SB Nation - Andrew Jones

Targets and Catches (Part Two, a.k.a. Will Franklin's Redemption)

Bill C. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:00:17 -0000

Image via The Trib's G.J. McCarthy

You may have noticed that, somewhere around 1pm yesterday, the title of yesterday's "Targets and Catches" post changed to "Targets and Catches (Part One)." That's because I figured out the next direction I wanted to take the concept of targets and couldn't wait to get started on it.

As discussed yesterday, the concept of targets (catches + incomplete passes intended for a given receiver) versus catches is a pretty good one, despite the likely flaws in the ways target data is collected (dropped/tipped passes that become interceptions don't have target data attached, not every scorekeeper probably records targets the same way, etc.). It allows us to look into a receiver's reliability in ways that simpler measures do not, and once national data is collected on this (offseason project #12,424), it might give us a way to measure a quarterback's performance independent of the quality of his receivers (hey Uribe Auction, here's how we get to Receiver Independent Passing Stats, or RIPS...I love it when a plan comes together).

But simply looking at a players Catch% (Catches per Target) does a disservice to those who are likely to run deeper, lower-percentage routes. How about we do this as well: create a Yards Per Target measure. Yards Per Catch is a good way to measure a receiver's explosiveness, and wouldn't the incorporation of target data create something that shows us both explosiveness and reliability? Let's try that.

Below are tables for 2006-09 giving us the following information:

Catches
Yards
Catch% (Catches divided by Targets)
Yards Per Target

2006

2006 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Chase Coffman	TE	58	638	65.2%	7.2
Martin Rucker	TE	53	511	77.9%	7.5
Will Franklin	WR	48	829	57.8%	10.0
Jared Perry	WR	37	429	67.3%	7.8
Brad Ekwerekwu	WR	32	430	64.0%	8.6
Tommy Saunders	WR	25	271	73.5%	8.0
Danario Alexander	WR	15	251	71.4%	12.0
Jason Ray	WR	6	50	40.0%	3.3
Tony Temple	RB	6	34	85.7%	4.9
Earl Goldsmith	RB	5	59	100.0%	11.8
Greg Bracey	WR	3	79	50.0%	13.2
Marcus Woods	RB	2	11	40.0%	2.2
Jimmy Jackson	RB	1	-2	50.0%	-1.0
Andrew Hoskins	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	291	3,590	66.0%	8.1

Here's where we start to see the value of Will Franklin. The 'Copta had an awful catch rate this season, but as we see here, a) he made up for it with his explosiveness, and b) being a deep threat means you're probably seeing more low-percentage passes. Meanwhile, tight ends running high-percentage routes will have good catch rates, but their Yards Per Target figures show that while it's good to have high-percentage targets, there isn't necessarily a lot of explosiveness there.

Two other interesting things to note:

1) Danario was very clearly showing his big-play potential early on. It really is a damn shame that he ended up having to fight so many injuries, but on the bright side, if he hadn't, he'd have almost certainly gone pro last year.

2) Clearly we should have been passing to Earl Goldsmith more often. Ahem.

2007

Image via the inestimable Bill Carter

2007 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Martin Rucker	TE	84	834	77.8%	7.7
Jeremy Maclin	WR	80	1,055	72.1%	9.5
Chase Coffman	TE	52	531	80.0%	8.2
Will Franklin	WR	49	709	64.5%	9.3
Tommy Saunders	WR	41	397	74.5%	7.2
Danario Alexander	WR	37	417	77.1%	8.7
Jared Perry	WR	13	152	65.0%	7.6
Derrick Washington	RB	10	70	71.4%	5.0
Jason Ray	WR	8	61	80.0%	6.1
Tony Temple	RB	7	68	77.8%	7.6
Jimmy Jackson	RB	6	30	100.0%	5.0
Earl Goldsmith	RB	4	20	66.7%	3.3
Greg Bracey	WR	3	53	33.3%	5.9
Blake May	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	394	4,397	73.2%	8.2

And here's where the numbers even out for Senor Goldsmith.

Even though his YPT dipped in 2007, Franklin was still a decent weapon here, averaging over 9.0 per target (which appears to be a pretty good number) and, as we must not forget, becoming one helluva downfield blocker for Maclin. In all, Chase Coffman was the most reliable target this season, but obviously the WRs were more dangerous, even though they didn't really thrust too many nunchuks.

(Non-RMN regulars just read and re-read that last sentence 5-6 times, then gave up on figuring it out what it meant. Here's the explanation.)

2008

Bill Carter again

2008 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Jeremy Maclin	WR	102	1,260	75.6%	9.3
Chase Coffman	TE	90	987	88.2%	9.7
Tommy Saunders	WR	72	833	78.3%	9.1
Jared Perry	WR	41	567	68.3%	9.5
Derrick Washington	RB	29	277	76.3%	7.3
Danario Alexander	WR	26	329	60.5%	7.7
Andrew Jones	TE	20	146	83.3%	6.1
Jerrell Jackson	WR	9	98	69.2%	7.5
Earl Goldsmith	WR	5	58	83.3%	9.7
Michael Egnew	TE	4	22	50.0%	2.8
Jimmy Jackson	RB	3	26	75.0%	6.5
Wes Kemp	WR	1	15	50.0%	7.5
Jon Gissinger	TE	1	10	100.0%	10.0
Brandon Gerau	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
Forrest Shock	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	403	4,628	76.0%	8.7

Here's where Chase Coffman became the best tight end we'll ever see. He was so reliable that throwing to him actually resulted in more yards per target than Jeremy Maclin, All-American. Here's also where Jared Perry, a.k.a. Will Franklin 2.0, began to show value. He was a reasonably reliable option his first couple of years (obviously targeted much more in 2006 than 2007, when Maclin emerged), but while he still couldn't hit 70% from a Catch% perspective, his big-play ability went up a notch, and he went from averaging 7-8 yards per target to over 9. Meanwhile, Jerrell Jackson registered with numbers very similar to Perry's freshman numbers, albeit on a small sample size.

2009

Yup, Bill Carter.

2009 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Danario Alexander	WR	107	1,644	73.8%	11.3
Jared Perry	WR	46	695	53.5%	8.1
Jerrell Jackson	WR	37	458	60.7%	7.5
Wes Kemp	WR	23	335	52.3%	7.6
Derrick Washington	RB	23	99	69.7%	3.0
Andrew Jones	TE	7	39	58.3%	3.3
Rolandis Woodland	WR	4	23	66.7%	3.8
Michael Egnew	TE	3	25	60.0%	5.0
De'Vion Moore	RB	3	13	100.0%	4.3
Kendial Lawrence	RB	2	42	100.0%	21.0
Brandon Gerau	WR	2	19	66.7%	6.3
T.J. Moe	WR	2	8	40.0%	1.6
Gilbert Moye	RB	1	5	50.0%	2.5
TOTAL	ALL	260	3,405	63.9%	8.4

And here's where we find out just how amazing Danario Alexander has been this season (as if there were any doubt). Looking only at receivers who were targeted at least ten times in a given season, Alexander's 11.3 per-target average is topped only by ... 2006 Danario Alexander, who was targeted only 21 times. For ~~Domino Axelrod~~ Danario to be both this reliable and this explosive has just been amazing.

Here are the overall averages per position:

WR: 67.3% catch rate, 8.7 yards per target
TE: 77.2% catch rate, 8.2 yards per target
RB: 75.0% catch rate, 5.5 yards per target

So for the last four seasons, here are your top ten in terms of Yards Per Target (with a minimum of ten targets):

Danario Alexander (2006): 12.0 per target (on 21 targets)
Danario Alexander (2009): 11.3 (145)
Will Franklin (2006): 10.0 (83)
Chase Coffman (2008): 9.7 (102)
Jeremy Maclin (2007): 9.5 (111)
Jared Perry (2008): 9.5 (60)
Jeremy Maclin (2008): 9.3 (135)
Will Franklin (2007): 9.3 (76)
Tommy Saunders (2008): 9.1 (92)
Danario Alexander (2007): 8.7 (48)

Will Franklin, you are absolved.

Danario Alexander, you officially have a case for having been the best receiver in Mizzou history.

Targets and Catches (Part One)

Bill C. — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:00:15 -0000

One of the measures I am looking to track more in-depth in the future, in terms of my play-by-play data, is the notion of catches versus targets. In the play-by-play data exists a line that I have yet allowed to go unrecorded: "Pass incomplete to _____." Obviously I record that the pass is incomplete, but I have not really paid attention to who the pass was intended for. It's a rather objective measure -- does everybody record who a pass was intended for the same way? If the QB is throwing the ball away and it goes 20 feet over a certain receiver's head, does it count as an incompletion "to" that receiver? Does every score-keeper even keep track of this? Plus, if a ball is tipped by a receiver and intercepted (e.g. Jerrell Jackson in the Oklahoma State game), the "intended for" bit isn't recorded. Clearly this is a piece of data that is rather inconsistent.

That said, this is also one of those measures where you figure that the inconsistencies balance out over time. Even if it doesn't paint a perfect picture, it probably tells an interesting story. Therefore, let's take a look at how our view of a receiver's (or quarterback's) performance changes when adding in "intended for" data.

The categories below are:

Catches: receptions
Targets: receptions + incomplete passes intended for that receiver (as recorded in the play-by-play data). In general, you can think of those incomplete passes as either being a) dropped or b) too well-covered to be completed. If your QB is accurate, you will obviously catch more of your targeted passes, but if you struggle to get open and clear space from the guy covering you, a lot more of your targeted passes are going to fall incomplete.
Catch%: the percentage of "targets" a receiver catches
Target%: the percentage of a team's overall targets aimed at a specific receiver

Without further ado, let's take a look at the last four years of Mizzou "target" data and see what it tells us.

