-Mizzou player.

Okay, you twisted my arm...one last time this season...

One last moment of silence, please. The knee injury that robbed Baylor (and us) of nine games of Hot Tub greatness* has left Baylor lifeless on offense, and despite an increase in overall team speed on offense and a relatively salty defense, the Bears sit at 3-5, 0-4 in the Big 12. Their best chance at a Big 12 win--a trip to Iowa State--ended with an easy, 14-point loss. We have all died a little inside without Hot Tub in our lives...and Baylor has died on the outside.

* Just for effect, I should once again point out that Griffin PLAYED THE ENTIRE NORTHWESTERN STATE GAME (well, all of the game that the first-string played) with a torn ACL suffered on the first possession, attempted three rushes, and went 16-for-19 passing with 226 yards and three touchdowns. With a torn ACL. God I love that guy.

Alright, now that we're past that, it's time to look at the team Baylor does have, and the amount of threat that they represent for Mizzou at 1pm on Faurot Field.

Offense

Baylor: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Offensive Preview

We're going to start with Baylor's overall "+" ranking, presented as we've presented data for every opponent, but this comes with a rather obvious disclaimer: Baylor's last five games without Griffin have shown a different type of team than the one that made up a chunk of these ratings. We'll take a look at Baylor, pre- and post-Griffin injury, after the initial spew of data.

Baylor Offense vs Missouri Defense
Category	BU Offense	MU Defense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	113.7 (40)	111.7 (35)
Close Success Rate+ (Rk)	104.7 (53)	104.8 (45)
Close PPP+ (Rk)	129.7 (29)	122.4 (33)

Rushing S&P+	133.2 (5)	102.7 (63)
Passing S&P+	99.9 (73)	118.3 (30)

Standard Downs S&P+	114.6 (33)	112.5 (35)
Passing Downs S&P+	123.6 (35)	115.0 (36)

Red Zone S&P+	128.6 (22)	104.4 (61)

Q1 S&P+	136.2 (15)	95.5 (77)
Q2 S&P+	106.0 (63)	135.8 (12)
Q3 S&P+	124.5 (26)	112.2 (41)
Q4 S&P+	105.4 (55)	115.8 (34)

1st Down S&P+	122.2 (20)	108.0 (49)
2nd Down S&P+	127.0 (22)	112.3 (41)
3rd Down S&P+	101.1 (74)	113.8 (38)

Line Yards+	105.9 (52)	101.6 (61)
Close Sack Rate+	95.7 (73)	93.3 (72)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	106.7 (57) / 108.3 (56)	101.9 (57) / 123.0 (37)

Analysis after the jump.

Now, let's look at the Baylor offense with and without Hot Tub III.

Baylor Offense: With & Without Griffin
Category	With Griffin	W/out Griffin
Close S&P+	120.3	89.1
Close SR+	111.1	92.2
Close PPP+	129.5	84.1

Rushing S&P+	169.5	74.0
Passing S&P+	89.0	94.3

Standard Downs S&P+	132.3	82.0
Passing Downs S&P+	79.8	113.4

Red Zone S&P+	150.7	102.8

Q1 S&P+	169.9	98.6
Q2 S&P+	77.1	96.4
Q3 S&P+	183.6	80.7
Q4 S&P+	87.6	96.7

First, it is worth noting that BU's actually a better passing team with Florence than with Griffin. That's not the biggest shocker in the world, but it does show that Florence is at least solid. And he's got a pretty deep WR corps (deep in that the #2 guy is about equal to the #6 guy) to work with, plus a nice, offensive-minded head coach. Also, for whatever reason, they're better in both Q2 and Q4 with Florence than they were with Griffin. You figure that one out, as I have no idea; of course, they are infinitely worse in Q1 and Q3, so usually the game is lost by the time Q4 (or even Q2) comes about, it appears. Mizzou might do Baylor some favors, as they are usually not particularly great in Q1, but it appears that Q3 is death for the Bears (strange, considering BU outscored Nebraska 10-0 in Q3 last week).

When Baylor Has the Ball...
Baylor Rushing	Advantage: Missouri
Baylor Passing	Advantage: Missouri
Best Time for Baylor:	Q1
Best Time for Missouri:	Q2-Q4

We'll once again start with the individual categories where Missouri has the rankings advantage. Where applicable, I'll look at post-Griffin numbers.

Close Success Rate+, PPP+, S&P+
Rushing, Passing S&P+
Standard Downs, Passing Downs S&P+ (though Passing Downs is close)
Red Zone S&P+
Q2, Q3, Q4 S&P+
1st Down, 3rd Down S&P+
Sack Rate+

And for Baylor...

Q1 S&P+
2nd Down S&P+
Line Yards+

Without Griffin, Baylor has found the going a lot rougher in terms of utilizing their other weapons--WR Kendall Wright, RB Jay Finley, etc. They still have at least a decent offensive line, but that line will need to execute against Missouri's rapidly improving defensive line, and they will need to generate some early points, as Missouri assumes more and more of an advantage as the game wears on. And if Baylor gets handed any easy opportunities through turnovers or special teams, they simply must convert those opportunities into touchdowns.

Quarterback

One thing's for certain right off the bat: Baylor's QB unit may have ranked 28th in overall quality in 2008, but they were a distant 1st place in QB Nicknames. Just when I thought nothing could top Blizzle Szyzzle (from the esteemed and departed Bear Meat), along came our boy rptgwb with Hot Tub Griffin III. No idea what to do with Nick Florence's name (here's his bio pic...any thoughts?), but while the Baylor QB legacy hasn't led to many wins (yet), who needs wins when you've laughed this much?

Nick Florence: 84-for-147 passing (57.1%), 942 yards (6.4 per pass), 2 TD, 4 INT

So...any great nicknames for Nick Florence yet? He needs you now more than ever. Really, Florence hasn't been too bad passing the ball. He hasn't been great, but considering two of his four Big 12 starts have come against Oklahoma and Nebraska, two of the three best defenses in the conference (this week, they play the fourth-best, followed by the overall best next week against Texas), his numbers haven't been too bad. He is indeed just a redshirt freshman, and he was thrown into a no-win situation; granted he indeed has no wins, but he could be a lot worse. Let's just say that he's absolutely no worse than Blizzle Szyzzle, Blake Szymanski. No offense intended, Mr. Blizzle.

Running Back

Here's an area where Baylor is perfectly...fine. Not great, not terrible, but fine. Good, even. Jay Finley averaged 5.8 yards per carry and fared much better than backups Jacoby Jones (now gone) and Jeremy Sanders (now a safety). He only ranked 80th in the POE (Points Over Expected) rankings and had a PPP+ of 110.4, which means he was slightly above average considering who his yards came against. Against three of the worst rushing defenses on the Baylor schedule (NW'ern State, Washington State, Texas A&M), Finley had 41 carries for a whopping 326 yards (8.0 per carry). Against everybody else: 108 carries, 539 yards (5.0 per carry). Still respectable, but that's how you can maintain a pretty high per-carry average while not ranking in among the Top 75 in POE. And that's how he managed almost an identical PPP+ to Jacoby Jones (110.6), who had averaged almost two fewer yards per carry.

Jay Finley: 42 carries, 261 yards (6.2 per carry), 2 TD; 4 receptions, 24 yards (6.0 per catch)
Jarred Salubi: 42 carries, 249 yards (5.9 per carry), 2 TD; 17 receptions, 134 yards (7.9 per catch)
Terrance Ganaway: 34 carries, 134 yards (3.9 per carry), 3 TD; 1 reception, 13 yards

Between Jay Finley and Jarred Salubi, Baylor has managed a pretty decent first-string RB this year. Unfortunately, most of their success came early in the season. Finley had 121 yards on eight carries against UConn, while Salubi had 131 in seven carries against Northwestern State. Since Griffin's injury, Finley has managed 49 yards in just 20 carries (2.5 per carry) while recovering from a sprained ankle and pulled quad, while Salubi has only been slightly better at 118 yards in 35 carries (3.4 per carry). Injuries haven't helped here, but the injury that hurt most of all was obviously Griffin's. Without the dual threat QB, teams are able to focus a lot more on the RBs.

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

Joining [Kendall] Wright will be a handful of players--David Gettis, Ernest Smith, Mikail Baker, Justin Fenty--who, I swear, have been playing at Baylor for nine years and hoping nobody noticed. Gettis and Smith have had respectable careers, especially White (95 career catches, 1,232 yards, 12 TDs), but both seem to be 30-40 catch guys at best. There is hope that Lanear Sampson, a former 3-star recruit from Mesquite, can add some much-needed new blood to the unit. He raced past a few more experienced players on the depth chart this spring.

WR Kendall Wright: 40 catches, 448 yards (11.2 per catch), 2 TD; 23 carries, 121 yards (5.3 per carry), 1 TD
WR David Gettis: 31 catches, 426 yards (13.7 per catch), 3 TD
WR Ernest Smith: 26 catches, 280 yards (10.8 per catch); 1 carry, 5 yards
WR Lanear Sampson: 15 catches, 130 yards (8.7 per catch), 1 TD

TE Justin Akers: 14 catches, 124 yards (8.9 per catch), 1 TD
TE Brad Taylor: 8 catches, 90 yards (11.2 per catch)

In Baylor's first game post-Griffin, Kendall Wright had 125 yards in nine catches against Kent State, suggesting there was life even with a dry hot tub. However, in the past four games he has managed only 16 catches for 134 yards and has scored zero touchdowns (of course, Baylor as a whole has scored only four, so that's not saying a lot). Justin Akers (against OSU) and David Gettis (against Nebraska) have stepped up recently, but until more than one weapon shows up for a given game, Baylor's whole aerial attack is grounded. Wow, I did not intend that weak pun there. C'est la vie.

Offensive Line

Now [Jason] Smith is gone...is there anything good left? Center J.D. Walton appears to be the best of the remaining bunch. Both he and guard James Barnard are seniors and two-year starters, and that can't be a bad thing, but Art Briles recruited the JUCO ranks heavily in this past recruiting class, signing three JUCO O-linemen (not to mention four high school OL's as well). This was clearly an area of concern, and not just because they lost Smith. This line wasn't good with Smith.

Looking at Baylor's Line Yardage and Sack Rates, you get the distinct impression that this isn't a particularly good or bad line. In fact, with rankings around 60th in all categories, you could say the line is actually perfectly average. Unfortunately for Baylor, Mizzou's defensive line has been improving significantly in conference play and is quite likely well above average right now, especially with Aldon Smith surging and a much less mobile quarterback looking for open receivers. This matchup has gone from a draw to a distinct Mizzou advantage in recent weeks.

---

Defense

Baylor: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

Baylor Defense vs Missouri Offense
Category	BU Defense	MU Offense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	100.0 (60)	106.2 (57)
Close Success Rate+	94.2 (84)	103.6 (58)
Close PPP+	109.0 (44)	112.8 (56)

Rushing S&P+	86.3 (98)	102.1 (67)
Passing S&P+	118.4 (29)	110.8 (51)

Standard Downs S&P+	99.5 (63)	105.0 (60)
Passing Downs S&P+	109.1 (47)	109.7 (56)

Red Zone S&P+	122.7 (32)	70.7 (114)

Q1 S&P+	89.0 (86)	117.9 (50)
Q2 S&P+	102.5 (63)	100.2 (73)
Q3 S&P+	109.8 (45)	111.9 (52)
Q4 S&P+	101.1 (61)	102.4 (65)

1st Down S&P+	102.5 (58)	102.6 (66)
2nd Down S&P+	95.2 (75)	106.6 (64)
3rd Down S&P+	109.1 (50)	118.9 (38)

Line Yards+	87.1 (101)	101.3 (71)
Close Sack Rate+	89.9 (78)	173.9 (16)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	79.1 (93) / 115.6 (45)	243.4 (8) / 124.7 (41)

When Missouri Has the Ball...
Missouri Rushing	Advantage: Mizzou
Missouri Passing	Advantage(ish): Baylor
Best Time for Baylor:	Q2-Q3
Best Time for Missouri:	Q1, Q4

With Gabbert looking much, much healthier against Colorado, we can at least tentatively put an end to the "injured Gabbert" period. So, since we did the "pre-and-post" treatment for Baylor, should we do the same for Mizzou? We know that Mizzou's offensive stats plummeted with Gabbert's ankle sprain, but we also know that the defenses Mizzou faced at that time were much better. Luckily, we have "+" numbers to account for the difference in competition level! So here are the numbers for when Blaine Gabbert had one and two healthy ankles (the "one healthy ankle" stats are for the last three quarters of the Nebraska game and all of the Texas and OSU games):

Missouri Offense: Healthy vs Injured Gabbert
Category	Healthy #11	Injured #11
Close S&P+	107.1	94.3
Close SR+	101.2	95.3
Close PPP+	114.1	93.1

Rushing S&P+	85.4	117.1
Passing S&P+	119.3	81.6

Standard Downs S&P+	103.4	84.9
Passing Downs S&P+	90.9	98.2

Red Zone S&P+	70.6	108.4

Q1 S&P+	93.7	116.3
Q2 S&P+	91.3	107.2
Q3 S&P+	108.2	31.5
Q4 S&P+	101.7	81.4

Mizzou was significantly better at both rushing and red zone offense when Gabbert was hurt, but I think there is a bit of noise in the statistics there. Mizzou got a lot of credit for the touchdown they scored on their lone red zone trip against Texas, and that balanced out their craptastic execution against OSU. Either way, that's a damn small sample size. Meanwhile, the rushing success didn't seem to have anything to do with Gabbert limping around--it was seemingly more a result of Missouri's offensive line simply blocking better (and, potentially, their running backs running better).

Either way, we're definitely working with a small sample size here, but there are some conclusions that can be reached: 1) while Missouri's second-half execution against Colorado left something (okay, a lot) to be desired, they are still a much, much better second-half team with a healthy Gabbert. It's almost as if Missouri was able to disguise Gabbert's injury with good game-planning, but by the second half, they were out of tricks. Now, with Gabbert throwing more accurate passes and pulling down a couple of keepers, Missouri has a lot more options. Also, and this is some incredible statistical analysis here, 2) Missouri is a much better passing team when their quarterback can actually hit his targets.

With that in mind, let's look at Missouri's "healthy Gabbert" advantages:

Close SR+, PPP+, S&P+
Rushing S&P+
Standard Downs S&P+
Q1 S&P+
2nd, 3rd Down S&P+
Line Yards+
Sack Rates+

Baylor's advantages:

Passing Downs S&P+
Red Zone S&P+
Q2 S&P+

With a healthy Gabbert, the passing game seems to be a draw, as do Q3 and Q4 S&P+ and 1st Down S&P+.