2006

Image via Phoebe Sexton / Columbia Missourian

2006 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Chase Coffman	58	89	65.2%	20.2%
Will Franklin	48	83	57.8%	18.8%
Martin Rucker	53	68	77.9%	15.4%
Jared Perry	37	55	67.3%	12.5%
Brad Ekwerekwu	32	50	64.0%	11.3%
Tommy Saunders	25	34	73.5%	7.7%
Danario Alexander	15	21	71.4%	4.8%
Jason Ray	6	15	40.0%	3.4%
Tony Temple	6	7	85.7%	1.6%
Greg Bracey	3	6	50.0%	1.4%
Marcus Woods	2	5	40.0%	1.1%
Earl Goldsmith	5	5	100.0%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	1	2	50.0%	0.5%
Andrew Hoskins	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	291	441	66.0%	100.0%

WRs: 60.1% of targets
TEs: 35.6%
RBs: 4.3%

Before looking at ensuing seasons, it is hard to get a grasp on what these numbers actually mean, but a couple of things should stick out pretty quickly. First, thanks to a midseason bout with the dropsies, Chase Coffman's numbers were only decent, not great. Martin Rucker was a rather automatic target at TE, but Coffman wasn't amazing. Meanwhile, if your #1 WR is only catching 58% of the passes thrown at him, that is going to do a number on your completion percentage.

Anyway, before we try to interpret this too much, let's take a look at how 2007 unfolded.

2007

Image via ESPN.com

2007 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Jeremy Maclin	80	111	72.1%	20.6%
Martin Rucker	84	108	77.8%	20.1%
Will Franklin	49	76	64.5%	14.1%
Chase Coffman	52	65	80.0%	12.1%
Tommy Saunders	41	55	74.5%	10.2%
Danario Alexander	37	48	77.1%	8.9%
Jared Perry	13	20	65.0%	3.7%
Derrick Washington	10	14	71.4%	2.6%
Jason Ray	8	10	80.0%	1.9%
Greg Bracey	3	9	33.3%	1.7%
Tony Temple	7	9	77.8%	1.7%
Earl Goldsmith	4	6	66.7%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	6	6	100.0%	1.1%
Blake May	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	394	538	73.2%	100.0%

WRs: 63.9% of targets
TEs: 32.2%
RBs: 3.9%

Despite a deep, experienced cast of receivers (Rucker and Franklin were seniors, Coffman and Saunders were juniors), Jeremy Maclin came out of nowhere to become Chase Daniel's most trusted receiver. His 72% Catch% was much higher than Will Franklin's 58% from the season before. Meanwhile, MotherRucker stayed right around 78% while Chase Coffman improved dramatically, from 65% to 80%. Franklin did improve to 65%, but he was still a far less reliable target than others around him. Of course, he obviously ran deeper routes than guys like Coffman, Rucker or Saunders, so that might have something to do with it. Then again, were his routes any different than those of Maclin? Maclin still outshone him in that regard.

With Maclin and an extra year of experience for Chase Daniel, the overall Catch% rose from 66% to 73% in 2007. This, of course, tells us nothing about how many passes Daniel chose to throw away (which would just go in the play-by-play as "pass incomplete" with no "intended for" information), but it does show that Daniel was completing one more pass for roughly every 14 catchable balls in 2007, and that could make a difference of 2-3 completions per game.

2008

Image via Chris Lee / Post-Dispatch

2008 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Jeremy Maclin	102	135	75.6%	25.5%
Chase Coffman	90	102	88.2%	19.2%
Tommy Saunders	72	92	78.3%	17.4%
Jared Perry	41	60	68.3%	11.3%
Danario Alexander	26	43	60.5%	8.1%
Derrick Washington	29	38	76.3%	7.2%
Andrew Jones	20	24	83.3%	4.5%
Jerrell Jackson	9	13	69.2%	2.5%
Michael Egnew	4	8	50.0%	1.5%
Earl Goldsmith	5	6	83.3%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	3	4	75.0%	0.8%
Wes Kemp	1	2	50.0%	0.4%
Jon Gissinger	1	1	100.0%	0.2%
Brandon Gerau	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
Forrest Shock	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	403	530	76.0%	100.0%

WRs: 66.6% of targets
TEs: 25.5%
RBs: 7.9%

In 2008, Missouri lost Martin Rucker and his 78% catch rate but still improved as a team, from 73% to 76%. Danario Alexander aside (this was the year he was recovering from knee injuries and was clearly not as confident/aggressive a receiver), just about everybody showed improvement. Coffman improved to a sickening 88% (that means that eight of every nine balls that were thrown at him and were even remotely catchable, were caught...yeah, he deserved the Mackey Award), Saunders improved to 78%, which is the highest you'll see from a highly-targeted receiver, and even Maclin improved to 76%. Having a ton of reps with the same quarterback helped a ton, I'm sure, as did the fact that said quarterback (Daniel) was as automatic as a computer in his reads, especially over the first half of the season.

So what happens when you lose your quarterback and your top three targets? As shocking as it may sound, your numbers go down!

2009

Image via the one, the only Bill Carter

2009 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Danario Alexander	107	145	73.8%	35.6%
Jared Perry	46	86	53.5%	21.1%
Jerrell Jackson	37	61	60.7%	15.0%
Wes Kemp	23	44	52.3%	10.8%
Derrick Washington	23	33	69.7%	8.1%
Andrew Jones	7	12	58.3%	2.9%
Rolandis Woodland	4	6	66.7%	1.5%
Michael Egnew	3	5	60.0%	1.2%
T.J. Moe	2	5	40.0%	1.2%
De'Vion Moore	3	3	100.0%	0.7%
Brandon Gerau	2	3	66.7%	0.7%
Kendial Lawrence	2	2	100.0%	0.5%
Gilbert Moye	1	2	50.0%	0.5%
TOTAL	260	407	63.9%	100.0%

WRs: 86.0% of targets
TEs: 4.2%
RBs: 9.8%

So here's where I start to get encouraged about Blaine Gabbert's prospects moving forward. With a relatively similar cast of characters in the receiving corps (Alexander was clearly better than any receiver in 2006, but Gabbert was without anyone nearing the reliability of Rucker, so they cancel out) and the propensity for throwing many more deep balls than Daniel, the Catch% for Gabbert's sophomore season was almost identical to Daniel's.

Now, unless one of our redshirting freshmen is suddenly capable of pulling a Jeremy Maclin impersonation (doubtful, to say the very least), Gabbert will head into 2010 without his top two targets, which is obviously something Daniel didn't have to worry about heading into 2007. However, while losing Alexander is a huge concern, losing Perry simply might not be too big a deal. Jackson has done a lovely Perry impersonation in recent weeks, and besides, Perry's 54% catch rate is simply horrendous. We know that Perry had a decent amount of bad luck this season -- how many times did Gabbert throw too high for him in the Oklahoma State game? -- but 54% is too low to blame simply on bad luck. Over four seasons, Perry never topped 70%, and while Jackson's 61% is nothing impressive, it is still better than what Perry managed this season. With another year (at least) of getting used to catching Gabbert's fastballs (and another year of Gabbert learning to keep the ball down as much as possible), I would expect Jackson's catch rate to be closer to the 65-70% range next year.

However, is that good enough? Gabbert can be expected to improve a decent amount next year, but ... who becomes the #1 target? And if it's Jackson, can Mizzou succeed at a high level with a #1 WR target catching only 65-70%, especially when there is suddenly no ultra-reliable tight end option to fall back on in times where a completion absolutely must be made?

Speaking of the tight end position, I guess this is the year in which we officially learned that WRs and TEs are basically exactly the same in this system. Alexander's Target% of 35% this year was 10% higher than Maclin ever managed and came within 10% of matching that of Maclin and Coffman from 2008. Lining up in the tight end slot position quite often, Alexander was actually able to approximately compensate for the loss of both players this year and catch passes at a very high rate for a receiver. Meanwhile, thanks to Alexander being a WR, tight ends accounted for only 4% of targets this year, and that's only if you count Michael Egnew as a tight end. The position disappeared from Mizzou's repertoire, but the passing numbers stayed relatively successful thanks to Alexander. With Alexander gone in 2010, do we see guys like Andrew Jones or Egnew working their way back into Gabbert's sights, or will another big receiver like Wes Kemp move into that role?

I have a lot more questions here than answers, but answers weren't the purpose of this exercise. I wanted to see if target data was viable and interesting, and while I found it both of those things, I'm curious what you think.

Mizzou-Iowa State: Beyond the Box Score PREVIEW

Bill C. — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:00:13 -0000

With basketball and the Mark Mangino Soap Opera for Dudes, it's been easy to become distracted from the fact that Mizzou has another home football game to play! I'm figuring Mizzou hasn't forgotten...at least I hope they haven't, as ISU's good enough to pop you in the chin if you let your guard down. Just ask Nebraska.

With his postgame celebration after Iowa State's win over Nebraska, I think it's safe to say that Paul Rhoads became most Big 12 North fans' second-favorite coach (or in the case of Colorado fans, maybe even their favorite). He is a passionate guy who, as we talked about this summer, seems to consider Iowa State a destination job, and in Year One of the Rhoads tenure, Iowa State is 6-5 and staring a bowl bid in the face. While their rankings below (and the fact that they've only beaten one team with a winning record, and it took eight turnovers to do so) suggest a relatively easy win for Missouri, it is certainly worth noting that they beat both Baylor and Nebraska this year, something Mizzou was unable to do. If Missouri plays well, as well as they did against Kansas State last week, they will win this game. But if they don't, Iowa State has proven quite capable of taking advantage of the opportunities given them and sneaking out with a seventh win.

Offense

Iowa State: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Offensive Preview

If fans have seen any one game Iowa State has played this year, it was probably the Nebraska game, which would give you the impression of a team light on offense but heavy on defensive playmakers. For the season, that really has not been the case. Statistically, they are much more successful on offense than defense; the key for the Cyclones, in both wins and losses, has been turnovers.

Iowa State's 6 wins: 22 takeaways (3.7 per game), 9 turnovers (1.5 per game), +13 turnover margin
Iowa State's 5 losses: 7 takeaways (1.4 per game), 13 turnovers (2.6 per game), -6 turnover margin

If stripping the ball is a skill, Paul Rhoads has taught it well. ISU has forced 29 fumbles this year (2.6 per game), almost three per game, and it has served them well against careless teams. Missouri has done well in only fumbling 14 times on the season (1.4 per game), but caution will be infinitely better than stretching for the extra yard on Saturday. Even taking the Nebraska game (and its +8 margin) out of the equation, ISU has still been good at taking the ball away, and it has still mattered a ridiculous amount toward whether they win or lose.

Anyway, to the offense. The numbers are, for the most part, pretty decent, though the after-the-jump conference figures tell you an interesting story.

Iowa State Offense vs Missouri Defense
Category	ISU Offense	MU Defense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	107.3 (51)	105.1 (47)
Close Success Rate+ (Rk)	109.6 (31)	100.5 (60)
Close PPP+ (Rk)	105.9 (64)	111.8 (43)

Rushing S&P+	106.5 (52)	113.5 (38)
Passing S&P+	109.4 (49)	97.2 (63)

Standard Downs S&P+	106.5 (51)	115.4 (24)
Passing Downs S&P+	103.9 (59)	96.7 (69)

Red Zone S&P+	115.8 (39)	117.4 (31)

Q1 S&P+	96.3 (84)	92.2 (80)
Q2 S&P+	101.1 (65)	132.1 (13)
Q3 S&P+	130.2 (16)	105.5 (51)
Q4 S&P+	104.7 (63)	114.3 (33)

1st Down S&P+	110.8 (39)	109.6 (44)
2nd Down S&P+	100.7 (72)	105.4 (52)
3rd Down S&P+	103.2 (70)	110.2 (43)

Line Yards+	113.9 (23)	102.3 (52)
Close Sack Rate+	232.2 (6)	82.1 (88)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	125.8 (44) / 200.9 (18)	114.8 (44) / 104.4 (58)

I listed 19 categories above, and in half of them, ISU ranks between 30th and 60th. That's pretty much the definition of "decent." They are outstanding on the offensive line -- by far the strongest in the North division according to these statistics -- but their skill position players are, well, somewhat lacking in skill. They are, however, extremely efficient, which is a nice quality to have against a Missouri defense that sacrifices efficiency for limited big plays. I will be interested to see how much Missouri adjusts its defensive gameplan to account for short passes, though I personally doubt they will tinker much. I'm pretty sure they will be perfectly content with doing what they did against K-State: allowing all the yardage they want between the 30s, then cracking down in the red zone.

These numbers, however, do not tell the entire story. For that, we need to go to their "Non-Conference vs Conference Play" numbers after the jump.

ISU Offense "+" Game Scores: Non-Con vs Conference Play
Category	Non-Con	Conference
Close S&P+	107.3	94.1
Close SR+	106.2	103.9
Close PPP+	106.5	81.0

Rushing S&P+	115.6	98.5
Passing S&P+	97.1	94.4

Standard Downs S&P+	112.2	84.9
Passing Downs S&P+	95.5	97.2

Red Zone S&P+	105.4	95.0

Q1 S&P+	98.7	84.7
Q2 S&P+	107.1	95.8
Q3 S&P+	107.6	111.0
Q4 S&P+	100.6	97.2

Note: you'll see that some of the conference/non-conference averages do not really match up with the season averages above. This is because I was looking at per-game data for the conference breakout, and one really good or really bad game can skew those numbers pretty considerably. For the full-season data, I look at every play (a sample size of, well a lot of plays) instead of "+" scores from a sample size of ten games. If this disclaimer didn't make any sense, don't worry about it. It's not that important, and I'm not really feeling like an A+ wordsmith at the moment.

Here is a game-by-game look at Iowa State's scoring progression this year: 34, 3, 34, 31, 23, 36, 24, 9, 10, 8, 17. After averaging 26.4 points over their first six games, the Cyclones have managed just 11.0 points in their last four. Thanks in part to turnovers and improving defense, they have gone 2-2 in that span, but this does start to take the look of a "Score 24 points and you'll probably win" game. We know that Baylor wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire before they came to Faurot Field two weeks ago, but the matchups in this game are not the same. Baylor doesn't have a lot of skill at wide receiver, but they have pure speed, and they burned Missouri with it. Iowa State quite frankly just doesn't have that speed. Their offense resembles K-State's without Brandon Banks--solid, strong running back, good tight end play (not that KSU showed any of that against Mizzou), and a big bunch of possession receivers.

The passing game has remained rather consistent throughout the season, but consistency isn't a great trait when you're just consistently being slightly below average. The running game, meanwhile, has regressed considerably, from rock solid in September to distinctly average in October and November. Consequently, they have remained about the same on passing downs, but they have fallen off on standard downs, which has resulted in a lot more passing downs.

When ISU Has the Ball...
ISU Rushing	Advantage: Mizzou
ISU Passing	Advantage: Push
Best Time for ISU:	Q3
Best Time for Missouri:	later in halves

Mizzou Advantages:

Points Per Play+ (explosiveness)
Rushing
Standard Downs
Red Zone (slightly)
Q2, Q4
2nd, 3rd Down

And for ISU...

Success Rate+ (efficiency)
Passing (slightly)
Q3
Line Yards, Sack Rates

It doesn't speak kindly of Alexander Robinson that Iowa State's run blocking numbers are so good, yet their actual rushing numbers are so average. In all, you can kind of see where both teams might succeed. Iowa State will succeed by playing well in the trenches and pulling off as many short, quick passes as they can manage. Missouri will succeed by using their superior linebackers to limit the running game, by tackling well, and by making stops on standard downs to force passing downs.

Quarterback

In glimpses, Austen Arnaud has size, a strong arm, and at least decent running ability. He completed 61.6% of his passes in 2008 for a solid 2,792 yards, 15 TDs and 10 INTs. He also mixed in 401 rushing yards and 5 TDs. In normal times, those would be considered numbers worthy of all-conference consideration. But in the Big 12, these aren't normal times. Arnaud's numbers put him at just 9th in the conference yardage, 11th in passer efficiency. And once again, when you factor in what was expected given the defenses Arnaud was facing, a decent quarterback probably would have produced more.

Austen Arnaud: 131-for-237 passing, 1,550 yards, 12 TDs, 9 INT (119.3 efficiency); 479 rushing yards, 7 TD
Jerome Tiller: 41-for-73 passing, 376 yards, 1 TD, 4 INT (93.0 efficiency); 216 rushing yards, 2 TD

For the second straight season, Austen Arnaud has put together numbers that are ... perfectly average. ISU has been decent in the passing game (with little help from the receiving corps), and Arnaud has become more of a threat with his legs this year, and he is by all means a solid quarterback. He will never threaten for all-conference honors, and honestly he seems like he should be scarier than he is -- strong arm, good legs, etc. --but he is competent. I mean this entire paragraph as neither a bad thing nor a particularly bad thing.

Running Back

Though the unit ranked just 90th in the country last year, I'm thinking the running backs have the biggest ceiling of any offensive unit Iowa State has. In his first year as a primary ball-carrier, Alexander Robinson fared...alright. His 703 yards, 6 TDs and 4.6 yards per carry were certainly respectable, and Missouri fans know he's capable of pretty solid play after his 2007 performance against them, but again...in a conference full of explosive weapons, Robinson gets lost in the shuffle. Using the POE measure discussed here, Robinson ranked 187th in the country (of about 270 eligible) with a POE of -4.4. Taking into account his relatively weak offensive line, he moved to 126th in Adjusted POE with a -0.4, meaning when blocking was taken into account, he was almost a precisely average running back last year. Average running backs are capable of a big game or two each year, but that's about it.

Alexander Robinson: 196 carries, 1,002 yards (5.1 per carry), 6 TD; 10 receptions, 200 yards (20.0 per catch), 3 TD
Jeremiah Schwartz: 71 carries, 264 yards (3.7 per carry)

Again, Robinson's numbers look strong, and he was huge against Missouri at Faurot Field two years ago, but once you factor line play into the equation, he starts to look very average, very quickly. He is a workhorse, however, and there is value in that. In the last five games that he has played (he missed the Nebraska game with a groin injury), he has averaged 22.4 carries per game, and like KSU's Daniel Thomas, ISU will absolutely lean on him as much as they can. It's just that, in those five games, he's only averaged over 5.0 yards per carry once. The injury has clearly affected his explosiveness.

In the nine games he's played (he only got 4 carries against KSU, so we're not counting that one here), here are his yards per carry:

5.2, 5.3, 6.2, 5.9, 5.6, 4.4, 3.8, 3.2, 4.6

Even last week against Colorado, when he went for 138 yards (plus 20 yards receiving), he still averaged less than five yards. The trick with Robinson is, the longer ISU stays in the game, the more they can pound away at you with him. But if you get a lead, then they don't know where to go with the ball. He still averaged 18 carries a game in blowout losses against OSU and ATM, but it didn't help much, as ISU scored only 18 points combined.