Defensive Line

Beyond [Penn State transfer Phil] Taylor (and let's be honest, at 6'4, 355, it's hard to see beyond this guy), there's not much to write home about. Jason Lamb (0.5 sacks, 1.5 TFL, and a blocked kick in 2008) moves from end to tackle, giving the Bears decent experience at tackle when you throw in Trey Bryant (4.0 sacks/TFL, 5 QB Hurries). That paves the way for a bunch of unknowns to get a shot at end. Zac Scotton and Tracy Robertson certainly look the part at DE, but they and speed rusher Jameon Hardeman combined for just 2.5 TFL/Sacks and 4 QBH in 2008. Scotton and Robertson could both turn it on as sophomores, but let's just say I'm not tremendously optimistic.

DE/DT Jason Lamb: 21.0 tackles, 5.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 2 QBH, 3 PBU, 2 Blocked Kicks
DT Trey Bryant: 15.0 tackles, 1.5 TFL/sacks, 3 QBH
DE Zac Scotton: 12.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH
DT Phil Taylor: 11.0 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 5 QBH, 2 Blocked Kicks
DE Tracy Robertson: 10.5 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FR, 3 QBH

So...has vaunted transfer Phil Taylor actually made a difference? Baylor's pass defense has actually been pretty solid, but their rushing defense has been horrible. If Mizzou's offensive line was able to open up holes for Derrick Washington and company and protect Blaine Gabbert from Colorado pass rushers, there's nothing saying they won't be able to do the same (and better) against Baylor. Maybe Taylor really is a difference-maker, but the rest of the line has been just terrible? Jason Lamb, who has been playing at Baylor since Grant Teaff was coach, has put up some decent numbers--as good as those of Mizzou's Jaron Baston and Dominique Hamilton--but he's pretty much it. If he's not making a nice play, then Baylor's relying on the LBs.

Linebackers

For the first two years of his Baylor career, I brushed aside Joe Pawelek as just a "somebody had to make the tackles" guy at LB on a bad defense. Bad defenses always have a linebacker or safety with ridiculous tackle numbers, and Pawelek was Baylor's guy. But last year he caught my attention not for the number of tackles he made, but the number of plays. He intercepted six passes, racked up 6.0 TFL (not too bad for an LB), broke up seven passes, forced a fumble, and recovered two. I'm still not sure if he's quite an all-conference talent, but he should be quite good as a senior. Meanwhile, the Two Antonios (Johnson and Jones) combined for 14.5 TFL/Sacks, two forced fumbles, and two recoveries. The LB unit still didn't put up amazing numbers by any means (9th in the conference), but this is a solid, experienced unit. Let's put it this way: if the Baylor defense is as bad or worse than it was last year, the linebackers won't be the reason why.

Joe Pawelek: 52.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 2 QBH, 2 PBU
Antonio Jones: 47.0 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FR, 2 QBH
Antonio Johnson: 41.5 tackles, 3.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 2 PBU
Chris Francis: 21.0 tackles
Elliot Coffey: 20.0 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF
Earl Patin: 14.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR

I really was pretty impressed with Joe Pawelek last year, but while he's been rock solid this year, it doesn't seem like he's been quite the playmaker I was expecting. He's still good, though, and the Two Antonios have combined with Pawelek to form what is certainly a decent unit. As I put it in the offseason, Baylor has struggled in certain areas (i.e. run defense), but they're not the reason why. And they're fast enough to do decent things in pass coverage.

Secondary

Jordan Lake returns for his senior season; he will team with Jeremy Williams (6.5 TFL/Sacks, 4 PBR) to make a dangerous tandem at safety, and while junior corners Antareis Bryan, Tim Atchison, and Clifton Odom won't be confused for OU's corners or anything, they've put together quite a bit of expeirence in their first two years. If the defensive line is helping to leverage teams into passing downs and getting pressure on the quarterback, this secondary is good enough to take advantage. They won't make a lot of plays without help from the front seven, but they could be a good complement.

S Jordan Lake: 48.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF
S Jeremy Williams: 25.5 tackles, 0.5 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH
CB Clifton Odom: 22.5 tackles, 0.5 TFL, 1 INT, 1 FF, 4 PBU
S Byron Landor: 22.0 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 1 QBH, 1 PBU
CB Tim Atchison: 21.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 1 PBU
CB Chance Casey: 18.5 tackles, 2 INT, 1 QBH, 4 PBU
S Mike Hicks: 12.5 tackles

If Pawelek hasn't been quite what I thought this year, Jordan Lake REALLY hasn't been what I thought. He was a pretty strong, disruptive player in 2008; this year, he's just a tackler. One forced fumble, one tackle for loss, and no interceptions? Huh. In all, though, Baylor's pass defense really has been pretty decent this year; I mean, ranking 47th isn't amazing by any means, but with a sieve for a run defense, the secondary has been the least of their problems. Can you tell I haven't at all been impressed with their defensive line?

Special Teams

The Baylor special teams unit should be pretty decent in 2009. Ben Parks was okay as a kicker--a 67% FG rate isn't terrible, though the five missed PATs are about four too many. Derek Epperson filled the role of Daniel Sepulveda II pretty nicely (Baylor always seems to have a good punter), and Mikail Baker is a relatively dangerous kick returner. If Parks improves, this unit will be something of a strength. If he doesn't...meh.

Punt Returns Rank: 22nd (Krys Buerck: 12 Returns, 7.5 Avg)
Net Punting Rank: 89th (Derek Epperson: 45.2 Avg)
Kickoff Returns Rank: 39th (Terrance Williams: 13 Returns, 26.0 Avg)
Opponents' Kickoff Returns Rank: 44th

Field Goals: 4-for-8 (Long: 41) (113th)
PATs: 17-for-18

If the special teams play involves a Baylor player with the ball in his hands, running upfield, then Baylor's special teams unit is pretty solid. If it involves somebody in a Baylor uniform kicking...not so much. Derek Epperson ranks in the nation's top 20 in overall punt average, but their net average has been hurt by two blocked punts, and they're giving up almost 17 yards per return (with one touchdown). Ouch. And Ben Parks has been far from great as place-kicker. But hey, Krys Buerck and Terrance Williams are bright spots. That's something.

---

Three Keys to the Game

Passing Downs

When Missouri has the ball, one of Baylor's biggest advantages come in Passing Downs. Meanwhile, the fight is about even when Baylor has the ball. Overall, this is a tossup that could go in the Bears' favor, but that's not a huge deal unless Missouri is turning the ball over. With Blaine Gabbert's arm, I love the idea of going deep quite a few times, but with the advantages Missouri will have in other regards, Missouri really just needs to avoid Passing Downs disaster, and they should be alright. It's rare one of my keys is "stay relatively conservative and don't do anything stupid," but that does appear to be the case here. I like to surprise myself sometimes.

Touchdowns over Field Goals

Let's face it: Missouri's offense has been simply horrible in the red zone this year. (SPREAD DOESN'T WORK NEED FULLBACK RAWR!!!!! ET CETERA. Just thought I'd get that out of the way so that doesn't come up and I don't have to point out that Missouri's red zone offense has been just fine in the spread the last few years.) Meanwhile, Baylor's red zone defense has been downright solid. If Missouri has to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns, then Baylor gets to stick around a little longer. BU does not have a lot of confidence, and the key to a game like this is stomping on the throat. Field goals are good, but they don't get the job done as quickly.

Special Teams

Many an upset was kick-started by a special teams disaster. Baylor's got a good enough return game to make Missouri pay for shoddy coverage, but as long as Missouri plays disciplined and doesn't allow any major returns, Baylor's kicking/punting game and place-kicking aren't good enough to make Missouri pay.

Prediction

Clearly this is Missouri's game to lose. It is Baylor at home, after all. However, even without Robert Griffin, this Baylor team has more weapons and team speed than previous Bears iterations, and if Missouri lets them hang around, loses the turnover battle, gets some bad bounces, allows a big play or two, etc., Baylor can absolutely win this game. As long as Missouri plays average or better, they should move to 6-3 and bowl eligibility. The numbers say Mizzou by 16.5, so we'll say Mizzou 30, Baylor 13. Run the ball well, rip off a big play or two, don't commit any awful turnovers, and let Mizzou's defensive weapons--Sean Weatherspoon, Aldon Smith, Will Ebner, etc.--make the plays they can make.

Mizzou-Colorado: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:15:17 -0000

More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

Browse more photos »

Confused? Catch up with the BTBS Primer.

I mentioned at the beginning of Saturday's postgame podcast that this was, in the end, a pretty simple game to explain. That didn't stop Ross and me from talking about it for 40+ minutes then, and it won't stop me from diving into the numbers to see what I can find. This game really was a nice reminder that Mizzou's still got a fast (and young) team with a world of potential, but if that's not reason enough to check out the stats with me, I'll just mention that there's a fun Labatt Blue reference somewhere in the post. So you've got THAT to look forward to...

	Mizzou (36)	Buffs (17)
Close %	65.7%
Field Position %	46.0%	45.0%
Leverage %	64.9%	61.7%

TOTAL
EqPts	20.9	6.9
Close Success Rate	39.6%	25.7%
Close PPP	0.34	0.05
Close S&P	0.735	0.306

RUSHING
EqPts	10.9	3.1
Close Success Rate	37.9%	27.3%
Close PPP	0.28	0.03
Close S&P	0.655	0.301
Line Yards/carry	2.54	1.00

PASSING
EqPts	10.0	3.7
Close Success Rate	41.7%	25.0%
Close PPP	0.41	0.06
Close S&P	0.831	0.308
SD/PD Sack Rate	0.0% / 13.0%	6.3% / 23.8%

STANDARD DOWNS
Success Rate	37.5%	37.8%
PPP	0.36	0.16
S&P	0.736	0.543

PASSING DOWNS
Success Rate	34.6%	21.7%
PPP	0.14	0.03
S&P	0.485	0.251

TURNOVERS
Number	2	4
Turnover Pts	15.8	19.9
Turnover Pts Margin	+4.1	-4.1

Q1 S&P	1.327	0.341
Q2 S&P	0.539	0.399
Q3 S&P	0.223	0.905
Q4 S&P	0.364	0.069

1st Down S&P	0.718	0.590
2nd Down S&P	0.524	0.462
3rd Down S&P	0.737	0.176

Projected Pt. Margin	+18.1	-18.1
Actual Pt. Margin	+19	-19

Reactions

Understated: Missouri's defensive success. Mizzou took on a bad offense and made them look like an NAIA offense, holding them to 176 yards and a 0.306 S&P. They were bigger, stronger and faster than CU. It was fun to watch. And with the game a play or two away from becoming competitive again, Mizzou allowed just a 0.069 S&P in the fourth quarter.
Overstated: Missouri's offensive success. Heading into this game, CU was in a battle with MU for the second-best defense in the North, but after a lovely first quarter, Mizzou did almost nothing offensively. They didn't necessarily need to do anything, and that's fine, but still.
You'll win a lot of games giving up a 0.176 S&P on third downs.
This game demonstrated the need for both efficiency and explosiveness. On Standard Downs, when many games are won and lost, MU and CU had nearly identical success rates (efficiency). But even when CU was moving efficiently, they still weren't getting anywhere. Mizzou's big-play threats--the long pass to Danario Alexander, and the nice, long runs by Derrick Washington and De'Vion Moore--got Mizzou a couple of easy scores in a game where points were hard to come by in the last 35-40 minutes.
I love it when the projected and actual margins match up so perfectly.

Other thoughts after the jump.

Three Positives

I guess the defense can't count for all three, huh? You expect good defensive numbers when you face a bad offensive team, but Mizzou was positively dominant. I can't even cite a specific number to explain how dominant they were, because all of them tell the story equally well.
Aldon Smith. Agent Smith in his last two games: 16 solo tackles, 8.0 tackles for loss, 5 sacks, 1 fumble recovery, 1 pass break-up. WOW. And half of that came against the best offense Missouri will see this year (Texas). With 4-6 games remaining this season, you do wonder what numbers he'll have put up by the end of the season. As I mentioned on Sunday, #85 is already threatening to leave Justin Smith's freshman numbers in the dust, and that's not even taking into account the increased pace of play-making he has put together in the last two weeks. The entire defense played well on Saturday, but this guy was a cut above the rest.
Blaine Gabbert's ankle looked fine!!! His first carry of the game was a simple 4-yarder, and all of Rock M Nation held its breath...but Gabbert not only was able to cut and change directions for the first time since September, but he also got up with no trouble. What a sigh of relief this is. Gabbert struggled after the first quarter, and CU took advantage of his further pass-telegraphing a couple of times, but if his ankle troubles are mostly behind him, we can actually start looking for signs of growth in #11 again, instead of just signs of survival.

(Also: I still can't say enough about how well he looked off the linebacker on the long TD to Danario. The LB was exactly in the way of the pass Gabbert wanted to make, so he looked to the right until the LB moved, then flicked the ball right where the LB was. Gorgeous. More of that, less locking onto receivers, please.)

And just for fun...a fourth positive:
In light of last night's 2010 post, I should point out that Aldon Smith, Kevin Rutland, Dominique Hamilton, Zaviar Gooden, Will Ebner, Andrew Gachkar, Kenji Jackson, and Jarrell Harrison all made multiple stellar plays on defense. All of those players look better now than they did in early September, and all of them return in 2010, along with Jacquies Smith, Carl Gettis, Jasper Simmons, and others who have already made plenty of plays this year.

Three Negatives

After the first quarter, the offense was just horrendous. The struggles were disguised by field position and a perfect fake field goal (JACQUIES SMITH FOR TIGHT END!!!1!!!!) in the second quarter, and the offense went into an intentional shell in the fourth quarter, but still...while the Q1 pace was probably unsustainable, the S&P for the final 45 minutes was under 0.400. That's quite bad...that's almost Colorado bad (almost).
The defense took its foot off the gas just long enough to give Colorado hope. Colorado managed just 176 yards all game, but 105 of them came in back-to-back drives sandwiching halftime, and it gave Colorado some much-needed momentum. Mizzou quickly righted the ship, and you really can't expect a squad this young to not suffer a lapse at some point in a game, but regardless, the momentum CU generated there allowed them to get within two possessions in a game Mizzou led by 33 at one point.
A 37.5% success rate on Standard Downs (and resulting 64.9% leverage rate) simply will not get the job done. This was caused mostly by the second-half funk--things were still pretty strong for much of the first half; however, it's simply too low. Now matter how iffy the next few teams are on the schedule, if you put yourself into too many Passing Downs, you're begging to turn the ball over and find yourself in a closer-than-it-should-be contest. Efficiency is godliness (that's the old saying, right?), and thanks mostly to iffy running and/or run blocking after the early going, Mizzou had none of it.

Three Keys Revisited

Seen here.

Field Position

In conference play, [Colorado had] averaged just two sustained drives per game, but they have been handed three scores on short fields. Get rid of the short fields, caused mostly by turnovers and special teams mishaps, and you only have to score about 17 points to beat them. Of course, that's easier said than done for Missouri. Coinciding perfectly with Gabbert's injury, Missouri has averaged a -9.8 turnover points differential per game in conference play. Plus, Mizzou has gotten murdered in the field position battle the last two weeks (partially due to turnovers). Hand Colorado 10 points and good field position, and they can absolutely beat you. Turnovers are always key, but never more than against Colorado.

Field position was the major reason Mizzou found themselves up 30+ in the first half, and the major reason CU got within 16 in the second half. Mizzou does not have the same type of "could score from anywhere, at any time" offense as they did in 2007 and 2008, and the little things matter more. They cannot allow a sustained funk to take place like they did in Q3 Saturday. But on the bright side, Mizzou won the turnover points battle for the first time in conference play, though not by much.

Missouri's defensive line

Simply put, a) Colorado's running backs aren't good enough to create good rushes on their own, and b) Colorado's quarterbacks aren't good enough to make big plays with under pressure. If the Missouri defensive line wins its battles versus the Colorado offensive line, Colorado simply cannot score enough to win, even with a handicapped Missouri offense.

Eight sacks and a 0.301 Rushing S&P. Um, yeah. Mizzou won this battle, to say the very least.

Derrick Washington, Kendial Lawrence, De'Vion Moore

I listed them as keys to the Oklahoma State game as well, and while they performed relatively well, they didn't make enough of a difference to swing the game in Missouri's favor. This one is also quite cut-and-dried: if Missouri can move the ball on the ground and give Blaine Gabbert as little to do as possible, Missouri will score enough points to win the game, barring major mishaps in Key #1 above. If Gabbert is throwing an accurate ball, Mizzou could kill Colorado. If he's not, Mizzou could still win if these three keys are clicking.

Mizzou's RBs: 37 carries, 161 yards, 1 TD. Good enough...or should I say...CROSE ENOUGH. Obviously the run game had plenty of issues, but it allowed Mizzou to seize the game early, and that's a net win.

Summary

Last week, we were trying to talk ourselves into Missouri still having a chance at the 2009 North title, and thanks to the way Missouri looked on Saturday, it's pretty clear that we're not just wishing and hoping. Colorado's far from good, but they were good enough to beat Kansas, and Mizzou beat them worse in Boulder than K-State beat them in Manhattan, so if you believe in the transitive property, that's a good sign for Mizzou's two remaining games away from Faurot Field. (Meanwhile, Mizzou's remaining games at Faurot are against Baylor and Iowa State, which...well, lose one of those games, and you don't deserve to win the North anyway.) The goals for 2009 were 1) make another bowl with a sickeningly young team, 2) win the North...and that's basically it. Mizzou can achieve half of its season goal with a win on Saturday, and it's shaping up to be a potentially lovely November for Gary Pinkel's Tigers.

The North in 2010

Bill C. — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:00:31 -0000

The 2009 Big 12 North race is, to say the least, intriguing heading into November, but the way my brain works, I can't help but keep an eye on the future as all of this plays out. And since it's in my head, I might as well type it out too, huh? As November 2009 begins, let's take a look at...2010.

What we're going to do is simple: we're going to take the most recent two-deeps listed on each team's website, remove the seniors, and see what's left. Obviously there will be plenty more analysis to come, but this will be a nice, preliminary peek. I can't help myself.

Missouri

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Blaine Gabbert (Jr) Jimmy Costello (So)	DE	Jacquies Smith (Jr) Marcus Malbrough (So)
RB	Derrick Washington (Sr) De'Vion Moore (So)	DT	Dominique Hamilton (Jr) Marvin Foster (RSFr)
WR	Jerrell Jackson (Jr) Brandon Gerau (Jr)	DT	Terrell Resonno (Jr) Bart Coslet (Sr)
WR	T.J. Moe (So) Rolandis Woodland (So)	DE	Aldon Smith (So) Brad Madison (So)
WR	Wes Kemp (Jr) Michael Egnew (Jr)	WLB	Zaviar Gooden (So) Donovan Bonner (So)
TE	Andrew Jones (Jr) Beau Brinkley (Jr)	MLB	Will Ebner (Jr) Luke Lambert (Sr)
LT	Elvis Fisher (Jr) Justin Britt (RSFr)	SLB	Andrew Gachkar (Sr) Tyler Crane (Jr)
LG	Austin Wuebbels (Jr) Travis Ruth (So)	CB	Carl Gettis (Sr) Trey Hobson (Jr)
C	Tim Barnes (Sr) J.T. Beasley (Jr)	CB	Kevin Rutland (Sr) Robert Steeples (So)
RG	Jayson Palmgren (Jr) Travis Ruth (So)	FS	Jasper Simmons (Sr) Munir Prince (Sr)
RT	Dan Hoch (Jr) Jack Meiners (So)	SS	Jarrell Harrison (Sr) Kenji Jackson (Jr)

K	Grant Ressel (Jr)	P	Matt Grabner (Jr)
PR	Carl Gettis (Sr)	KR	Jasper Simmons (Sr)

I've got to say, this is the most complete team heading into 2010. Blaine Gabbert will be the most accomplished North QB heading into 2010 and Derrick Washington the second-most accomplished RB. The improved secondary will return just about everybody of importance, and a deep LB corps could be well-positioned to absorb the loss of Sean Weatherspoon with as little drop-off as possible.
Two major question marks: a) who replaces Danario Alexander, and b) who replaces Jaron Baston? Multiple candidates exist to replace Spoon, so that's actually less of a worry, but the WR situation is at least a bit worrisome. Wes Kemp has shown flashes, and if he continues to grow, he could be the deep threat this team needs, but what is it I always say? Until you actually prove it, it's a question mark. Beyond Kemp, guys like Jackson, T.J. Moe (remember him?), Rolandis Woodland, and one of the redshirting freshmen (L'Damian Washington, Jaleel Clark, Kerwin Stricker) will fill out the depth chart, and at least one of them will need to take a step forward.
Of course, you know who else could absorb the loss of Danario? Tight ends. Novel concept, I know.
I really like what I've seen out of Dominique Hamilton recently, but Terrell Resonno seems to have disappeared. Either he or one of the underclassmen (Marvin Foster, Jimmy Burge, George White) will need to raise their game. If somebody competent steps up at WR and DT, this team is loaded.

Colorado

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Tyler Hansen (Jr) Cody Hawkins (Sr)	DE	Marquez Herrod (Sr) Josh Hartigan (Jr)
RB	Rodney Stewart (Jr) Darrell Scott (Jr)	DT	Curtis Cunningham (Jr) Nate Bonsu (So)
FB	Ryan Deehan (Jr) ?	DT	Will Pericak (So) Conrad Obi (Jr)
WR	Scotty McKnight (Sr) Jason Espinoza (Jr)	DE	Forrest West (So) Nick Kasa (So)
WR	Markques Simas (Jr) Will Jefferson (So)	WLB	Jon Major (So) Tyler Ahles (Jr)
TE	Ryan Deehan? (Jr) ?	MLB	Michael Sipili (Sr) ?
LT	Nate Solder (Sr) Ryan Dannewitz (So)	SLB	B.J. Beatty (Sr) Doug Rippy (So)
LG	Ethan Adkins (Jr) Blake Behrens (Jr)	CB	Jimmy Smith (Sr) ?
C	Keenan Stevens (Sr) Mike Iltis (Jr)	CB	Jalil Brown (Sr) Arthur Jaffee (Jr)
RG	Matthew Bahr (Jr) Max Tuioti-Mariner? (So)	FS	Ray Polk (So) Anthony Perkins (Jr)
RT	Ryan Miller (Jr) Bryce Givens (So)	SS	Travis Sandersfeld (Jr) ?

K	Aric Goodman (Sr)	P	Aric Goodman (Sr)
PR	Jason Espinoza (Jr)	KR	Brian Lockridge (Jr)

I mentioned this past offseason that while Colorado was going to stink in 2009, they might actually be positioning themselves to actually fulfill the role of sleeper that has been foisted upon them for most of the last half-decade. Ironically, they might actually emerge as a sleeper just as everybody finally gives up on them.
Of course, there will still be some major question marks. You know I'm not at all impressed with Rodney "Another Short Gain By" Stewart, and while Scotty McKnight (how is he still an underclassman???) is a great possession guy, he'd be a helluva lot better as a #2 or #3 threat than a #1. Unless Markques Simas finally starts to live up to the potential everybody says he has, this team is still severely lacking at WR, and they're losing both of their top tight ends. (I'm going out of my way not to mention Darrell Scott here, as he...whatever. I have no expectations whatsoever for him at this point, and I'm going to let him surprise me.)
I really like Jimmy Smith at CB, but CU's going to be searching for some replacements in the secondary. Jalil Brown has potential, and Ray Polk is young, but depth could be an issue.
Same can be said for the LB corps. Luckily for CU, they should have a strong D-line to maybe deflect some of the concerns.
If CU really does live up to its annual sleeper reputation, it will be in the trenches, where a struggling O-line will at least have experience on its side, and the D-line could be strong. Then again, after watching CU's O-line attempt to handle MU's improving-but-not-amazing D-line, maybe returning a bunch of these guys might not be a good thing.

Iowa State

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Austen Arnaud (Sr) Jerome Tiller (So)	DE	Patrick Neal (Jr) ?
RB	Alexander Robinson (Sr) Beau Blankenship (So)	DT	Bailey Johnson (Jr) Stephen Ruempolhamer (Jr)
WR	Jake Williams (Sr) ?	DT	Austin Alburtis (Sr) ?
WR	Sedrick Johnson (Jr) ?	DE	Roosevelt Maggitt (So) Cleyon Lang (So)
WR	Josh Lenz (So) Darius Darks (Jr)	SLB	Jacob Lattimer (Jr) ?
TE	Collin Franklin (Sr) ?	MLB	Matt Tau'fo'ou (Sr) A.J. Klein (So)
LT	Kelechi Osmele (Jr) Brayden Burris (So)	WLB	Jake Knott (So) ?
LG	Alex Alvarez (Sr) Mike Bangston (So)	CB	Leonard Johnson (Jr) Jeremy Reeves (So)
C	Sean Smith (Sr) ?	CB	Jacques Washington (So) ?
RG	Ben Lamaak (Sr) Trey Baysinger (Jr)	FS	Michael O'Connell (Sr) ?
RT	Scott Haughton (Jr) Zack Spears (Jr)	SS	David Sims (Sr) Zac Sandvig (Sr)

K	Grant Mahoney (Jr)	P	?
PR	Leonard Johnson (Jr)	KR	Leonard Johnson (Jr)

So Paul Rhoads' second year in Ames will potentially see a downright strong offense and a thin, depleted, inexperienced defense. I don't want to overstate the offensive potential (the WR situation is iffy, to say the least), but ISU might have the best O-line in the North blocking for what is at least decent skill position talent.
Arnaud vs Tiller. Could be interesting to watch this competition.
Really, if ISU returned just a couple more decent playmakers on defense, I could talk myself into them being a darkhorse contender. But while I do like what Rhoads has done with the talent on hand this year, I just can't figure they'll be that great next year. They will need another year or two of Rhoads developing his own recruits before I feel a lot more comfortable about the potential of their program.

Kansas

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Kale Pick (So) ?	DE	Jake Laptad (Sr) ?
RB	Toben Opurum (So) ?	DT	Jamal Greene (Sr) ?
WR	Dezmon Briscoe?? (Sr) ?	DT	John Williams (So) Richard Johnson (Jr)
WR	Johnathan Wilson (Sr) Tertavian Ingram (Sr)	DE	Quintin Woods (Sr) ?
WR	Bradley McDougald (So) Chris Omigie (So)	SLB	Justin Springer (Sr) ?
TE	Tim Biere (Jr) Ted McNulty (Jr)	MLB	Drew Dudley (Sr) ?
LT	Tanner Hawkinson (So) Ian Wolfe (Sr)	WLB	Huldon Tharp (So) ?
LG	Brad Thorson (Sr) Carl Wilson (Sr)	CB	D.J. Beshears (So) Daymond Patterson (Jr)
C	Jeremiah Hatch (Jr) Brad Thorson (Sr)	CB	Chris Harris (Sr) Calvin Rubles (Sr)
RG	Sal Capra (Sr) Trevor Marrongelli (So)	FS	Lubbock Smith (So) ?
RT	Jeff Spikes (Jr) Michael Martinovich (Jr)	SS	Phil Strozier (Sr) ?

K	Jacob Branstetter (Sr)	P	Alonso Rojas (Sr)
PR	Daymond Patterson (Jr)	KR	Bradley McDougald (So)

So KU's biggest question mark (offensive line) will return completely intact next year, while most of the known skill position talent disappears. I listed Dez Briscoe on the two-deep above, but I've got to be honest: I'm about 92% sure he's going pro this year. His stats are ridiculous, he's got decent NFL size, he's been suspended for academic reasons, and supposedly he was tied to those football-vs-basketball brawls earlier in the year. That's not a recipe for someone who's going to go out of his way to stick around campus for another season.
Without Briscoe, I have to figure this is going to be a run-heavy offense next year. Kale Pick's got a lot to prove, but with Toben Opurum and an experienced line, they might (might) be able to rely on the run. Then again, they'll still need some sort of passing attack, and...who will be the #1 receiver? Johnathan Wilson, I guess? Color me unafraid.
I'm not even going to try to figure out if KU's D is going to be any good. They've improved recently, but they lose Darrell Stuckey and two linemen, and the depth from LB corps vanishes. I assume this will be a decent unit, and really you can start to maybe see the identity KU might be going with--defense first, run-heavy, grind it out.