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

As nice as it might be having a couple of good running backs, Iowa State desperately needs some rejuvenation in the receiving corps. No returning wide receiver averaged more than 12 yards per catch, though there's at least some hope in the fact that two of ISU's leaders last year were true freshmen, former 4-star recruit Sedrick Johnson and 3-star Darius Darks. Neither did a whole lot--Johnson caught just 18 passes for 188 yards (albeit with three TDs) and Darks caught a ton of passes (49) for not a ton of yards (9.7 per catch, very Thomson Omboga-esque)--but they were young and there's obviously plenty of playing time available in Ames. If they can continue to develop, this unit could be pretty decent, especially if another newcomer or two turns out well.

WR Marquis Hamilton (Sr.): 41 receptions, 542 yards (13.2 per catch), 4 TD
WR Jake Williams (Jr.): 26 receptions, 297 yards (11.4 per catch), 3 TD
WR Josh Lenz (Fr.): 20 receptions, 186 yards (9.3 per catch)
WR Darius Darks (So.): 17 receptions, 158 yards (9.3 per catch), 1 TD
WR Darius Reynolds (Jr.): 13 receptions, 72 yards (5.5 per catch!)

TE Derrick Catlett (Sr.): 25 receptions, 277 yards (11.1 per catch), 2 TD
TE Collin Franklin (Jr.): 14 receptions, 149 yards (10.6 per catch)

If a wide receiver is making a big play, it is almost certainly coming from Marquis Hamilton, who seems to be in his 19th year in Ames. Otherwise, this is as nondescript a WR corps as you will find. The good news for ISU is, they have a pair of rock solid tight ends, and they will use them a lot if given the opportunity. Of ISU's 12 complete passes last week, five went to the tight ends. Derrick Catlett very much impressed me in last year's Mizzou-ISU game, and Mizzou very much needs to account for him. Still, though, having good tight ends only helps with efficiency, not so much explosiveness. If Mizzou tackles well and plays smart, this unit simply will not have much of a day.

Offensive Line

Their 61 returning career starts is fourth-most in conference. Another thing they have going for them: size. The average weight of their projected starters: 329 pounds. These guys have a lot of nice, corn-fed Iowa names like Lamaak, Klerekoper, Baysinger, Tuftee, and...uhh, Osmele. They should be able to do at least reasonably well against lighter defensive lines.
Really, their size is a potential wildcard. If 220-pound Bo Williams turns out to be a solid running back, they could have a nice, big rushing attack to wear defenses out a little bit.

Consider this the best test of the month for Mizzou's improving, and almost awesome, defensive line. As mentioned in the above excerpt, this is a big, strong offensive line, and they have the potential to wear you down if you are allowing too many first downs. They are good in pass protection, but their strength is in the running game. With an elite back, the run blocking really could have made the difference between six wins and a North title. This is Iowa State's single strongest unit.

---

Defense

Iowa State: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

ISU Defense vs Missouri Offense
Category	ISU Defense	MU Offense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	86.5 (100)	116.2 (28)
Close Success Rate+	83.1 (117)	106.7 (41)
Close PPP+	91.9 (73)	133.1 (22)

Rushing S&P+	97.5 (74)	102.5 (67)
Passing S&P+	78.2 (111)	126.7 (17)

Standard Downs S&P+	90.7 (95)	113.3 (37)
Passing Downs S&P+	91.5 (87)	115.4 (43)

Red Zone S&P+	98.9 (69)	79.3 (108)

Q1 S&P+	79.2 (106)	120.9 (38)
Q2 S&P+	94.8 (75)	114.9 (43)
Q3 S&P+	90.6 (84)	118.1 (32)
Q4 S&P+	92.9 (79)	107.0 (56)

1st Down S&P+	97.2 (70)	114.1 (34)
2nd Down S&P+	82.3 (107)	112.0 (48)
3rd Down S&P+	87.4 (95)	118.5 (35)

Line Yards+	89.6 (100)	99.1 (71)
Close Sack Rate+	44.9 (119)	140.4 (29)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	51.7 (114) / 76.9 (94)	228.7 (11) / 110.9 (53)

When they are not forcing turnovers, they are not getting the job done.

ISU Defense "+" Game Scores: Non-Con vs Conference Play
Category	Non-Con	Conference
Close S&P+	98.8	96.7
Close SR+	99.6	86.9
Close PPP+	98.7	120.5

Rushing S&P+	131.4	113.4
Passing S&P+	81.7	91.5

Standard Downs S&P+	96.7	98.6
Passing Downs S&P+	107.1	119.1

Red Zone S&P+	115.1	129.5

Q1 S&P+	100.0	102.0
Q2 S&P+	125.8	124.0
Q3 S&P+	83.9	111.7
Q4 S&P+	132.5	104.4

So as the season has progressed, Iowa State has gotten better defending the pass and worse defending the rush. Against Missouri, that might not necessarily be a bad thing for them. You have to account for Mizzou's pass before you worry about the run.

When Missouri Has the Ball...
Missouri Rushing	Advantage: Push
Missouri Passing	Big Advantage: Mizzou
Best Time for ISU:	Q3
Best Time for Missouri:	The rest of the game

MU's advantages:

Close S&P+, Success Rate+, Points Per Play+
Rushing (slight)
Passing (huge)
Standard Downs, Passing Downs
Q1-Q4
1st-3rd Down
Line Yards
Sack Rates (HUGE)

ISU's advantages:

Red Zone

Two quick notes:

ANY sack Mizzou gives up is a huge failure. ISU has generated one of the worst pass rushes in the country.
Each of the last two games, a key factor has been Touchdowns vs Field Goals. ISU's only significant advantage is in the Red Zone, but if they can hold Mizzou to three points instead of seven, they will stay in the game for longer and longer. And as mentioned above, the longer they stay in this game, the longer they can pound away at Mizzou with their big linemen in run blocking.

Defensive Line

As mentioned above, I consider the line a relative strength of the defense even though only two starters return. There's good experience at tackle, with 9th-year senior Nate Frere (9.5 sacks/TFL) leading the way and upperclassmen Austin Alburtis and Bailey Johnson filling in. I like Stephen Ruempolhamer quite a bit, though that's either because a) his name is awesome, or b) he somehow managed two fumble recoveries and eight tackles. Needless to say, a 1-to-4 FR-to-tackle ratio is...rare. For Sean Weatherspoon to have pulled that off last year, he'd have recovered about 40 fumbles. Which would have been awesome.

DE Christopher Lyle: 41.0 tackles, 9.5 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 2 FR, 3 QBH, 3 PBU
DT Nate Frere: 17.5 tackles, 4.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 1 QBH
DT Bailey Johnson: 15.0 tackles, 3.0 TFL/sacks
DE Patrick Neal: 14.5 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks, 4 QBH
DT Stephen Ruempolhamer: 12.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FR
DT Austin Alburtis: 11.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH

I called this unit a relative strength in the offseason, but it has been absolutely brutal this year. Chris Lyle has put together some nice numbers, but the rest of the line has been, to put it kindly, iffy. Mizzou's decent-not-great offensive line should be able to impose its will on this unit, which ranks 100th or worse in both line yards and sack rates.

Linebackers

Another unit that wasn't done any favors by the BTBS numbers, ISU's LBs have K-State's problem--lots of experience, little known talent. They have their prototypical 'tackling machine' in Jesse Smith and another decent playmaker in Fred Garrin--the two combined for 12 sacks/TFL, 4 forced fumbles, 3 recoveries, and a handful of other disruptive stats--but they were eclipsed in total tackles by safety James Smith, which is almost never a good thing. Other guys like Josh Raven and Derec Schmidgall have seemingly been around forever, with little to show for it.

Jesse Smith: 88.5 tackles, 3.5 TFL/sacks, 2 INT, 2 FF, 3 QBH, 5 PBU
Fred Garrin: 60.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 2 INT, 2 FF, 4 PBU
Josh Raven: 27.5 tackles, 7.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 1 PBU, 2 QBH
Jake Knott: 16.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 1 PBU
A.J. Klein: 11.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR

On the other hand, ISU's linebackers been more disruptive than expected, at least in terms of getting a hand in on turnovers. Josh Raven has been the only behind-the-line-of-scrimmage threat, and this isn't a wonderful unit by any means, but the five players above have forced six fumbles, recovered two, and picked off four passes. If Blaine Gabbert gets a little too greedy and locks in on a receiver, the back seven of ISU's defense might make him pay.

Secondary

First things first: for a redshirt freshman, Leonard Johnson was quite good in 2008. He had a hand in a ton of big plays--he intercepted two passes (he had a third against Missouri, but it was called back due to a penalty far removed from Johnson), forced two fumbles, recovered three fumbles, and broke up four passes. Not bad consiering how poor the supporting cast around him was. As mentioned before, James Smith was a tiny tackling machine, posting 85 tackles and almost no "disruptive" stats (sacks/TFL, FF, FR, INT, QBH, PBR, etc.) whatsoever. And beyond that...well, let's just say this: with the "+" stats, Big 12 defenses were cut major slack because of the strength of the offenses they were facing. For instance, Missouri ranked in the top 30 in pass defense despite their high yardage totals. If you were a Big 12 defense, you were guaranteed to give up a ton of yards. And yet Iowa State's pass defense still managed to get themselves ranked 109th in the country last year. Ouch. All the slack in the world, and they only ranked above 11 other teams.