Kansas State

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Carson Coffman (Sr) ?	DE	Brandon Harold (Jr) ?
RB	Daniel Thomas (Sr) ?	DT	Prizell Brown (Sr) ?
FB	Braden Wilson (So) Lucas Hamm (Sr)	DT	Raphael Guidry (Jr) ?
WR	Lamark Brown (Sr) ?	DE	Antonio Felder (Sr) Joseph Kassanavoid (So)
WR	Collin Klein (So) Chris Harper (So)	LB	Kevin Rohleder (Sr) ?
TE	Travis Tannahill (So) ?	LB	Alex Hrebec (Jr) ?
LT	Zach Hanson (Jr) ?	LB	Troy Butler (Sr) Thomas Ferguson (So)
LG	Zach Kendall (Sr) Trevor Viers (Sr)	CB	Joshua Moore (Sr) Darious Thomas (So)
C	Wade Weibert (Sr) ?	CB	Stephen Harrison (Sr) David Garrett (Jr)
RG	Kenneth Mayfield (Sr) Colten Freeze (Jr)	FS	Emmanuel Lamur (Jr) ?
RT	Clyde Aufner (Jr) Ethan Douglas (So)	SS	Tysyn Hartman (Jr) Torrell Miller (So)

K	Josh Cherry (Sr)	P	Ryan Doerr (So)
PR	Tysyn Hartman (Jr)	KR	Daniel Thomas (Sr)

Like Kansas, this looks to be a pretty run-heavy, can't-pass-on-them team, with Daniel Thomas running behind a super-experienced line and a well-coached defense that is iffy in the front seven but stout in the secondary. In other words, this looks like a Bill Snyder team (sans the All-American linebackers). We've made a big deal out of the fact that they're losing about 35 seniors this year (and that's only a slight exaggeration), and that will absolutely murder their depth, but if they stay reasonably healthy, the Snyder identity might be able to take shape a bit more.
Now, I say they'll have a good secondary...I'm still unsure about how good the secondary is now, but returning all four current starters certainly suggests decent improvement for next year.
I believe I heard that Chris Harper is moving to WR instead of competing at QB, right?

Nebraska

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Cody Green (So) Zac Lee (Sr)	DE	Cameron Meredith (So) Josh Williams (So)
RB	Roy Helu, Jr. (Sr) Rex Burkhead (So)	DT	Baker Steinkuhler (So) Terrence Moore (Jr)
FB	Tyler Legate (So) Mike Hays (Jr)	DT	Jared Crick (Jr) ?
WR	Niles Paul (Sr) Antonio Bell (So)	DE	Pierre Allen (Sr) ?
WR	Curenski Gilleylen (Jr) Khiry Cooper (So)	Will	Blake Lawrence (Sr) Matthew May (Jr)
TE	Mike McNeill (Sr) Dreu Young (Sr)	Mike	Will Compton (So) Micah Kreikemeier (So)
LT	Mike Smith (Sr) ?	Buck	Sean Fisher (So) Eric Martin (So)
LG	Keith Williams (Sr) ?	CB	Prince Amukamara (Sr) Dejon Gomes (Sr)
C	Mike Caputo (Jr) ?	CB	Anthony West (Sr) Alfonzo Dennard (Jr)
RG	Ricky Henry (Sr) ?	FS	Eric Hagg (Sr) Austin Cassidy (Jr)
RT	Marcel Jones (Jr) D.J. Jones (Sr)	SS	P.J. Smith (So) Courtney Osborne (So)

K	Alex Henery (Sr)	P	Alex Henery (Sr)
PR	Niles Paul (Sr)	KR	Niles Paul (Sr)

How the hell is Pierre Allen still an underclassman? I was completely convinced that both he and Barry Turner were seniors, but I guess not.
Next question: how much of Nebraska's defensive identity is grounded in Ndamukong Suh? He and Turner depart, but will Allen and the stout Jared Crick be able to keep the great D-line play coming? And how much of Crick's success is due to offenses' fear of Suh?
The shine is quickly wearing off of Roy Helu, Jr., but he does return next year (lord knows he's not going pro), and with yet another experienced O-line, NU should be able to run the ball pretty well. That will obviously take some pressure off of Cody Green if Green is not, after all, ready to be NU's savior.
I really like what NU has returning at CB, but...safety? I think I like their second-string CBs more than their first string safeties. Will be interesting to see if there's some position shifting when all is said and done.

As a Missouri fan, I look at this information and quickly conclude that Missouri will be the 2010 favorite, and really I'd say I have pretty good basis in fact for that opinion. That said, Nebraska is intriguing, and even though K-State is not a stat-friendly team (I've already accepted that they're better than the stats say--I just can't figure out how much better), Bill Snyder really might get them back into the hunt despite the youth and lack of depth. Colorado could be interesting depending on who the head coach is (ahem), Kansas has recruited well and will see plenty of talented-but-young players hitting the field, and Iowa State might have the best offensive line in the division. I'd like to think Missouri might run away with this thing, and I'm sure it could happen (the trip to Lincoln aside), but with five of six North teams (all but Kansas) looking potentially better next year than this year, we might have another fun race on our hands.

Mizzou-Colorado: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Bill C. — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:00:26 -0000

More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

Marquez Herrod: part of a surprisingly successful CU d-line.

Browse more photos »

Last year at this time, Missouri was coming off of a tough loss to OSU and a blowout loss to Texas, and they turned their season around with a ridiculously easy 58-0 win over Colorado. This season, a younger, hobbled, even-more-reeling Mizzou team makes the trip to Boulder, hungry for even a 1-point win, much less a 58-pointer. Will they get the job done?

Are you an optimist or a pessimist? Because whatever your inclinations, the stats below have something to feed them. An optimist looks at the matchups below and sees a Missouri team with significant defensive advantages, a Colorado team with no major skill-position threat, run-blocking advantages for both the Mizzou offensive and defensive lines, and such a pronounced speed advantage in the last two years that it simply cannot have all gone away now that Jeremy Maclin is catching passes from Donovan McNabb.

If you're a pessimist, however, you've got plenty of ammo as well. You've got an immobile, inaccurate quarterback facing a solid pass rush (and a backup who has not inspired a boatload of confidence), a Mizzou secondary that suffered flashback-inducing communication breakdowns a week ago, and a rushing offense that has still underachieved significantly this season. (Oh, and of course TERRIBLE COACHING PINKEL'S TOO STUBBORN OUR PASS COVERAGE IS TOO SOFT YOST AND STECKEL SUCK!!!!!1!!!!!!!!! Can't forget that.) The projections for this game have gotten tighter as Mizzou has begun to struggle, but let's be honest--without knowing how Gabbert's ankle will respond to another week of treatment, and how such a young team (did you see where Mizzou now has 36 freshmen and sophs on the two-deep????) will respond to a three-game losing streak, projections here are rather worthless. Not that that's going to stop me from diving ahead, of course...

Offense

Colorado: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Offensive Preview

In the last three years against Missouri, Colorado has scored a total of 23 points. After a decent 373-yard output in 2006, the Buffs have not managed even 200 yards in either of the past two meetings. Missouri's defense is actually quite a bit better statistically than in 2008, while Colorado's offense has only incrementally improved. Plus, Missouri holds the ratings advantage in a vast majority of major "+" categories.

Colorado Offense vs Missouri Defense
Category	CU Offense	MU Defense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	90.3 (92)	112.4 (31)
Close Success Rate+ (Rk)	98.9 (70)	104.6 (43)
Close PPP+ (Rk)	78.2 (103)	124.0 (30)

Rushing S&P+	121.5 (25)	101.9 (64)
Passing S&P+	72.5 (108)	120.8 (25)

Standard Downs S&P+	95.4 (83)	114.1 (27)
Passing Downs S&P+	94.3 (85)	117.4 (32)

Red Zone S&P+	106.5 (60)	100.0 (68)

Q1 S&P+	105.5 (69)	96.1 (73)
Q2 S&P+	107.1 (57)	136.1 (18)
Q3 S&P+	83.0 (103)	120.9 (24)
Q4 S&P+	91.8 (93)	113.9 (40)

1st Down S&P+	95.8 (82)	110.9 (42)
2nd Down S&P+	89.9 (97)	114.1 (35)
3rd Down S&P+	98.3 (78)	115.5 (33)

Line Yards+	126.8 (5)	99.5 (64)
Close Sack Rate+	77.3 (97)	89.2 (75)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	61.8 (107) / 108.4 (61)	78.4 (87) / 96.0 (70)

When Colorado Has the Ball...
Colorado Rushing	Advantage: Colorado
Colorado Passing	Big Advantage: Missouri
Best Time for Colorado:	1st Quarter
Best Time for Missouri:	Anything after 1st Quarter

Analysis after the jump.

We'll once again start with where Missouri has the rankings advantage:

Close S&P+, Success Rate+, PPP+
Passing S&P+
Standard Downs S&P+, Passing Downs S&P+
Q2, Q3, Q4 S&P+
1st, 2nd, 3rd Down S&P+
Close, Standard Downs Sack Rate+

And for Colorado...

Rushing S&P+
Red Zone S&P+
Q1 S&P+
Line Yards+
Passing Downs S&P+

Obviously Missouri has significant advantages in most categories, but you do see where Colorado has a sliver of opportunity. They will likely try to establish the run in the first quarter, and even though Missouri has been improving quite a bit against the run, CU does still have the overall advantage there. If Rodney Stewart gets going and Missouri has to focus a bit more on the run, then CU might be able to exploit a Missouri pass defense that might or might not now be shaky. Until the Texas game, Missouri had been playing great pass defense--more than good enough to completely shut CU down. But some breakdowns against the Longhorns have caused some serious consternation, and until we see that everything's alright--that the sudden miscommunication is alleviated, that Carl Gettis' head is on straight--we don't know for sure that it will be.

Though Colorado does obviously have a road map to success, you could see things pretty quickly turn in Missouri's favor if Stewart isn't finding running lanes and Colorado isn't moving the ball early. The per-quarter advantage quickly turns in Mizzou's favor after the first 15 minutes, when CU's scripted plays have likely run their course and the game turns to adjustments, counters to counters, and athleticism. If Mizzou leads after Q1, they are in very good shape. As with Blaine Gabbert's ankle, we should pretty quickly be able to discern how the secondary is going to play, and if Missouri's speed advantage is going to be enough to shut Colorado down for the fourth straight year.

Quarterback

If the cast of characters surrounding Cody Hawkins and Tyler Hansen improves considerably, can one or both of them turn into a competent guide for the offense? Cody Hawkins earned a lot of goodwill during his redshirt freshman season in 2007, primarily because of the win over OU. Beyond that game, he didn't show a whole lot, but he was a freshman. Unfortunately, he regressed considerably in 2008, just like everybody else on the Colorado offense. Hansen was able to very briefly breathe new life into the CU offense just by offering a different style of threat--he was able to generate some offense with his legs, something Hawkins is not capable of doing.

In the end, they were both not very good, but they are still young. For better or worse, CU still has two more years of Hawkins and three of Hansen. It really wouldn't surprise me if Clark Evans were given a look if Hawkins/Hansen prove early on that they still can't get the job done, or if one or the other gets injured.

Cody Hawkins: 114-for-228 passing (50.0%), 1,208 yards (5.3 per pass), 9 TD, 11 INT
Tyler Hansen: 24-for-44 passing (54.5%), 281 yards (6.4 per pass), 1 TD, 1 INT

Last year, CU came to Columbia with uncertainty at quarterback. Cody Hawkins simply wasn't performing well at all, and Dan Hawkins tore the redshirt off of Tyler Hansen to provide some competition. This year...almost exactly the same story. Hawkins has been mostly awful once again, and after an early decision to redshirt Hansen, Dan Hawkins decided against it, bringing Don't Call Me Taylor into the Texas game and starting him against Kansas.

Hansen provided enough of a change in style that it gave CU a momentary boost. The Buffs managed just 322 yards of offense against Kansas in Hansen's first start, but they took advantage of opportunities (twice, KU handed them the ball deep in their own territory) and came away with a win. Predictably, though, the Hansen magic quickly wore off, just like it did last year. CU gained just 244 yards against K-State, with Hansen and Hawkins combining to go 17-for-37 for 184 yards (a disgusting 5.0 per pass), 0 TDs, 2 INTs and 4 sacks. Ouch.

(And that's right, Hansen's redshirt came off halfway through the season, but he's still only splitting time with Cody Hawkins.)

Hansen is elusive enough that he really might be a better option than Nolte-Hawkins (I'm not completely sure I'm not a better option than Hawkins). He is not necessarily a threat to gain a bunch of yards on the ground (he ripped off a 20-yarder against KU, but that's it), but he is constantly escaping the pocket and trying to buy time for his receivers. Of course, his receivers are terrible, so that doesn't really work. But that's not his fault.

Running Back

Beyond Darrell Scott are two guys built on misconceptions. It seems like Rodney Stewart was pretty good in 2008. Wrong. Yardage-wise, he turned out to be CU's most successful freshman last year, posting 632 yards in 132 carries before getting injured himself. Problem was, as shown by POE, most of his yards came against iffy defenses. He did well against an okay Florida State run defense (21 carries, 107 yards), but otherwise most of his yards came against West Virginia (28-for-166) and Kansas State (29-for-141), two rather awful run defenses. Against Missouri and Texas, the two best run defenses on the schedule, Stewart managed just 36 yards on 18 carries.

Rodney Stewart: 120 carries, 467 yards (3.9/carry), 6 TD; 5 catches, 28 yards (5.6/catch)
Demetrius Sumler: 29 carries, 114 yards (3.9/carry); 10 catches, 58 yards (5.8/catch)
Darrell Scott: 23 carries, 95 yards (4.1/carry), 1 TD; 4 catches, 35 yards (8.8/catch)

For the second straight year, Scott has spent a majority of the season either dinged up or out. He had arthroscopic surgery on his knee early last week and is out for another week or two. Not that his game log was fear-inducing in the first place, of course.

The main threat in the backfield, I guess, is Rodney Stewart. Stewart is once again riding a nice performance against West Virginia (21 carries, 105 yards) to prop up his numbers. In conference play, he is averaging just 3.2 yards per carry (197 yards on 61 carries), and while CU's overall rushing stats are better than last year (and therefore so are Stewart's), I want to see him do something against a fast front seven before I claim to be scared of him in any way, shape or form. He is a bit of a workhorse--until his 16-carry performance against K-State last week, he had gone over 20 carries for four straight games. Durability is a virtue, especially when you're missing your supposedly most explosive RB option (Scott), but Stewart's got to show me he can run on Missouri's defense before I believe it (last year against Mizzou: 6 carries, 9 yards). Missouri had some issues last week, but not up front.

Meanwhile, for the second straight year, I'm almost thinking that Demetrius Sumler is CU's best back.

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

[A] bad receiving corps probably got worse in terms of proven talent, but CU fans are putting a lot of hope in Markques Simas, a big-time recruit from Hawkins' first full-year recruiting class who sat out last due to (I believe) academics. With Smith, Simas could have had a nice role as the explosive #2 guy while Scotty McKnight continued to fill the "possession receiver" role, but without Smith the pressure will be on Simas to make plays from the very beginning.
Beyond Simas and McKnight (46 catches, 519 yards, 5 TDs)...oy. The seven other names I listed on the projected WR depth chart combined for...wait for it...one catch in 2008. And that one catch (from RB-turned-WR Kevin Moyd) garnered a loss of a yard. You never know when somebody will emerge out of the blue and thrive, but you certainly don't want to have to rely on that. With the level of inexperience here, the WR corps is ripe for an infusion of energy from a true freshman or two--don't be surprised if either/both Jarrod Darden (6'5, 210) and/or Terdema Ussery (6'4, 205) see the field early.

Scotty McKnight: 41 catches, 431 yards (10.5/catch), 3 TD
Jason Espinoza: 13 catches, 136 yards (10.5/catch), 1 TD
Markques Simas: 9 catches, 107 yards (11.9/catch), 1 TD
Patrick Devenny: 8 catches, 107 yards (13.4/catch), 2 TD

Riar Geer: 28 catches, 326 yards (11.6/catch), 3 TD
Ryan Deehan: 8 catches, 77 yards (11.8/catch)

I'll say this right now: when Hansen escapes the pocket and attempts to buy time, somebody better find the tight end. Not that either Riar Geer or Ryan Deehan is a threat to take a pass 50 yards or anything, but Geer appears to be the #1 safety valve option, and if somebody is going to bail Hansen (or Hawkins) out on a third-and-long, it's Geer.

Beyond that? Blech. Scotty McKnight is performing admirably in his "possession receiver" role, for seemingly the 13th consecutive year, and being that Missouri let Nebraska's possession receiver (Niles Paul, admittedly better than McKnight) go deep on them once, he's at least a bit of a threat. But McKnight and Geer are the only two players averaging more than two receptions a game. Markques Simas is the homeless man's Malcolm Williams--we've heard hype about him for a while, and he looks good in a uniform, but he just hasn't lived up to the hype yet. That said, all nine of his receptions have come in the last four games, so he's at least working his way into the offense a bit.

Offensive Line

If there truly is hope for the Colorado offense in 2009, it probably comes from the potential of the offensive line. Ryan Miller was another big-time recruit who got thrown into the deep end last year and actually acquitted himself pretty well. Blake Behrens got a lot of early experience as well. These two, combined with incoming redshirts Bryce Givens and Ryan Dannewitz, not to mention a host of sophomores (sans guard Max Tuioti-Mariner, who has suffered approximately 26 knee injuries in his brief CU career and is out at least for 2009, if not forever), should bring very solid line play to Colorado in the future.

I can't say for sure that this will happen in 2009, mind you--the line may not congeal until 2010--but there is hope here. Injuries and extreme youth decimated the line last year, so it's impossible to say exactly how much potential is here just yet (sounds like the running back corps, no?), but again, we're just talking about hope. This will still be one of the conference's younger lines in 2009, but if things click soon, the entire offense starts to look a lot better.

Possibly the most intriguing unit-vs-unit matchup in Saturday's game comes here--CU's offensive line versus MU's defensive line. I have been very impressed with Mizzou's front seven overall in conference play. Nevada gashed them up the middle, and since then nobody's gashed them at all, aside from a long Roy Helu run after the Nebraska game had been salted away. They have overachieved their rushing rankings the last 2-3 games, and that's an encouraging trend, but the pass rush still needs to improve. They have been all-pros at almost getting to the QB, but that doesn't count for a lot.

Meanwhile, the Colorado OL has seen the same type of encouraging results. Their line yardage figures have been surprisingly great (which brings about even more question marks regarding CU's actual running backs--their line yardage is great, yet they still don't have a back averaging more than 4.1 yards per carry??), but their sack rates leave something to be desired (again, this could be why Hansen is a better QB option...then again, he was sacked four times last week, so nevermind). Strength vs strength, weakness vs weakness. No matter what happens when Missouri has the ball, the game could be determined by who wins this matchup. If Missouri wins it, how exactly is Colorado supposed to score?

---

Defense

Colorado: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

Colorado Defense vs Missouri Offense
Category	CU Defense	MU Offense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	114.9 (29)	106.9 (55)
Close Success Rate+	120.4 (13)	104.4 (52)
Close PPP+	108.7 (43)	113.4 (56)

Rushing S&P+	117.7 (26)	103.4 (66)
Passing S&P+	110.9 (37)	112.5 (49)

Standard Downs S&P+	117.5 (22)	105.7 (59)
Passing Downs S&P+	97.1 (71)	115.9 (46)

Red Zone S&P+	118.3 (27)	74.4 (112)

Q1 S&P+	101.6 (58)	113.1 (58)
Q2 S&P+	120.3 (32)	99.5 (76)
Q3 S&P+	132.0 (15)	119.7 (32)
Q4 S&P+	105.9 (48)	112.4 (37)

1st Down S&P+	112.5 (34)	104.1 (64)
2nd Down S&P+	112.7 (37)	113.5 (49)
3rd Down S&P+	114.7 (36)	117.9 (35)

Line Yards+	106.4 (45)	109.5 (41)
Close Sack Rate+	168.1 (5)	161.7 (20)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	190.5 (4) / 122.1 (38)	189.8 (13) / 118.4 (51)

When Missouri Has the Ball...
Missouri Rushing	Advantage: Colorado
Missouri Passing	Advantage: Push
Best Time for Colorado:	2nd Quarter
Best Time for Missouri:	4th Quarter

Missouri's advantages:

Passing Downs S&P+
Q4 S&P+
3rd Down S&P+
Line Yards+

Colorado's advantages:

Close S&P+, Success Rate+, PPP+
Rushing, Passing S&P+
Standard Downs S&P+
Red Zone S&P+
Q2, Q3 S&P+
1st, 2nd Down S&P+
Close, Standard Downs, Passing Downs Sack Rate+

Pretty jarring to see a Missouri offense with that many disadvantages, huh? This is the world we live in. This is also why Blaine Gabbert's ankle is such a huge wildcard for the rest of this season. If Gabbert can get back to actually throwing accurate passes, then Missouri goes back to having a dangerous offense--most of the statistical regression has come in the last three games, since Donkey Kong Suh's Gabbert roll-up. Before that, Missouri had a Top 30 offense (only Top 30 instead of Top 15 because of the weakness of the non-con defenses, but better than 55th, no?). But as it stands now, CU has a majority of the advantages.

With these numbers, we can see a pretty clear picture for how both teams will succeed, if they succeed, when Missouri has the ball.

If Missouri succeeds, it will be through the improving running game (Mizzou's got the advantage in the trenches) and 3rd down passing. Anecdotally speaking, CU's safeties have been by far their weakest link, and that has led to numerous breakdowns on 3rd downs and Passing Downs. With experienced, fast route-runners like Danario Alexander and Jared Perry running around, they could wreak havoc in these situations if Gabbert can get the ball anywhere close to them.

If Colorado succeeds, you will know it quickly. Derrick Washington is stuffed on the first carry of the game, and Gabbert launches a third-down pass 17 yards over Jared Perry's head. The same thing played out in the second half of the Oklahoma State game and pretty much from the opening snap of the Texas game. If Gabbert's first pass is far off-target, it will likely be another grind-it-out performance. The good news is, Colorado's defense simply isn't as good as OSU's or Texas', but it's good enough to make stops if the running game regresses and Gabbert can't throw. Oh yeah, and CU has a solid pass rush, and they'll happily tee off if given the opportunity.

Defensive Line

Remember how I pointed out yesterday that the CU receiving corps has next to no experience whatsoever? Well they've got nothing on the CU D-line. The eight names on the [projected depth chart] combined for 27.0 tackles, 4 sacks, and 2 TFL. As a reference point, Mizzou's Jacquies Smith alone had 34.0 tackles, 1 sack and 3 TFL in 2008, and he didn't really start seeing a ton of playing time until a few games into the season.

Half of the 27.0 tackles listed above (and all of the sacks) came from Herrod, who by default becomes the unquestioned veteran leader of the line. CU fans seem pretty excited about Conrad Obi, but it's all potential right now--he had exactly one tackle in 2008. If he can stay healthy, I think good things could be in store for Curtis Cunningham, but we'll see. The 7.5 tackles on his resume leave something to be desired. As we'll see, the CU LB corps and secondary have quite a bit of potential in 2009, but if the line is a sieve, it won't matter. CU had a mediocre D-line at best in 2008, and unless at least two of the people on the above list (or star recruit DE Nick Kasa) become studs, I don't see how the ranking won't fall in 2009.

DT Curtis Cunningham: 22.0 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 2 PBU, 2 3DS (3rd-Down Stop*)
DE Marquez Herrod: 18.5 tackles, 7.0 TFL/sacks, 6 QBH, 5 3DS
DT Will Pericak: 11.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FR, 1 PBU, 4 3DS
DE Forrest West: 6.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 2 PBU, 1 QBH, 1 3DS

* I really wish other schools recorded defensive stats like CU does.

The Colorado defensive line isn't asked to do a ton, but Curtis Cunningham's tackle total is impressive for a DT. He seems like the type who is rather agile for his position but can be pushed around a bit. In all, you see these individual stats and start to conclude that most of CU's solid sack rates come from blitzing linebackers. Marquez Herrod, the aforementioned "unquestioned veteran leader of the line," has performed pretty well at end, but beyond that, this isn't a highly productive line. Nick Kasa has been slowed by injuries and has managed just 2.0 tackles (1.0 TFL) thus far.

So that brings up an interesting question. Texas aside, no team has blitzed Blaine Gabbert effectively, and even they picked and chose their spots quite well. Gabbert's instincts are not at the same level as Chase Daniel's, but he's been quite effective in seeing blitzes coming and knowing where to go with the ball. Teams who have effectively defended Missouri (without Texas' overall talent advantage) have done so by dropping as many as possible into coverage, and that doesn't appear to be Colorado's style. That could work in Missouri's favor.

Linebackers

Last year, Jeff Smart, Shaun Mohler and Brad Jones combined to make up a solid-not-spectacular LB corps; this year Jones is gone, but a host of potentially capable replacements lie in wait. Jones was the big-time playmaker in the bunch (7 sacks, 7 TFL, 2 forced fumbles), and he will be missed. While Smart and Mohler aren't big-time playmakers (they combined for just six sacks/TFLs) and Jones was (7 sacks, 7 TFL, 2 forced fumbles), every team needs a tackling machine or two, right? The trick will be getting some good blitzing from one of the potential Jones replacements.

There really is a nice mix here between experience (Smart, Mohler, Burton) and guys with high ceilings (Beatty, Rippy, Major), but while I think the high-ceiling guys could be quite strong in 2010, I'm not sure where they lie for 2009. I'm going to say that this unit has a pretty good chance to remain ranked somewhere in the 30s, but I'm not going to call for significant improvement until next year.

Jeff Smart: 59.0 tackles, 3.0 TFL, 1 INT, 1 FF, 2 FR, 3 PBU, 2 QBH, 6 3DS
Marcus Burton: 28.5 tackles, 6.0 TFL, 1 FF, 1 PBU, 2 QBH, 4 3DS
Shaun Mohler: 15.0 tackles, 1 PBU, 1 QBH, 2 3DS
B.J. Beatty: 14.0 tackles, 5.0 TFL, 1 FF, 1 FR, 1 PBU, 3 QBH, 2 3DS
Tyler Ahles: 10.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL, 1 QBH, 1 3DS
Michael Sipili: 10.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL, 2 QBH, 1 3DS
Bryan Stengal: 5.0 tackles, 1 3DS

So far in 2009, it's been a mix of the experienced and high-ceiling guys getting the job done. Jeff Smart has pretty much collected one of everything--INT, FF, FR, TFL, etc.--but is mostly the prototypical tackling machine. The worrisome guys to me are Burton (experienced) and Beatty (high-upside). They are more disruptive types than Smart is, and even though I encourage teams to blitz Gabbert--it usually works out well for Mizzou--if Colorado is going to make a game-turning play on defense, it's as likely to be from Burton and Beatty as anybody else on the team. Also look out for Ahles, who had a pretty good game against K-State. Overall, this is likely CU's best overall defensive unit.

As a whole, CU's tackle-splits (by that, I mean how many tackles each unit has made, and what kind of tackles) point to a defense similar to Nevada's--lots of tackles for loss, lots of big pass plays allowed. Granted, Gabbert had two healthy ankles against Nevada, but I'd much prefer to see that type of defense again, especially if Mizzou's running game has started to improve.

Secondary

The strength of Colorado's defense in 2008, the Buffalo secondary returns a wealth of experience at cornerback...and a wealth of unknowns at safety. If Anthony Perkins and Patrick Mahnke (or anybody else) can do well in the "last line of defense" role, the depth at corner should serve them well. Cha'pelle Brown (71.5 tackles, 1 sack, 5 TFL, 10 pass breakups, 1 FF) was quietly strong last year, and either Jimmy Smith, Benjamin Burney or Jalil Brown should serve as a solid #2 CB. But really, the performance of this unit will come down to the safeties. I wasn't just amazed by the now-graduated Ryan Walters last year, and I think he is replaceable. This isn't the biggest secondary, but it should still remain the strength of the defense and remain ranked somewhere in the teens, if not a smidge higher.

CB Cha'pelle Brown: 40.5 tackles, 6.0 TFL, 1 PBU, 2 QBH, 8 3DS
CB Jimmy Smith: 39.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL, 1 FR, 6 PBU, 4 3DS
S Anthony Perkins: 28.0 tackles, 1 PBU
CB Jalil Brown: 26.5 tackles, 2 INT, 2 FR, 6 PBU, 6 3DS
CB Benjamin Burney: 25.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL, 1 INT, 2 FF, 3 PBU, 1 QBH, 3 3DS
S Ray Polk: 22.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL, 2 QBH, 2 3DS
S Patrick Mahnke: 9.0 tackles, 1 PBU

Last year Colorado had a Top 20 Passing S&P+ defense, and they returned pretty much all cornerbacks who contributed to that unit. They also, however, lost both starting safeties. Against Toledo, this cost them dearly. Colorado simply didn't have the secondary speed to cope when Toledo's skill position players got to the second level of the defense. Since then, things have improved a bit, but this unit is still a big question mark. If Gabbert is throwing reasonably accurate passes, then a hungry Mizzou receiving corps should be just fast enough to give the CU pass defense fits.