S James Smith: 61.0 tackles, 0.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 3 FR, 5 PBU
S David Sims: 54.5 tackles, 3.5 TFL/sacks, 4 INT, 3 FF, 1 FR
CB Leonard Johnson: 46.0 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks, 2 INT, 2 FF, 1 FR, 4 PBU
CB Kennard Banks: 42.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 1 FR, 5 PBU
S Michael O'Connell: 27.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FR, 1 PBU
CB Ter'ran Benton: 26.0 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks, 2 QBH
CB Jeremy Reeves: 10.0 tackles

It's interesting: the Iowa State secondary has been about as disruptive a secondary as you could ask for. Eleven tackles for loss, nine interceptions, seven forced fumbles, seven recovered fumbles, a ton of broken-up passes ... and yet, when they are not making huge plays, they're leaking yardage like our old dishwasher leaked water. This is about as all-or-nothing a unit as you're going to find, and it is a must that Mizzou play smart in their passing game. If Gabbert makes the smart throw, and the receivers hold onto the ball (Jerrell Jackson, I'm looking in your general direction), then they should have no trouble moving the ball downfield. But ISU is good at turning little mistakes into large mistakes. Speaking of mistakes...

Injured Blaine Gabbert: 42-for-95 passing (44.2%), 512 yards (5.4 per pass), 1 TD (1.1% of passes), 5 INT (5.3%)
Healthy Blaine Gabbert: 159-for-246 (64.6%), 2,150 yards (8.7 per pass), 19 TD (7.7%), 2 INT (0.8%)

WOW. I realize that his injury coincided perfectly with the best threesome of pass defenses that Missouri faced this year, and I realize he wouldn't have produced his season averages in 11 quarters against Nebraska, OSU, and Texas, but ... still ... wow. Healthy Gabbert is completing 20% more of his passes than Injured Gabbert, for 3.3 more yards per pass, throwing TDs at a 7x higher rate, while throwing INTs at almost a 7x lower rate. It's an amazing question to wonder what Gabbert's already strong numbers would have looked like had Ndamukong Suh not rolled him up.

In the end, Healthy Gabbert is taking on a secondary that, while more disruptive, is really no better than Kansas State's ... and with help from Danario Alexander, he carved K-State up quite nicely. I'm curious how Mizzou will handle the loss of Jared Perry, particularly who becomes the fourth major target, assuming Jerrell Jackson is now #2 and Wes Kemp #3 (or vice versa). Does long-lost Andrew Jones join the fray again? Does somebody like Brandon Gerau, Rolandis Woodland, or T.J. Moe suddenly see a couple passes? Danario Alexander already catches a higher percentage of his team's passes than any other major receiver, so we can't really lean on him more than we already do.

Special Teams

If the offense and defense can keep Iowa State in the game, the special teams unit is just good enough to make the difference. Grant Mahoney was quite good for a freshman, and Mike Brandtner isn't a liability at punter. Leonard Johnson is a potentially explosive kick returner, and Michael O'Connell is...well, he's a punt returner. We'll see what he's capable of.

Punt Returns Rank: 104th (Josh Lenz: 19 returns, 4.7 avg)
Net Punting Rank: 24th (Mike Brandtner: 56 punts, 40.5 avg)
Kickoff Returns Rank: 56th (Leonard Johnson: 17 returns, 20.4 avg; David Sims: 15 returns, 22.9 avg)
Opponents' Kickoff Returns Rank: 7th (Grant Mahoney: 2 touchbacks in 48 kickoffs)

Field Goals: 98th (Grant Mahoney: 12-for-19, Long: 52)
PATs: 118th (Grant Mahoney: 21-for-25)

Another all-or-nothing unit, ISU's coverage teams are rock solid. They're 24th in Net Punting and 7th in Net Kickoffs, but they pretty much stink on ice at everything else. They're bad at returning punts, they're bad at place-kicking, and they're only okay at kickoff returns. (Of course, "okay at kickoff returns" could actually mean "good at kickoff returns" against Missouri. We'll see.) Mizzou has a solid advantage here if Jake Harry is getting good bounces and there are no complete debacles at kickoff return.

---

Three Keys to the Game

Turnovers. More than any other game, turnovers.

It's pretty obvious that Iowa State is well above average in terms of forcing fumbles and intercepting passes. If it is a technique that can be learned, they've learned it. Meanwhile, Missouri is actually somewhat due a turnover -- their last one was in the third quarter against Colorado, meaning they've gone nine quarters without a lost turnover. Even the best teams in the world throw a pick or bobble a ball every now and then, so expect 1-2 from Mizzou tomorrow. But if they stop it at 1-2, while maybe forcing 1-2 themselves, then ISU's odds of winning go down exponentially. Turnovers are always important, but ISU lives and dies off of them.

Touchdowns instead of field goals.

Mizzou had to settle for three field goals against Baylor, and even though The Amazing Grant Ressel made them all, settling for them in the first place cost them quite a bit in an eight-point win. Meanwhile, Missouri held K-State to four field goals last Saturday, and while their final winning margin suggests it probably wouldn't have made a difference, it did.

Defenses are slowly starting to catch up to offenses again, especially in the red zone, and it seems touchdowns have been much harder to come by for a lot of teams this year. If Mizzou is able to punch the ball into the endzone instead of settling for three points, an Iowa State offense that has been far from en fuego recently will find it quite difficult to score enough points to keep up. But if Mizzou gets, say, three scoring opportunities in the first half and only comes away with 9 points instead of 17 or 21, look out. Meanwhile, if they're holding ISU to field goals, ISU has no chance. Red zone execution is ISU's only major defensive advantage, and it could be a big one.

Tackle.

Expect ISU to run plenty of short, quick passes, and expect them to work at least a bit considering Mizzou's typically soft coverage cushions. It's annoying, but we saw last week why they do it. If they tackle well and force an only-decent offense like Iowa State's to drive the length of the field consistently, the Cyclones will falter more often than not. But if they do ISU some favors, and the Cyclones are able to generate some bigger plays, then ... well, we saw what happens in that scenario two weeks ago against Baylor. Play disciplined on defense, do your job, and Iowa State will need another +8 turnover margin to win the game.

Prediction

Not surprisingly, the numbers like Mizzou quite a bit in this one. I don't believe too heavily in things like Senior Day emotion playing a big role or anything -- to me, it could almost be a detriment as much as an asset -- but in the end, emotion should even out, and Mizzou should move to 7-4. I cannot commend enough the job that Paul Rhoads has done this season, taking a group that had no idea how to win, and teaching them how to seize every opportunity and win some ball games. Still, though, if Missouri doesn't turn the ball over and give ISU extra opportunities, they should be able to handle Iowa State relatively easily. Make mistakes, however, and you will pay. The numbers say Mizzou by 18, so we'll go with Mizzou 31, Iowa State 13.

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.

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.

Texas: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Bill C. — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:30:15 -0000

Saturday night Missouri plays in what could possibly be the last game of the regular season in which they are the underdog (unless Kansas avoids a tailspin). What kind of upset chances do the Tigers have? What do the stats tell us are possible opportunities (and serious threats) for our most losable Homecoming game in quite some time? To the numbers!

Offense

Texas: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Offensive Preview

As you'll see, I've made the switch from raw Sack Rate figures to the schedule-adjusted Sack Rate+ ratings. These numbers still have a bit of a small sample size issue, meaning that the highs and lows for each category are more extreme than in other categories. For instance, Auburn is #1 in Offensive Sack Rate+ with a rating of over 400--rarely will you see a rating of over 200-250 in most categories. Keep that in mind when you see Missouri's really low Defensive Standard Downs Sack Rate+--it's bad, but it's not quite as bad as the number you see.

Texas Offense vs Missouri Defense
Category	UT Offense	MU Defense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	120.5 (21)	121.6 (25)
Close Success Rate+ (Rk)	119.7 (12)	107.6 (39)
Close PPP+ (Rk)	122.4 (31)	143.1 (16)

Rushing S&P+	124.2 (18)	101.3 (66)
Passing S&P+	116.3 (36)	143.4 (15)

Standard Downs S&P+	129.0 (7)	116.3 (26)
Passing Downs S&P+	124.4 (29)	115.7 (34)

Red Zone S&P+	117.2 (44)	94.0 (77)

Q1 S&P+	131.4 (23)	100.5 (63)
Q2 S&P+	126.7 (25)	154.0 (8)
Q3 S&P+	151.3 (6)	100.7 (56)
Q4 S&P+	118.7 (30)	120.4 (23)

1st Down S&P+	143.4 (5)	116.0 (31)
2nd Down S&P+	121.7 (26)	113.8 (35)
3rd Down S&P+	120.5 (29)	111.0 (40)

Line Yards+	99.3 (72)	104.5 (54)
Close Sack Rate+	147.3 (27)	85.7 (84)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	164.7 (27) / 137.0 (38)	49.3 (106) / 91.0 (70)

Analysis after the jump.

Let's start with where Missouri has the rankings advantage:

Close PPP+
Passing S&P+
Q2 S&P+
Q4 S&P+
Line Yards+

To win this game, Missouri must defend those rankings, first and foremost. They have been one of the better teams in the country in terms of not giving up big plays (PPP+), and that must continue. Their "allow the short passes and tackle well" approach has worked for the most part, and that must continue. They get stronger as the half moves on, and that must continue. Texas simply has not run-blocked very well this year, and Missouri must take advantage of that.

Other thoughts:

Here are the categories where Texas holds the biggest advantage: Rushing S&P+, Red Zone S&P+, Q1 S&P+, Q3 S&P+, 1st Down S&P+, Standard Downs S&P+. While Missouri must maintain the advantages they do have, they also need to minimize the damage done here. Early-half stops. Big-time run support from the likes of Sean Weatherspoon, Will Ebner, Aldon Smith, etc. Figuring out some way, any way, to get pressure on Colt McCoy on 1st Downs and not allow him to get off quick pass after quick pass.