Of course, if he's spraying the ball like he has been recently, the secondary is more than good enough to thank him for the charity and make some plays.

Special Teams

I didn't even know Colorado was allowed to have a bad place-kicker. I just assumed that when Mason Crosby left, his replacement would be just as good. Nope. Last year, Aric Goodman was...well, we'll politely call him "iffy." I mean, 5-for-14? Really? ... He MUST improve if Colorado wants to duplicate its strong close-game record from a year ago. They got lucky that he wasn't more of a liability last year. Meanwhile, punting was only a hair better. Matt DiLallo returns, and like Goodman, he must improve. Seriously, how did Colorado not find somebody better than at least Goodman, if not Goodman and DiLallo?

Punt Returns Rank: 115th (Jason Espinoza: 19 returns, 3.2 average)
Net Punting Rank: 109th (Matt DiLallo: 34.6 Net Avg)
Kickoff Returns Rank: 21st (Darrell Scott: 21 returns, 26.9 average; Brian Lockridge: 13 returns, 24.9 average)
Opponents' Kickoff Returns Rank: 12th

Field Goals: 6-for-10 (Long: 54)
PATs: 19-for-20

Well, the good news is, there have been improvements in some areas. Scott (who is out) and Lockridge (who is not) have combined for solid kick returning, and they have covered very well on their own kickoffs. Plus, while Colorado is still one of the worst in the country at field goals (60% is tied for 101st in the country), 60% is certainly an improvement over last year's 36%, right?

Of course, there's also the matter of the atrocious punting and non-existent punt returns threat (I guess Espinoza is the only player on the team who can reliably catch a punt?). Without a series of terrible bounces, Jake Harry should have little trouble flipping the field on punts, and assuming Carl Gettis' ankle is good to go, he could get a couple of decent return opportunities against a team that has already allowed two punt return touchdowns this year.

---

Three Keys to the Game

Field Position

For three quarters against Kansas, Colorado was almost completely listless. They were outscored in Q's 1, 3, and 4 by a combined 23-10. But in Q2, they exploded for 24 points, in part because Todd Reesing almost literally handed them the ball at the KU 3 on one possession (leading to a one-play TD drive), then later was picked off by Jalil Brown, who returned the pick to the 1 (leading to a two-play TD drive). Two drives, three plays, four yards...14 points. That's how you give a desperate team confidence. That's also how a team that manages just 322 yards for the entire game managed to score 34 points. Without easy scoring drives, this team does not score big points. They just don't.

Colorado's Scoring Drives and Sustained Drives

vs Colorado State

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 3
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 1

vs Toledo

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 6
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 1

vs Wyoming

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 4
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 1

vs West Virginia

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 4
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 1

vs Texas

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 1
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 1

vs Kansas

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 3
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 2

vs Kansas State

Sustained drives of 40 yards or more: 2
Scoring drives of 30 yards or less: 0

In conference play, they have averaged just two sustained drives per game, but they have been handed three scores on short fields. Get rid of the short fields, caused mostly by turnovers and special teams mishaps, and you only have to score about 17 points to beat them. Of course, that's easier said than done for Missouri. Coinciding perfectly with Gabbert's injury, Missouri has averaged a -9.8 turnover points differential per game in conference play. Plus, Mizzou has gotten murdered in the field position battle the last two weeks (partially due to turnovers). Hand Colorado 10 points and good field position, and they can absolutely beat you. Turnovers are always key, but never more than against Colorado.

Missouri's defensive line

Simply put, a) Colorado's running backs aren't good enough to create good rushes on their own, and b) Colorado's quarterbacks aren't good enough to make big plays with under pressure. If the Missouri defensive line wins its battles versus the Colorado offensive line, Colorado simply cannot score enough to win, even with a handicapped Missouri offense.

Derrick Washington, Kendial Lawrence, De'Vion Moore

I listed them as keys to the Oklahoma State game as well, and while they performed relatively well, they didn't make enough of a difference to swing the game in Missouri's favor. This one is also quite cut-and-dried: if Missouri can move the ball on the ground and give Blaine Gabbert as little to do as possible, Missouri will score enough points to win the game, barring major mishaps in Key #1 above. If Gabbert is throwing an accurate ball, Mizzou could kill Colorado. If he's not, Mizzou could still win if these three keys are clicking.

Prediction

As I've mentioned time and time again, I always go with what my numbers project here (even last week, when I had the distinct impression that the numbers were full of hooey). The projections say Mizzou by 3.4, so we'll go with Mizzou 24, Colorado 21. That said, I think the best odds are on one of two scenarios: Mizzou's offense finds a rhythm against a much less fast defense, and they win by 17-20 (at least), or Mizzou turns the ball over too much and loses by about 7-10.

I realize I just spent a couple of thousand words talking about Colorado above, but really this game is about Missouri. Colorado is good enough to beat a team playing poorly and bad enough to get killed by a team playing well; therefore it's up to Missouri to play well and move to 5-3. As Gary Pinkel said earlier this week, Mizzou's out of time. It's time for the senior leaders--Sean Weatherspoon, Danario Alexander, Jaron Baston, Jared Perry, Kurtis Gregory--to take over, and it's time for the younger guys--Aldon Smith, De'Vion Moore, Wes Kemp, Jasper Simmons, Will Ebner, Dominique Hamilton, Dan Hoch, Elvis Fisher, Andrew Freaking Jones--to not only make some good plays here and there, but to take over a game.

This game will define Missouri's season. We knew from the start that the NU-OSU-UT swing of games represented probably three of Mizzou's four most losable games, and Mizzou lost all three. The next four games are exceedingly winnable, but it starts with Colorado. If Mizzou wins on Saturday, a 9-3 record and third straight North title is not only conceivable, but quite realistic. If they lose, however, then the rest of this season will instead be defined by scrounging around for another couple of wins and a bowl bid. The North title and a true "eff you" to critics who predicted a major downfall in 2009 will go out the window. It's a damn shame that Gabbert got hurt when he did--if he hadn't, Mizzou might be as good as 5-1 and ranked in the teens right now. But he did, and it's time for everybody else on the team to carry him to a win the way he carried them in St. Louis and Reno. Show us what you've got, Mizzou.

Mizzou-OSU: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:00:18 -0000

More photos » by Sue Ogrocki - AP

Browse more photos »

Confused? Catch up with the BTBS Primer.

Alright, I've got to ask. Would Mack Brown be catching this much crap from Texas reporters and fans if he had played Colt McCoy with a sprained ankle? It's starting to annoy me a little bit. It's not a ligament tear, it's not a hairline fracture, it's not anything that is going to cause long-term problems--it's a sprain. It's going to hurt, and then it's going to get better. And especially considering Gabbert averaged 1.1 yards per pass more than Zac Robinson did on two legs (and as mentioned before, he was two drops away from 350 first-half passing yards...that's, uhh, not bad), I'm just not sure what the problem is here. It's a damn shame that Gabbert got rolled up by Donkey Kong Suh. And it's a damn shame that Missouri has now lost two games in a row in which they maybe could have won with a healthy Gabbert (definitely with Nebraska, maybe with OSU), but...that's football. Players get hurt, and when they feel good enough to play and won't cause long-term problems, they play, even if they're not at 100% effectiveness (and Gabbert absolutely isn't). The end.

(And for those suggesting Gabbert sit out the Texas game because we probably won't win anyway...come on. Gary Pinkel would be run out of town, relatively justifiably, if he actually did that. "He's saying we don't have a chance!" "He's not giving us a chance to win!!" People still resent Pinkel for getting rid of the fullback--how long would they hold a grudge if he more-or-less forfeited the Texas game to maybe do better later in the season? Gabbert should play, and Gabbert will play, and every coach in the country would have it that way.)

Anyway, with that off my chest, let's take a look back at Mizzou-OSU. Once again, the numbers tell you about what you thought they would.

	Mizzou (17)	OSU (33)
Close %	100%
Field Position %	48.5%	62.9%
Leverage %	72.1%	67.1%

TOTAL
EqPts	22.3	21.2
Close Success Rate	41.2%	41.4%
Close PPP	0.33	0.30
Close S&P	0.741	0.717

RUSHING
EqPts	6.5	7.8
Close Success Rate	52.2%	40.0%
Close PPP	0.28	0.22
Close S&P	0.806	0.622
Line Yards/carry	2.03	2.55

PASSING
EqPts	15.8	13.5
Close Success Rate	35.6%	42.9%
Close PPP	0.35	0.38
Close S&P	0.707	0.813
SD/PD Sack Rate	3.2% / 0.0%	0.0% / 0.0%

STANDARD DOWNS
Success Rate	46.9%	53.2%
PPP	0.38	0.31
S&P	0.845	0.838

PASSING DOWNS
Success Rate	26.3%	17.4%
PPP	0.21	0.30
S&P	0.471	0.472

TURNOVERS
Number	4	0
Turnover Pts	19.4	0.0
Turnover Pts Margin	-19.4	+19.4

Q1 S&P	0.966	1.093
Q2 S&P	1.096	0.943
Q3 S&P	0.139	0.644
Q4 S&P	0.477	0.207

1st Down S&P	0.940	0.934
2nd Down S&P	0.779	0.525
3rd Down S&P	0.329	0.605

Projected Pt. Margin	-18.3	+18.3
Actual Pt. Margin	-16	+16

Reactions

Missouri outgained Oklahoma State by 42 yards, but only by 1.1 EqPts. Why? Because yards become much more valuable in opponents' field position, where the likelihood for points grows a lot faster, and Missouri got crushed in the field position game, starting three consecutive drives at their 14 as the game was being decided in the third quarter. OSU made some lovely defensive adjustments at halftime, and quite simply Blaine Gabbert didn't look as good in the second half. I remarked in the live blog that he just looked a lot stiffer after halftime, and nothing clicked for Missouri...as the numbers would attest.

A little more on Gabbert's ankle, just because. It really is a damn shame that the injury happened when it did. Here are Gabbert's season stats, before and after Suh rolled him up:

Before Ankle Injury: 92-for-139 (66.2%), 1,192 yards (8.6 per pass), 11 TD, 0 INT
After Ankle Injury: 34-for-79 (43.0%), 428 yards (5.4 per pass), 1 TD, 5 INT

Now, obviously it's not that simple. Before the injury, he was going against Nevada, Furman, et cetera, and after, he faced Nebraska and Oklahoma State. But still...he's gone from better-than-Ryan-Mallet numbers to worse-than-Josh-Freeman numbers as he's dropped from two good ankles to one. And at least two of the picks were directly related to the injury--the INT of the out route against Nebraska, when he clearly did not get enough juice on the ball, and the final INT against OSU, when his pass was woefully off-target. In pre-injury drives against Nebraska, he was 5-for-8 for 31 yards before the injury...and 12-for-35 for 103 yards and two picks after. With healthy legs, his numbers are still significantly better in those seven quarters, and Missouri potentially wins at least one more game. Damn you, Suh.

(And since I referenced it earlier, Jimmy Costello would probably have generated a better completion percentage than Gabbert but averaged at least a yard fewer per pass, probably two. The offensive gameplan would get extremely conservative with Costello in the game, and we haven't proven yet that our receivers, offensive line, running backs, etc., can move the ball 3-5 yards at a time. We're living and dying by the big play, and with Costello, we'd likely be without the big play.)

(And while we're at it, for the fans giving Pinkel crap for not having a capable backup...who in the Big 12 does have a capable backup? What would happen if Zac Robinson had to miss a game? Todd Reesing? Colt McCoy? Robert Griff...oh wait. Sam Bradf...oh wait. Only Texas Tech has similar quality from starter to backup...and maybe Nebraska, because apparently their starter isn't very good.)

Anyway, I promise I'm moving on now. More thoughts about OSU after the jump.

Field position, field position, field position. When your opponents are running 14% more plays in your territory than you are on theirs, you are giving yourself almost no margin for error. The third quarter was absolutely murderous for Mizzou despite the fact that the defense played damn well. But Mizzou was starting every drive from their 14, and OSU was starting every drive from midfield. When you're down seven to start the quarter, you are simply not giving yourself a chance to win.

(Now, this does come with a bit of a disclaimer: the third Mizzou drive starting at the 14 only started there becuase of the phantom hold penalty on Jasper Simmons' long kickoff return. Without that horrific call, Mizzou starts at OSU's 10, probably gets at least a field goal out of the drive, and cuts OSU's lead to either 27-20 or 27-24. But the stat sheet does not care about terrible penalty calls. The stat sheet is not sympathetic to your whines and cries. The stat sheet does not like you.)
Missouri actually stayed out of Passing Downs better than OSU did, but after some early success for Mizzou, that's where OSU clamped down the best on defense. They were much more mindful of the deep ball, and they relied on Gabbert inability to fire slants and outs as accurately.
Two conclusions can be drawn from the run-pass stats: 1) Missouri should have run more, and 2) OSU should have thrown more. OSU runs to soften you up as much as anything, but they just did not have much success there, and credit to Mizzou's defense for that. The Cowboys kept waiting for Mizzou to fall apart defensively and start getting gashed by the run, and it just didn't happen. Meanwhile, this really was a solid rushing performance for Mizzou, but as quickly as they found themselves in Passing Downs in the second half, the opportunity to work on the run never came about after halftime. Of course, David Yost and company still could have run the ball more, especially in those short-yardage situations late, but that's life. They clearly don't quite trust the run yet (it's not without just cause), and they probably won't during the Texas game either. Starting with Colorado on Halloween, they can start piling up the rushing yards.
Neither team generated any sort of pass rush whatsoever. We knew OSU didn't have much of a rush, but we hoped Mizzou's athletic ends would be getting at the QB more than they have this year. Granted, a less mobile quarterback would have been sacked 2-3 times Saturday night--Zac Robinson did an awesome job of evading the rush, but still...2-3 times still isn't that much, especially considering how many Passing Downs OSU attempted.
If you were to define the traits of a super-young football team, I think #1 would be "Struggles on Third Downs." Success on third downs is the last to come on offense, and...well, it hasn't come yet for Missouri. As Sean Weatherspoon said to that kid in the commercial, in due time. In due time.