Quarterback

Can Colt McCoy possibly approach his 2008 numbers in 2008? I say no, and I have one major reason why: Texas actually did better on Passing Downs (1.01 S&P) than Standard Downs (0.97 S&P) in 2008. Think about that. They were a better offense on 3rd-and-7 than 2nd-and-4. That makes no sense, and while I don't have enough year-to-year data to show what happens to teams with disproportional success like that, how in the world can you maintain that?

In a lot of ways, this disproportionality reminds me a lot of a baseball measure that has significantly grown in popularity recently: BABIP (Batting Average on Balls In Play). Over time, most players and pitchers produce roughly the same BABIP. It can vary depending on the ratio of ground balls to line drives and fly balls, but over time, most BABIP will regress to the mean of around .290. When a pitcher gives up a BABIP of .350 or .220 one year, it's probably pretty quickly going to revert back toward .290. Therefore it can be used to spot flukes, seasons that were particularly good or bad depending on whether ground balls tended to sneak between 3B and SS or go straight at a defender.

To me, disproportional success on Passing Downs might end up being a lot like BABIP in picking up on some amount of fluky success. Texas certainly had a good offense no matter what in 2008, but I think it may have been a little too good to maintain in 2009. Especially considering McCoy will be playing without two major third-down bailout options, Chris Ogbonnaya and Quan Cosby, I'm thinking Colt may end up having a year where Texas struggles at times, and there's no clear explanation why (kind of like when you're hitting a ball hard, but right at the shortstop). A few more 3rd-and-7 passes fall incomplete, and the Texas offense could slow down in a hurry.

Colt McCoy: 156-for-223 passing (70.0%), 1,537 yards (6.9/pass), 11 TD, 7 INT; 48 rushes, 91 yards (1.9/carry), 1 TD

Last season, Texas ranked 24th in Standard Downs S&P+ and 2nd in Passing Downs S&P+. So far this year, they are up to 7th in Standard Downs S&P+, but only 29th in Passing Downs S&P+. Has McCoy regressed? Did he somehow become less "clutch"? Doubtful. Granted, Texas' offensive line probably isn't the best in the conference, but I still think Texas' struggles (and "struggles" is used loosely here--29th in Passing Downs S&P+ is nothing to scoff at, though McCoy's already thrown 7 interceptions this year after only throwing 8 last year) are most explained by simple regression to the mean. All in all, McCoy's numbers are absolutely respectable--70% completion rate, almost seven yards per pass, etc.--but human. Regression to the mean was the single biggest reason I didn't think McCoy had a chance at this year's Heisman (his chance was last year, when almost everything went right), and so far I've been proven correct on that one. Of course, he could complete 80% of his passes and throw for 350 yards and 4 TDs a game from here on out, and he could still win the big trophy...but I doubt it.

Running Back

The Longhorns have a host of talented-yet-flawed athletes in the backfield. Cody Johnson is an awesome short-yardage back, but can he see every-down success? Can Fozzy Whitaker stay healthy enough to live up to the massive promise seen by Burnt Orange Nation readers over the last couple of years? Can Vondrell McGee, UT's most well-rounded overall back, assert himself a bit more in 2009? Can any number of other highly-recruited options break into the rotation?

Vondrell McGee: 46 carries, 260 yards (5.7/carry), 2 TD; 8 receptions, 37 yards (4.6/catch)
Tre' Newton: 41 carries, 203 yards (5.0/carry), 3 TD; 3 receptions, 21 yards (7.0/catch)
Fozzy Whittaker: 23 carries, 121 yards (5.3/carry), 2 TD; 6 receptions, 24 yards (4.0/catch)
Cody Johnson: 29 carries, 104 yards (3.6/carry), 5 TD; 2 receptions, 13 yards (6.5/catch)
D.J. Monroe: 17 carries, 91 yards (5.4/carry)

Gosh, what torture Mack Brown must go through trying to figure out ways to find carries for five different running backs. Makes you feel sorry for him, huh? Right now, the amalgamation of Texas' five main backs, "Vozztre' Monson," has put together a workmanlike 156 carries for 779 yards and 12 TDs. That's 5.0 yards per carry and 130 yards per game...for the season, that would be roughly what LeSean McCoy produced for Pittsburgh last year. Plus, Vozztre Monson has one luxury that McCoy did not--extra limbs. In case a shoulder or ankle or knee gets injured, he has plenty of other sets upon which to fall back.

Texas' running game will lull you to sleep--nobody here averages over six yards per carry (for comparison, Alabama's Mark Ingram is currently averaging 6.7 per carry, Virginia Tech's Ryan Williams 6.0), but they are quite efficient, and even though they've gotten little contribution from McCoy so far, the run game ranks in the nation's top 20. They're doing something right, even if they don't have any one guy as good as someone like Jamaal Charles.

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

If Texas can replace Quan Cosby's reliability (and Brandon Collins--10 of 12 third-down catches moved the chains--looks like he could be up for the challenge), then this receiving corps could be one of the best in the country. Jordan Shipley returns for his 17th year (what? only his 6th?), and the rest of the depth chart is simply littered with big-time recruits. Malcolm Williams awed everybody in the country with his 91-yard touchdown catch at a key moment against Texas Tech, but he only caught 19 passes all season. Dan Buckner passes the eyeball test...but only caught five passes. With Cosby gone, it is time for at least a couple of these guys to become reliable, every-down receivers.

WR Jordan Shipley: 51 catches, 605 yards (11.9/catch), 3 TD
WR Dan Buckner: 29 carries, 333 yards (11.5/catch), 4 TD
WR John Chiles: 22 catches, 177 yards (8.0/catch), 2 TD
WR James Kirkendoll: 20 catches, 198 yards (9.9/catch), 1 TD
WR Marquise Goodwin: 14 catches, 127 yards (9.1/catch), 1 TD
WR Malcolm Williams: 8 catches, 84 yards (10.5/catch)

TE Greg Smith: 3 catches, 22 yards (7.3/catch)

Where would this team be without Jordan Shipley? He's the only main Texas receiver averaging over 11.5 yards per catch, and he has caught as many passes as the Longhorns' #2 and #3 receivers combined. No offense to the guy (hey, did you hear he roomed with Colt McCoy?), but I kind of wish the NCAA hadn't given him an extra year of eligibility after his 17 career injuries. Kinda wish they'd inflicted the John Dausman "Yeah, you tore up your knee twice and missed 1.9 full seasons, but your team just isn't important enough for us to care about you too much...but you better not do anything illegal, because we need to throw the book at somebody for USC's violations" ruling at him*.

(* Yeah, that was a little bitter. I need to get better at letting things go. Dausman was a senior in 2000, and he really wasn't even that great. Shipley is exactly who the sixth-year exception is made for, and just ignore me because I'm a bitter person.)

Anyway, there has been a bit of a revolving door at WR for Texas, with plenty of people getting an opportunity at the "McCoy's #2 guy" role and nobody completely accepting it. For this game, it appears that the main shots will go to speedy Marquise Goodwin and huge Malcolm Williams. Goodwin scored UT's only touchdown against OU, and Williams has the single highest fear-induced-to-actual-production ratio in the country. Opposing fans are petrified of this guy, and justifiably so (I mean, did you see the catches he made against Missouri and Texas Tech last year??)...but in his first season and a half on the depth chart, Williams has caught a total of 25 passes, or six fewer than Missouri's Jared Perry has caught this year alone. But somehow, he really is terrifying, and you just hope he waits until next week to wake up.

Offensive Line

So here's something interesting: while Texas is known for signing as many four-star recruits as they can stomach, of the four returning starters on the offensive line, three--Hall, Ulatoski, Tanner--were 3-star recruits. Now, Missouri has proven that there's nothing wrong with loading up on 3-stars, but there isn't quite as much high-end talent here as in most units for the Longhorns, and it possibly showed last year. While Colt McCoy was one of the nation's best QBs, and the UT receiving corps was Top 15, the line struggled, both in run-blocking (64th in Line Yards+) and pass protection (59th in Adjusted Sack Rate). For those who follow recruiting rankings, there is a silver lining for the 'Horns, as Michael Huey, Tray Allen, David Snow, and Mark Buchanan were all given at least four stars by Rivals (Allen was a 5-star), so there is decent depth of talent here, and if this unit can do its job a little better, maybe McCoy won't have to come through on nearly as many Passing Down situations.

Compared to last year, Texas' sack rates have improved quite a bit...and their run-blocking has gotten worse. With the line yardage figures, a line is punished if backs dance too much or are not aggressive enough hitting holes, so as I do when talking about Missouri's own line yardage figures, I wanted to make sure that disclaimer was mentioned. That said, this does appear to be one area where Missouri matches up well. We can talk about how disappointed we are that the athletic end trio of Aldon Smith, Jacquies Smith, and Brian Coulter haven't gotten to the quarterback more, but they have been stout in run support, and Missouri's front seven might be able to stand up pretty well to the Texas running game, especially if Will Ebner is anywhere near 100%. Love that guy.

Overall, the key to stopping McCoy will be doing whatever you can to force mistakes out of him. Missouri has not been great at forcing turnovers, but that will need to change, and if you can leverage a team into enough Passing Downs, the turnovers seem to flow out a lot easier. That means stopping the run, that means batting passes down, and that means tackling well after short passes (and if the receivers' per-catch totals mean anything, they will absolutely throw short).

---

Defense

Texas: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

Texas Defense vs Missouri Offense
Category	UT Defense	MU Offense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	138.9 (11)	98.1 (75)
Close Success Rate+	128.6 (9)	98.2 (78)
Close PPP+	154.6 (12)	98.9 (78)

Rushing S&P+	187.1 (1)	87.0 (101)
Passing S&P+	122.6 (26)	106.9 (64)

Standard Downs S&P+	139.4 (6)	102.3 (68)
Passing Downs S&P+	157.8 (6)	97.5 (75)

Red Zone S&P+	164.6 (7)	61.9 (119)

Q1 S&P+	144.9 (13)	102.6 (71)
Q2 S&P+	171.5 (3)	93.9 (84)
Q3 S&P+	123.5 (24)	114.9 (42)
Q4 S&P+	158.0 (5)	101.7 (72)

1st Down S&P+	132.4 (17)	101.9 (68)
2nd Down S&P+	147.1 (11)	107.2 (59)
3rd Down S&P+	199.4 (1)	92.5 (88)

Line Yards+	252.4 (1)	91.9 (94)
Close Sack Rate+	100.2 (60)	170.1 (17)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	88.9 (75) / 133.3 (30)	171.3 (24) / 138.5 (37)

Let's once again start by looking at where Missouri holds the statistical advantage:

Close Sack Rate+
Standard Downs Sack Rate+

Aaaaaaaaand that's about it. So in the name of maintaining the advantages they have, Missouri must make sure that Blaine Gabbert does not face much pressure. Sergio Kindle becomes an extremely scary presence on Passing Downs (just ask Taylor Potts), but before Missouri can worry about that, they have to protect and make sure that Gabbert sees as little pressure as possible on the downs in which running and passing are of equal likelihood.

Other thoughts:

If Missouri can get ANYTHING WHATSOEVER out of the running game, I will be thrilled. That is the single biggest difference in rankings between the two teams (that, and the heavily-related Line Yards+). If Missouri is going to win this game, Derrick Washington absolutely has to find the fifth gear he misplaced sometime early last year. We know what D-Wash can do, but he hasn't done it in quite a while.
Texas gets better with each progressive down, from 17th on 1st downs, to 11th on 2nd, to 1st on 3rd. That puts significant pressure on Missouri to get yards on first down. If it doesn't come from the running game, it has to come with short passing. Andrew Jones needs to pretty quickly find a cure for invisibility because he could be very useful here.
As I've mentioned before, the truest signal of a young team is lack of success on third downs and Passing Downs. Missouri has predictably struggled here, and it will be quite a task to suddenly improve against the best defense they will face this year. Here's where Missouri's play-calling and effort will need to be at their A+ level. The coaches will need to deftly put players in the position to succeed, and the players will have to take advantage of it. Rocket science, I know.

Defensive Line

The main man in making sure UT's QB pressure doesn't drop in 2009 isn't even on the list above. That, of course, would be hybrid LB/DE Sergio Kindle (14 TFL, 10 sacks), listed below in the LBs list. He will be the main rush end, I think, in passing situations. Along with Kindle, it's probably time for former 5-star recruit Eddie Jones to make his move. In 13 games last year, he managed only eight tackles in backup time, though five went for loss (he also added 5 QBH, but I'm starting to think that Texas statisticians were VERY liberal in their interpretation of what constitutes a "hurry"). If he can become a reliable force alongside Kindle and Sam Acho, Texas should be just fine. If he doesn't, defensive coordinator Will Muschamp will be looking toward Dravannti Johnson and maybe stud true freshman Alex Okafor to provide the lacking pressure.

DE(ish) Sergio Kindle: 20.0 tackles, 7.0 TFL/sacks, 2 FF, 1 PBR
DE Sam Acho: 19.5 tackles, 7.0 TFL/sacks, 4 FR, 8 QBH, 2 PBR
DT Lamarr Houston: 17.0 tackles, 6.0 TFL/sacks, 2 FR, 17 QBH, 2 PBR
DT Ben Alexander: 13.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH

If this team had nobody named Kindle or Acho, it would be much less intimidating. Kindle (DE/LB), Sam Acho (DE), and Emmanuel Acho (DE) have combined for 22 TFL/sacks, five forced fumbles and six fumble recoveries. They are the disruptive force in Will Muschamp's defense. Meanwhile, Lamarr Houston and Ben Alexander have both made a strong number of plays for DTs--not the Ndamukong Suh level of plays, but a lot. Man for man, this is probably a better line than what Missouri faced against Nebraska, which is a scary thought...though the field should be dry, which can't hurt.

Linebackers

Whereas the D-line had headliners and great stats, the Texas linebackers (sans Kindle) were probably a bit overshadowed in 2008. But when a defense is equally great at stopping the run and the pass, some of that is going to be because of a good LB corps, and that reflected well in my LB rankings. Kindle and fellow 2009 seniors Roddrick Muckelroy and Jared Norton were extremely steady in 2008, and there's no reason to expect otherwise in 2009. Muckelroy only had four TFLs and didn't really play a role in forcing many turnovers, but he was UT's main tackler, racking up 112 (71 solo). There is little experience behind this trio of seniors, but Keenan Robinson and Tariq Allen were both 4-star recruits--they'll probably be alright in 2010...or at least 2011.

Roddrick Muckelroy: 30.5 tackles, 6.0 TFL/sacks, 7 QBH, 5 PBR
Keenan Robinson: 20.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 3 PBR
Emmanuel Acho: 20.0 tackles, 8.0 TFL/sacks, 3 FF, 2 FR, 3 QBH
Dustin Earnest: 9.5 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH

Aside from Kindle and the Achos, this front seven is steady and fast...and that's all they need to be. It seems like Roddrick Muckelroy has been playing for the Longhorns for nine years now, and he brings a nice, steadying force to the UT defense, allowing others to take more chances.

Secondary

If there's an area of aimed-for improvement in this unit, it comes in the form of interceptions--they only snagged six in 2008. In landing the #3 ranking, they benefited from the fact that my rankings don't place heavy emphasis on turnovers. They covered and tackled well, but one thing that can help out the Texas offense--one that I'm still saying might struggle more than expected thanks to their disproportionate success on Passing Downs--is by setting up some short fields and easy points. These are mostly 3- and 4-star recruits with a growing amount of experience, so it wouldn't be shocking to see a secondary that was a liability just a couple of years ago, suddenly forcing quiet a few turnovers and turning into the single best unit on the team.

S Earl Thomas: 22.5 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 5 INT, 1 FF, 9 PBR
CB Curtis Brown: 21.5 tackles, 1 FF, 10 PBR
CB Aaron Williams: 19.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 2 FF, 2 QBH, 2 PBR
S Blake Gideon: 19.5 tackles, 2 INT, 2 PBR
CB Chykie Brown: 15.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 QBH, 7 PBR

When you've got such a good defensive line and scary front-seven athletes, your secondary is almost guaranteed to look good as well--QBs will be making more hurried throws, RBs won't be breaking wide open into the secondary, etc. That said, it really is starting to appear that the Longhorns secondary that was a liability a couple of years ago has rounded into a helluva unit, at least in terms of playmaking ability. They rank only 26th against the pass, compared to Missouri's 15th-ranked pass defense, but they have also intercepted ten passes, eight more than Missouri. In a game which Missouri cannot win without winning the turnover battle, it does appear that Texas has the edge here.

Special Teams

Hunter Lawrence wasn't asked to do a ton last year--less than one FG attempt per game--but he did well in the limited opportunities, missing just two kicks all year. He and John Gold form a pretty damn solid kicking unit, even if neither was needed much in 2008. Jordan Shipley had a clutch kickoff return touchdown against Oklahoma, just as it looked like OU was about seize control of the game (UT had just gone down 14-3 when he broke loose), but the rest of the year he was only solid at KR's, not spectacular. Same with punt returns, where he ripped off a 45-yard touchdown in one return and managed only 19 yards in five others. It wouldn't surprise me to see Malcolm Williams become a force in kickoff returns, but overall this is a solid unit either way. Not as good as OSU's, but definitely in the upper half of the Big 12.

Punt Returns Rank: 15th (Jordan Shipley: 16 returns, 16.4 average, 2 TD)
Net Punting Rank: 74th (Justin Tucker: 21 returns, 39.5 average)
Kickoff Returns Rank: 2nd (D.J. Monroe: 9 returns, 42.7 average, 2 TD)
Opponents' Kickoff Returns Rank: 77th (22.1 yards/return)

Field Goals: 12-for-14 (Hunter Lawrence)
PATs: 30-for-31

Hunter Lawrence is a strong kicker, and Justin Tucker is a decent enough punter, but they don't really matter. For Missouri to win, they will also have to win the special teams battle, and that is a tall task thanks to UT's return game, which has produced four return touchdowns in six games. Jordan Shipley's punt return TD against Texas Tech gave the Longhorns some breathing room while their offense struggled, and Texas only led Colorado by ten when another Shipley return iced the game away. Knowing Missouri's past strategies against strong kick returners, expect a lot of short, pop-up kicks. Hopefully Tanner Mills is pretty good at them...assuming Missouri has quite a few opportunities to kick off, ahem. And after a down week in Stillwater, Jake Harry IV will need to go back to being Missouri's secret weapon. His rugby kicks and epic rolls have been key to Missouri winning field position battles this year, and while there's no way Missouri intentionally kicks directly to Shipley, the rolls still have to go in our favor...they had all year until the OSU game.

---

Three Keys to the Game

The Bomb

Missouri has enough to worry about already--they simply must prevent big plays on defense. Texas hasn't generated too many of them this year, and they are still leading the country in scoring offense (granted, a lot of that has come against bad defenses, and a lot of points have been scored via the return game, but still). If Malcolm Williams catches a bomb, or if Fozzy Whittaker suddenly lives up to the hype and love Burnt Orange Nation has showered upon him for a while now, Missouri is dead meat. Despite all I said above about how the front seven must perform, really the safeties--Jasper Simmons, Kenji Jackson, Jarrell Harrison, Hardy Ricks--could be the most important players on the field for Mizzou on Saturday.