Three Positives

The Defense. Yes, OSU was without Dez Bryant and Kendall Hunter. But every offense Missouri has faced this season has performed below its season averages, and considering how much Mizzou's defense was up against the wall, and how much better it performed as the game wore on, they deserve major kudos. Hubert Anyiam had eight catches for 93 yards in the first half...and two for 26 in the second. OSU threw to him seven times in the second half and completed only two. They adjusted almost as well to OSU's offense as OSU's defense did to Mizzou's offense
Danario Alexander. A no-brainer. We fretted often before the season that this team didn't have a #1 receiver. It does, and he's a really, really good one. The passing game clearly isn't clicking on all cylinders, but it is not because of the lack of a go-to guy. You just can't go to the go-to guy on every pass, unfortunately.
The ~~Utes~~ Youths. Of the twelve players who made more than one non-special teams tackle Saturday night (sorry, Chris Willett, you don't count), ten are underclassmen. Andrew Gachkar looked great, Dominique Hamilton looked good, Jasper Simmons and Kenji Jackson looked good, Carl Gettis is back to being a helluva cornerback, Aldon Smith blocked two passes, Robert Steeples and Kip Edwards both got playing time and (aside from one play, where Steeples got burned and Simmons bailed him out) made the most of it. The anchor of this defense is still clearly Sean Weatherspoon, and obviously he will be gone in 2010, but there is a lot to like about this defense's future.

Three Negatives

Turnovers -- too many of them. It does not take a stat nerd to realize that you simply are not going to win many games with a -4 turnover differential. (Yes, here's another disclaimer: it should have been a -2 turnover differential instead, of course. Jasper Simmons' fumble was pretty clearly not a fumble, and Keith Toston fumbled late, but the replay official decided that he just wanted to end the game and go home instead of actually making the correct call. That, and the monitor from which he was basing his decisions was smaller than my work monitor...which isn't very big.)

In fact, since turnover margin is such an easy concept to understand, instead of elaborating further, I will instead point out this wonderful quote from Dave Steckel:
Finally, from the "There's no Such Thing as a Stupid Question Department," I asked Steckel to explain how small a defense's margin for error becomes against a quarterback like Texas' Colt McCoy, who completes 70 percent of his passes. His answer: "30 percent. That's called modern math. You asked."
Turnovers -- not enough of them. I have been quite pleased with the defense's development this year in terms of overall yardage allowed. But in struggling to find a pass rush, playing soft coverage at CB, and not having safeties experienced enough to play the ball better, they have intercepted only two passes. Clearly there are two parts to the turnover differential equation--committing them and forcing them. Mizzou has committed too many recently, but they also haven't forced enough.

Now...it's easy to just say "They need to force more turnovers!" and leave it at that, but that obviously comes with a price. You force turnovers by taking chances, and that opens you up to giving up more big plays. If I had to choose between either giving up few big plays or forcing a lot of turnovers, I'd go with the former. But as the defense gets more and more experienced, as maybe the young Agents Smith start to generate a better pass rush, and as the defensive backs get better at reading instead of reacting (and as the offenses on the schedule get worse), I hope that more takeaways will come.
Drops. Duh. You knew I'd have to mention this at least one more time. I understand that Blaine Gabbert probably throws passes too hard sometimes, but receivers go to college for free, with the understanding that their major job is to not drop passes. Two drops cost Mizzou at least 14 points Saturday night...in a game they lost by 16. This can't happen, especially now, when Gabbert is facing added degree of difficulty. The receivers need to help him out more than they are--only Danario Alexander is handling Gabbert's passes well enough.

Three Keys Revisited

Seen here.

Make Robinson dink and dunk

They have a big-play passing game even without Bryant, and it is imperative that Missouri's to-date strengths of preventing the long ball continue to come through for Mizzou. Allowing short gains and simply making OSU run as many plays as possible to score will benefit Mizzou throughout the course of the game because it will make unproven play-makers make more plays. A breakdown and a 40+ yard gain could get OSU rolling in a major way.

No 40-yard gains for OSU, not even any 30-yarders, but to the extent that OSU's passing game succeeded on Saturday, it was due to the more intermediate passes. Four players caught passes of at least 20 yards, and while Missouri succeeded overall on defense, this did let OSU off the hook a few times.

Third Downs

[W]hen Missouri forces OSU into a Passing Downs situation (third-and-6 or higher), they must make the stop. OSU has been living a blessed life so far in converting quite a few Passing Downs, and Missouri is in for a long night if they let the Cowboys do the same.

Missouri's defense was wonderful on Passing Downs, allowing OSU successes on fewer than 20% and a Passing Downs S&P of 0.472. Unfortunately, Missouri's own 0.471 S&P negated any advantage that came from this.

Run the freaking ball well

We've talked about it all week. As mentioned above, if it doesn't happen this week, it may not happen this season. Run fast, run smart, block well, etc. Just run efficiently and take some pressure off of Blaine Gabbert. That's all we ask.

They did indeed run well...for a while. In the second half, they neither ran well nor got the opportunity. In the decisive third quarter, Missouri backs got two carries...that went for a combined one yard. It was a step in the right direction for the running game, but as mentioned above, it is clear from the play-calling that the coaching staff does not yet trust the running game against a real defense. With Colorado, Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State, and Kansas still on the schedule, the opportunity to get things going will present itself.

Summary

I'll just reiterate what we've been saying for the last week. BIG PICTURE, PERSPECTIVE, POSITIVITY, etc. No matter what happens on Saturday, the back half of Missouri's schedule is ripe for the picking. Nebraska generated a lot of positivity in the off-season by basically feasting on the crap teams on the back half of their schedule, and Missouri has a chance to do the same this year. Missouri just needs to perform well against Texas, stick together, and allow Blaine Gabbert to work through his pains, of both the physical and growing variety, and come out of the experience a better quarterback. With a healthy quarterback and a ton of underclassmen (now's a good time for a reminder: depending on the week, between 25 and 30 members of Missouri's two-deep are freshmen and sophomores) getting more and more experienced, this team could catch fire in the second half of the season if they can just avoid mental implosion in this tough three-game stretch.

It's a damn shame that Missouri couldn't beat either Nebraska or Oklahoma State--with the way the defense played, both games were there for the taking--but it's in the past. If Missouri loses to Texas, we'll read lots of stories and message board posts about how Missouri's falling apart, and in the basement of the North, and...who cares? Me, I'm for wasting sportswriters' time. So, I'd like to hang around and see if we can give 'em all a nice, big shitburger to eat.

Panic Level: Position-by-Position

Bill C. — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:00:31 -0000

For some losses, like last week's Nebraska loss, I don't really feel like talking or thinking about it too much. For others, like this one, I can't really shut up. So to put my verbosity to good use, we're going to walk through each unit for Missouri, and I'm going to give you two ratings: 1) my short-term panic level (on a 1-to-10 scale), and 2) my long-term panic level (same scale).

Quarterback

Short-term panic level: 5 | Long-term panic level: 0

People are questioning the use of Blaine Gabbert in this game, both whether he should have played at all and, more realistically, whether he should have been playing at the end. I say of course he should have been playing--an ankle sprain is not an injury with long-term danger, and even though he was spraying every pass a bit high, let's face it: we don't really have another good quarterback. Maybe Jimmy Costello is better than I'm giving him credit for, but he's probably not better than a one-legged Gabbert, and we knew from the beginning of this season that we were going to live and die with Gabbert this season. Right now, we're not necessarily dying by any means, but we're not living well because he's not living well.

Of course, the only problem with keeping him in the game, especially late, was that his instincts are very clear when behind center. He ran a couple of times on the last series of the game, even though that was the worst possible thing he could do. When he has the ball in his hands, he's not thinking "I should be careful." He's trying to move the ball, even when that might do him further damage.

Anyway, short-term, quarterbacking is definitely a bit of a concern. A sprained ankle needs rest and treatment to heal, and Missouri doesn't have a week off for quite a while. This is going to limit him for the foreseeable future, but he's still going to make some throws that nobody else in the conference can make, and after next week against Texas, he should be able to make quite a few plays even if not 100% healthy.

And long-term, duh. No worries here whatsoever. Gabbert still needs to develop better presence in the pocket--when to tuck and run, when to leave the pocket and roll left or right, et cetera. But that will come with playing time, plain and simple.

Running Back

Short-term panic level: 4 | Long-term panic level: 1

Derrick Washington and De'Vion Moore both took what was given to them yesterday, and in a few instances even took a little more. I was a bit curious whether Moore was actually any better than Kendial Lawrence and whether he would lose his backup role at some point, but in a handful of carries the last couple of weeks, he has looked damn strong and damn quick. Meanwhile, D-Wash looked like D-Wash, never letting the first guy bring him down, falling forward, stepping through tackles, etc. If this performance is what we see the rest of the year, then things will be just fine. And Washington, Moore, and Lawrence all obviously return in 2010, along with Gilbert Moye an a couple more capable commits in Henry Josey and Greg White. For the foreseeable future, this unit will have both depth and diversity.

Wide Receiver

Short-term panic level: 6 | Long-term panic level: 4

It's almost funny how things have unfolded in the last two months. Back in August, we were worried that a) this unit didn't have a go-to guy, b) this unit didn't have a big play threat, and c) Danario Alexander's hands would prevent him from being the solution for (a) and (b). Instead, Danario is absolutely the go-to guy, and one of the best in the conference. Plus, Danario and (to a slightly lesser degree) Jared Perry and Wes Kemp are capable of both catching the deep ball and (in Perry's and Danario's case) taking short passes a long way. The potential big play is one of Missouri's best weapons. But the hands of everybody not named Danario have been a serious issue. We've already said this about six times, but two drops more or less made the difference in the game last night. If Jerrell Jackson keeps his eye on a slant and doesn't let it bounce right off of his hands, it's a 10-yard gain for Missouri instead of a pick six for Oklahoma State. If Wes Kemp, uhh, closes his hands at the right time on a gorgeous bomb from Blaine Gabbert, Missouri not only uncorks a 60-yard (at least) gain late in the first half, but even if they don't score, they don't give the ball back to OSU in time for the Cowboys to drive down and score with seconds left in the half. Those two drops resulted in at least a 14-point swing for OSU, and that's if Missouri doesn't score after Kemp's drop.

This isn't a new phenomenon, though last night was the first time it truly cost Missouri. When you've got a quarterback like Gabbert, who is capable of firing 100-mph fastballs on just about any route, at the college level you are going to have some drops. Hell, at the pro level you're going to have some drops--not just anybody could catch John Elway's passes, right? But we are halfway through the season, and the guys on the field need to be getting better at catching the fastballs, and they are really not. This is at least a bit of a long-term concern simply because the 2010 Missouri team won't feature either Danario or Perry. Guys like Kemp and Jackson (and T.J. Moe, and Brandon Gerau, and Rolandis Woodland, and L'Damian Washington) are going to have to step up, both as every-down threats and simply guys with reliable hands. All of the guys I listed above are freshmen or sophomores right now, and they will quite possibly grow into the role.

I really do like the long-term potential of Kemp, especially. He's not nearly as fast as Danario, but he's got potential both as a deep-ball threat and an over-the-middle weapon. He's just had a couple of really bad weeks, between almost getting decapitated by Ndamukong Suh last week (I honestly thought his drop last night was due to a case of alligator arms, but the replay showed that he really did just close his hands at the wrong time...which, honestly, is better than if he were starting to get a little scared) and being the perpetrator in one of Missouri's two killer mistakes, but he's a sophomore, and he's already shown ridiculous growth between years one and two. He'll likely be fine, but until he proves that he will be fine, it's hard to make a 100% confident assumption.

Tight End

Short-term panic level: 10 | Long-term panic level: 8

Last night, when Blaine Gabbert had Andrew Jones wide open on the goal line on a fourth-quarter drive (one of the two that stalled on fourth down), he ended up leaving the pocket and throwing the ball away. That was the moment I realized that our tight end problem has gone from "Tight ends are unreliable" to "It doesn't matter what the tight ends are doing anymore because Gabbert doesn't even look to them." Andrew Jones and Michael Egnew were invisible enough over the first month of the season (to the point where Gary Pinkel started Beau Brinkley over both of them at Nevada to send a message) that Gabbert apparently doesn't even trust them enough to see them as an option. Considering where we thought we were before the season--Jones as a reliable 3rd-and-7 threat, Egnew as the guy with red zone potential--this is extremely alarming. Gabbert desperately needs another consistent weapon to complement Danario and Perry, and while we all thought Jones was just the man, it hasn't happened. As fans, we cannot truly determine why, but if Missouri really is going to go 9-3 this year (which is certainly still a possibility), they need Jones and Gabbert to reconnect. Obviously everybody in this unit returns next year--Jones, Egnew, Brinkley, and redshirting freshman Alex Sanders--but they need to buy Gabbert a steak, get on his good side, and get going with the rapport they had in the spring, when Jones and Egnew were Gabbert's top two targets.

Offensive Line

Short-term panic level: 5 | Long-term panic level: 3

It's pretty clear that, as is usually the case, we were underestimating the loss of starters Colin Brown and Ryan Madison from last year's offensive line. That, combined with a tweak in technique that they apparently made this summer, have resulted in some early growing pains with this line. For the most part, I did like what they did last night against a decent OSU front seven, at least in the first half. Once Missouri fell behind and the OSU secondary started playing better, it ended up predictably affecting how OSU's front seven performed as well, and Missouri didn't have as many options available to them down the stretch. That said, though, they absolutely get a passing grade for last night's game.

Long-term, things are still pretty rosy. Four of Missouri's current five starters--Elvis Fisher, Austin Wuebbels, Tim Barnes, and Dan Hoch--will return in 2010, and only Kurtis Gregory does not. He is a strong lineman, and he will be missed, but Missouri will be in much better shape to replace him, as both Jayson Palmgren and J.T. Beasley will be juniors and are getting plenty of reps this year. That, combined with freshman Jack Meiners getting some playing time, mean that O-line depth should be a strength in 2010. I still like the potential of the line this year, and I think that with hindsight the early struggles should have been a bit predictable.

Defensive End

Short-term panic level: 6 | Long-term panic level: 2

From a run-support standpoint, there is absolutely nothing to complain about with this line. Aldon Smith, Jacquies Smith, and Briant Coulter all stand up to blocks well and are excellent at pursuit. Good mixture of speed and size. But they HAVE to start rushing the passer better. Aldon Smith is pretty reliably going to make a couple of plays a game--last night it was a couple of timely blocked passes. But Jacquies really hasn't been very disruptive at all, and even though Missouri got in Robinson's face a few times last night, the pocket never completely closed in on him, and he was always able to escape and make a throw, even if he was just throwing the ball away.

Now...Aldon Smith is a redshirt freshman and Jacquies a true sophomore. It's easy to forget that sometimes, but while their potential is clear, consistency comes with playing time, and clearly neither has had enough yet. We've got a potential all-conference performer in Agent Aldon and a potentially solid three-year starter in Agent Jacquies, but they're just not ready to make every-down contributions yet. If there's a concern here, it's depth. Brad Madison has been on the field this season, but you couldn't tell it from the stats. Marcus Malbrough looked decent in junk-time against Furman, but that's it. Hopefully one of the redshirting freshmen--either Michael Sam or Brayden Burnett--can be counted on to make a contribution next season; otherwise we'll be leaning on Smith and Smith even more next year with Coulter's departure.

Defensive Tackle

Short-term panic level: 2 | Long-term panic level: 4

LOVE what this unit did last night. Jaron Baston was great, and I noticed Dominique Hamilton quite a bit. While Missouri's run defense hasn't been as good this year as last, I thought it was an encouraging sign that, against an OSU team with a rock-solid offensive line and a very good between-the-tackles runner in Keith Toston, Missouri held OSU's running backs to just 87 yards on 27 carries (3.2 per carry). It was their best performance of the year, and if Missouri can count on that for the rest of the year, this defense will continue to look damn good.

For 2010 and beyond, there is a concern here simply because Baston is a senior. Hamilton and Terrell Resonno are the current projected 2010 starters, and while both have looked decent at times, they've clearly been the #2 and #3 DTs (in some order) behind Baston. They will need to continue to develop for Missouri not to drop off here. Of course, two young guys could make this unit a severe strength in the future: Marvin Foster and Sheldon Richardson. Foster was quickly working his way into the DT rotation in August before injuring his knee and redshirting. Assuming he's at full strength in 2010 (and with this staff, a knee injury is child's play), he could be an immediate contributor. Meanwhile, Richardson is an obvious X-factor starting in 2011, assuming he still attends Missouri (and with the comments from his JUCO coach a couple of months ago, that seems like a comfortable assumption for now).

With Resonno, Hamilton, Foster, and maybe Jimmy Burge or George White, this unit could still be strong in 2010, especially if Resonno or Hamilton make a Baston-esque leap between their sophomore and junior seasons. And in 2011, with all of those players back with Richardson added to the mix, they could be excellent. The only reason I put the long-term panic level at a 4 is that it's still an assumption that Resonno or Hamilton will make that leap, and as I said with Wes Kemp above, until it happens, it's at least a little bit of a concern.

Linebacker

Short-term panic level: 1 | Long-term panic level: 2

Even without Will Ebner, I had no complaints with this unit last night. Sean Weatherspoon was outstanding, and Luke Lambert played well, even forcing a late fumble that, uhh, was bafflingly called a non-fumble by the replay official (seriously, get the replay official a bigger monitor please). Andrew Gachkar was around the ball quite a bit, even if he didn't make a ton of plays, and Zaviar Gooden made an outstanding play on an option run. With the strong run defense Missouri showed, clearly the linebackers had a role in that.

Missouri obviously loses 'Spoon after this season, but the long-term prospects are still bright. Ebner, Gachkar and Lambert return in 2010, and with Gooden, Donovan Bonner and hopefully Joshua Tatum assuming backup roles...yeah, let's just say that at least two, and potentially three of Missouri's backups would have been starting LBs for Mizzou anytime between 2000 and 2005. I'm really excited about this unit, even without SPOOOON.

Defensive Back

Short-term panic level: 3 | Long-term panic level: 2

Don't know what to think about this unit. Hubert Anyiam had a career day last night, but as the offense was falling apart in the second half last night, the secondary continuously made plays and prevented OSU from running away with the game. Seriously, with the field position advantage OSU had last night, they very well could have ended up winning something like 45-17 or something, but they didn't. The Carl Gettis Treatment looked good, Jasper Simmons looked good, and after getting burned once on a double move (and bailed out by Simmons), Robert Steeples got a ton of playing time and did not allow Anyiam to do much of anything on a series of Q4 third-down passes. I'm not sure why Steeples was in there that much--was Kevin Rutland being punished for allowing the slant-route TD on the last play of the first half?--but he acquitted himself well. I still wish we were seeing more out of our boy Kenji Jackson, but this unit has still looked good for most of 2009...

...and all of the major contributors return for 2010. Only Del Howard and Hardy Ricks depart after this year, and no offense to them, but I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over that. Gettis, Rutland, Steeples, Kip Edwards and Munir Prince all return at CB, and Simmons, Jackson, and Jarrell Harrison all look like keepers at safety. And if a redshirting freshman like Matt White forces his way into the rotation in 2010, all the better.

In all, the hopes for this defense in 2010 and beyond are quite high. By the end of this season, Aldon Smith, Will Ebner, Andrew Gachkar, Carl Gettis, Jasper Simmons and others will have all proven themselves at a pretty high level, and with guys like Dominique Hamilton, Terrell Resonno, Jacquies Smith, Zaviar Gooden, Kevin Rutland, Kenji Jackson, Robert Steeples and Jarrell Harrison all having shown flashes of really nice play, the 2010 defense will be as deep a play-making defense as Missouri will have had under Gary Pinkel, even with the loss of Jaron Baston and Sean Weatherspoon.

Special Teams

Short-term panic level: 3 | Long-term panic level: 1

An absolutely dreadful special teams effort last night, but it's hard to panic over that considering how good special teams have been for Missouri. Grant Ressel made his only FG, but karma bit Jake Harry IV in the ass, as he didn't get a single good bounce on any of his kicks. We have gotten very used to getting great rolls on his rugby kicks, and it just didn't happen last night. That, and OSU made a nice strategic play of having what seemed like two return men--one deep and one at mid-range to catch some of the punts and make sure the rolls didn't happen. Between Missouri's second-half three-and-outs and struggles in the punt game, they got drilled in the field position battle, especially in the second half.

Meanwhile, OSU broke off a couple of nice kickoff returns, which isn't entirely surprising--Perrish Cox is one of the best return men in the game--and thanks to horrific officiating (sorry, I can't let it go just yet), Missouri's own kickoff returns were major liabilities. Jasper Simmons' first great kick return was called back to a phantom hold (but hey, how much damage could a 70-yard net penalty do, really? Not much, right? Yeah...), and he lost a fumble in which his knee appeared to be down (SERIOUSLY...get the freaking replay official a bigger monitor...), but in the box score it says that kick returns were a liability.

Long-term, things look good here. Harry has been a great asset, and he is a senior, but honestly, Missouri's punting scheme is good, and whoever wins next year's punting battle (Matt Grabner? Trey Barrow? Grant Ressel?), I think this will still be a relative strength. Plus, Carl Gettis looking better and better on punt returns, and Simmons has shown at least strong straight-line speed and the capability of breaking a long return.

And we've got Ressel at place-kicker for another two years, so there's that.

Coaching

Short-term panic level: 3 | Long-term panic level: 0

I'm sorry, but I just cannot get myself that worked up about the coaching staff. I know we always look for somebody to blame when things go poorly, and I disagreed as much as anybody with David Yost's decision to call empty-backfield sets late in the game, but you know what? When you are calling 60-80 plays per game, you are going to make mistakes. Dave Christensen obviously made plenty of mistakes, and he was apparently good enough at his job to score a Mountain West head coaching position. Meanwhile, one of the best coordinators in the country--OU's Kevin Wilson--is getting destroyed by the OU fanbase for sucking...and he's one of the best coordinators in the game. Missouri fans are spoiled by previous successes, but in his first year on the job, Yost is already a decent coordinator, and when Missouri gains in experience, he will probably start looking like a really good one. People calling for his head or already falling back on the dumb old "Gary Pinkel's too stubborn!!!!1!!!" line are...well, they're being ridiculous. Get over yourselves--this is a good offensive staff, and it will only get better. Blaine Gabbert was two drops away from having 360 first-half passing yards last night. It takes good play-calling for that to happen.

Meanwhile, I don't think any of us can have much complaint with the job Dave Steckel and the defensive staff are doing, right? Or are we still managing to be pissed at them too? You tell me.

---

I know I'm either a) preaching to the choir or b) yelling at people who have their minds made up here (and are more than willing to yell back), but man oh man...BIG PICTURE HERE, PEOPLE. Most of us did not expect to be better than 4-2 right now, and now that it's happened, we're flying off the handle. But anyway. Time to enjoy the rest of the weekend.

Mizzou Links, 10-7-09

Bill C. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:51:09 -0000

An outbreak of MU-NU smack talk, a ZouDave video, picks, lots of fanposts, lots of hits (for us)...was yesterday the best day ever for Rock M Nation?

Mizzou-Nebraska Links!

The Missourian: What you need to know for MU-Nebraska parking
- The Maryland Avenue parking garage and Parking Structure No. 7 near University Hospital will not be open to the public for parking as it typically is for Saturday home games. These garages will be restricted to student and employee parking only, Joy said.
- Because of these garage restrictions, there will be about 2,000 fewer game-day parking spaces than normal.
- The five on-campus garages open to the public free of charge are Conley Avenue, Hitt Street, Turner Avenue, University Avenue and Virginia Avenue.
The Missourian: Heavy rain possible during Missouri-Nebraska game Thursday
The Trib (Dave Matter): Behind the Numbers: MU-NU, Part II

Here's something you can't really measure in numbers but could be a factor on Thursday. Defense, especially run defense, is played with controlled rage, a channeled emotion. And, barring a torrential monsoon, the atmosphere on Thursday promises a setup to favor those emotions. In Missouri's last two home games against Nebraska, the Tigers fed off that atmosphere and smothered the Nebraska run, holding them to minus-2 yards on 19 carries in 2005 (thanks to a bushel of sacks of Zac Taylor), and in 2007 limited the Huskers to 3.0 yards a carry. Last year's game in Lincoln, MU was even better against the run, holding Nebraska to 2.3 yards a pop. Much will depend on Missouri's ability to control the line of scrimmage, and for that, look no further than the man lined up next to nose tackle Jaron Baston. This is a huge game for D-tackles Dominique Hamilton and Terrell Resonno. They cannot be pushed around inside. Those two have to hold their ground in the trenches.

That reminds me of a comment Resonno made to me back in August, something he can prove against the Huskers: "You got to be nasty to play defensive line. When I first got here, I didn’t know what that meant. But I’m nasty, though. I can get nasty. Sometimes I can be nice, but if you push my buttons, I can be a nasty mother... . So, that’s about it."
The Trib: Running woes dragging Tigers down some
MUtigers.com: Football Fan Primer
Dr. Saturday: On the Spot: 'Husker D can't be back in Black until it reverses track at Missouri
Nebraska currently leads the nation in scoring defense, giving up seven points per game on just 286 yards. Of course, there are only so many concrete conclusions you can take away from an early schedule against Sun Belt also-rans Florida Atlantic, Arkansas State and Louisiana-Lafayette, interrupted only by the relative offensive juggernaut of Virginia Tech, which managed to rip out Nebraska's heart with a single long ball despite doing nothing offensively the rest of the day. By contrast, Missouri will be wielding the nation's 16th-ranked offense and one of its most efficient passers, Blaine Gabbert, who has 11 touchdowns, zero picks and has lived up to all of the recruiting hype in his first four starts. This will be the big litmus test of whether the Cornhuskers' pass defense, their Achilles heel over the past three seasons, has made the meaningful progress the numbers have suggested so far.
The Missourian: Pelini wants Nebraska's defense to earn Blackshirts
PowerMizzou: The here and now
"I see a lot of similarities between that team and this team," linebacker Sean Weatherspoon said. "But you really won't know until you go out there every week. You've got to go out there and grow as a team, and that's what the 2007 team did. The seniors did a great job leading, and hopefully we can put it together again."

One difference, however, is the confidence level. This isn't 2003, when Missouri beat Nebraska for the first time in 24 years. This isn't 2005, when Missouri extended its winning streak at home over Nebraska to two. The Tigers have won four of the last six meetings by an average of 26 points. In fact, only a handful of players saw the field the last time Missouri lost to Nebraska, in 2006.

"I'm one of the very few guys that was here the last time they beat us," defensive tackle Jaron Baston. "I think about it a lot. I still want to continue that winning tradition that Missouri has over Nebraska."
PowerMizzou: Tigers vs Huskers: The Variables
Post-Dispatch: MU has something to prove
Post-Dispatch: Are the Nebraska Cornhuskers behind the '08 ball?
KC Star: Missouri hopes to get running game going against Nebraska
KC Star (Campus Corner): Munir Prince Out for Mizzou
KC Star (Campus Corner): "Runaround Suh" - What's Your Favorite Sports song? (I almost didn't post this because of the brutal title)
Lincoln Journal Star: Zac Lee expected to play key role in battle against Tigers (You think so, huh? The quarterback is expected to play a key role?)
Omaha World-Herald: Mum's the word for MU's Blaine Gabbert
Omaha World-Herald: Missouri natives will get reacquainted
Nebraska State Paper: All Eyes on Blaine
Palestra.net: Missouri Prepared for Nebraska

SB Nation - Dominique Hamilton

Mizzou-KSU: Beyond the Box Score

Mizzou(38)

K-State(12)

"This Team Can't Score in the Second Half"

Three Positives

Three Negatives

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

Mizzou Links, 11-12-09

MIZZOU-BAYLOR: ROCK M PHOTO GALLERY

Mizzou-Baylor: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Offense

Quarterback

Running Back

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

Offensive Line

---

Defense

Defensive Line

Linebackers

Secondary

Special Teams

---

Three Keys to the Game

Prediction

Mizzou-Colorado: Beyond the Box Score

Mizzou(36)

Buffs(17)

Reactions

Three Positives

Three Negatives

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

The North in 2010

Missouri

Colorado

Iowa State

Kansas

Kansas State

Nebraska

Mizzou-Colorado: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Offense

Quarterback

Running Back

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

Offensive Line

---

Defense

Defensive Line

Linebackers

Secondary

Special Teams

---

Three Keys to the Game

Prediction

Mizzou-OSU: Beyond the Box Score

Mizzou(17)

OSU(33)

Reactions

Three Positives

Three Negatives

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

Panic Level: Position-by-Position

Quarterback

Running Back

Wide Receiver

Tight End

Offensive Line

Defensive End

Defensive Tackle

Linebacker

Defensive Back

Special Teams

Coaching

Mizzou Links, 10-7-09

Mizzou
(38)

K-State
(12)

Mizzou
(36)

Buffs
(17)

Mizzou
(17)

OSU
(33)