First-and-10

I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for the Missouri offense to generate yardage on first downs, and for the Missouri defense to prevent them. That's it. Chart the first downs on Saturday night--whoever does better will win the game.

The Turnover

Again, not rocket science. Missouri outgained Oklahoma State last week, in terms of both yards and EqPts. And yet they lost by a comfortable margin because of the -4 turnover differential and -19.4 turnover points margin. Colt McCoy has proven willing to throw at least a pick or two, and while I love how well this defense has reacted to the play at hand and prevented big plays, you do figure they might have to both take some risks to force some turnovers. Overall, despite McCoy's seven picks, Texas is still +5 on the year in turnover margin. Missouri is -2. They will need to flip that around to have a chance. Sean Weatherspoon was Missouri's "Go force a turnover" guy last year, and now would be a pretty good time to make his presence felt, no?

Prediction

As I've mentioned multiple times this week, the monsoon game seems to have skewed both Missouri's and Nebraska's numbers, and due to that, the numbers project a nailbiter, Texas by 0.3. Being that I always go with the numbers, we'll say that means Texas 24, Missouri 23. That said, I'm pretty queasy about that. There is absolutely a path toward Mizzou winning this game--protect the ball and pick off a couple of passes, move the ball on first down (via air or ground, don't care which), punt well, tackle well, don't get burned deep. It's the recipe for winning any game, really, but with Blaine Gabbert's ankle not at 100%, and with Missouri's most-defined weakness (offensive line) meshing perfectly with Texas' biggest strength (defensive line), there's plenty of reason for pessimism here.

Texas is far from unbeatable--in my opinion, they're pretty far from the team they were just last year. But in a graduation- and injury-depleted Big 12, the road ahead of them is still quite maneuverable, and if Missouri or Oklahoma State doesn't knock them off, I don't know who will. I've been pretty down about Missouri's chances in this game--like I've said before, my main goals here are to not get anybody else hurt and make sure all the moving pieces start to come together for a five-game winning streak after this game--but this is college football, and anything can happen. Missouri is a fast, strong, super-young team, and teams like that experience pretty disparate highs and lows. Hit a high-note on Saturday night, and they can claim Gary Pinkel's first win over OU or Texas. If not, make sure not to lose your spot on the bandwagon. It will start filling up again when the team gets hot later on.

Mizzou Links, 10-22-09

Bill C. — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:53:44 -0000

Mizzou-Texas Links

MUtigers.com: ABC Releases Coverage Map For Texas
The Trib (Dave Matter): Behind the Numbers: MU-Texas

Here’s what’s scary about the Horns’ dominance against running teams. You might think the rushing numbers are skewered because UT piles up zillions of quarterback sacks, which count against opponents’ rushing totals. But the Horns haven’t sacked quarterbacks at last year’s rate. They have 16 in seven games, a total that ranks just 31st nationally. (A year ago, their 47 sacks led the country.) Nope, the boys in burnt orange are simply swallowing up the running game.
Here’s what opposing running backs have done against the Horns this season:
* Frank Goodin, La-Monroe: 15 carries-60 yards
* Alvester Alexander, Wyoming: 9-24
* Eric Stephens, Texas Tech: 9-27
* Baron Batch, Texas Tech: 4-23
* Rodney Stewart, Colorado: 21-40
* Chris Brown, Oklahoma: 12-23
* DeMarco Murray, Oklahoma: 5-(minus 3)
The Trib: Behind the Stripes Webcast: Episode 11, Pt. 1
The Missourian: Texas special teams a challenge for Missouri
KC Star: Missouri has to find Texas' Sergio Kindle
KC Star (Jason Whitlock...god he's such a predictable flake): Blaine and I just need a little space, that's all
Post-Dispatch: Texas has quite a catch in receiver Jordan Shipley
Burnt Orange Nation: Texas Offense About to Take Complete 180

Since opposing defenses, surprise, surprise, have caught up with the four-wide look of the Longhorns, either blitzing like Oklahoma did in classic Brent Venables Reflexive Blitz action -- if Venables ever has his head cut off, he would probably run around in circles briefly and then call for a blitz -- or drop eight into zone coverage, the coaching staff seems to think a change is necessary. Brown said the four-wide flex offense isn't something that you can run "consistently."

Except the Longhorns did run it consistently for more than the last half of the season. All sarcasm aside, Brown is right, though, as Ohio State certainly demonstrated that defenses were starting to figure out ways to defend the Longhorns and as a terrible unit like Colorado more than amply demonstrated. The shelf life of that particular offense and that particularly set of plays has effectively expired as of this point.
Austin American-Statesman: Horns' Aaron Williams has gone from Fab to fabulous
PowerMizzou: Powered Up: Why not Mizzou?
Palestra.net: Mizzou Preps for Homecoming and Texas

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, 10-5-09

Bill C. — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 11:08:09 -0000

After a relatively disengaged (for me) weekend, it's time to get primed for Thursday night, baby. And it starts with your typical Monday boatload of links.

Mizzou-Nebraska Links!

KC Star: For now, Missouri's football program outshines Nebraska

Over the previous five seasons, Missouri has won six more games than Nebraska, three in Big 12 play. The Tigers have played in four straight bowl games, one more than the Cornhuskers in that span.

Missouri’s six NFL draft selections last April match the total of Nebraska players taken over the previous two years.

Conquests of ranked opponents, all-conference and All-America selections, postseason appearances and bowl trophies all favor Tigers of recent vintage.

But the most telling baton-passing moments have occurred on game days. Mizzou has toyed with the Huskers with a combined 93-23 score in two straight triumphs. Thursday, the Tigers go for their first three-game series winning streak since 1969.

It was around the time man first walked on the moon that Mizzou held its own with Nebraska in reputation and perception.
KC Star: MU-Nebraska matchup loaded with intrigue
KC Star: Nebraska returns tickets (?????????) as MU nears sellout
KC Star (Campus Corner): Exploring the Rankings for Mizzou and Nebraska; and updated depth chart
MUtigers.com: OFFICIAL RELEASE!!

Mizzou has won 4 of its last 6 games over Nebraska, with all 4 wins coming by no fewer than 17 points. Mizzou has won 3 straight in Columbia (41-24 in both 2003 and 2005, plus a 41-6 win in 2007), and that was capped last season with an historic 52-17 win in Lincoln, which marked Mizzou's first win in Nebraska since 1978. Missouri is looking to beat Nebraska for a third straight season - the last time that happened was during a stretch from 1967-69.

Mizzou's 3 straight wins in Columbia over Nebraska is the longest such streak since the Tigers won 4 straight in Columbia over the Huskers from 1947-53. Tiger Coach Gary Pinkel stands 4-4 against Nebraska in his 8 years on the Mizzou sideline. The last Tiger coach to have more wins against Nebraska than Pinkel was the College Football Hall of Famer, Dan Devine, who went 8-5 against the Huskers from 1958-70.
Post-Dispatch: Mizzou now looms as challenge for Huskers
Omaha World-Herald: With a roar, Tigers look to restore order, too
Omaha World-Herald: Getting to know Missouri: Gabbert, Tigers hard to tame
Lincoln Journal Star: Sean Weatherspoon in the middle of things
Nebraska State Paper: Beat Em and Join Em
Nebraska State Paper: Pinkel "Very Impressed" with Huskers
PowerMizzou: Where could the Huskers hurt Missouri?

Gabbert Links!

Post-Dispatch: Gabberts are living in middle of rivalry
Post-Dispatch: MU notebook: Blaine Gabbert's streak impresses Pinkel, even if it can't last
The Missourian: Pinkel expresses pleasure with Gabbert's poise
Omaha World-Herald: Tigers court a second Gabbert

And speaking of recruiting, here's a fun Twitter post from PowerMizzou's Gabe Dearmond:

Just got confirmation from Sheldon Richardson that he will visit for #Mizzou game against Nebraska on Thursday

Media Day Links!

Dave Matter: Tigers meet the press
On the depth chart, tight end Andrew Jones is back at No. 1, ahead of Beau Brinkley. ... An OR is listed between Jarrell Harrison and Kenji Jackson at strong safety and between Jasper SImmons and Hardy Ricks at free safety, though Harrison and Simmons were working with the No. 1 defense during practice walk-throughs. ... Brian Coulter is back listed as a starter at one defensive end spot, while there's an OR between Aldon Smith and Jacquies Smith at the other.
MUtigers.com: Press Conference Quotes
PowerMizzou: PMTV: Pinkel meets the media
PowerMizzou: PMTV: Pinkel on the Huskers
PowerMizzou: PMTV: Talking Nebraska

Mizzou-Nevada: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:00:19 -0000

Confused? Catch up with the BTBS Primer.

In the end, this was not a very statistically impressive win. Mizzou's now looked extremely statistically impressive twice and unimpressive twice, and...guess what: they're 4-0. What we're seeing right now is a young, relatively inconsistent team that kicks its game up in the second half and makes the plays it needs to make. We'll see what happens when the schedule gets tougher--does Missouri get tougher too, or is this shaping up to be another 7-5/8-4 season when all is said and done? Anybody who says they know the answer is lying.

	Mizzou (31)	Nevada (21)
Close %	93.8%
Field Position %	54.2%	57.5%
Leverage %	63.9%	71.2%

TOTAL
EqPts	29.8	23.2
Close Success Rate	41.7%	51.6%
Close PPP	0.41	0.28
Close S&P	0.831	0.798

RUSHING
EqPts	4.1	15.4
Close Success Rate	25.8%	65.8%
Close PPP	0.13	0.36
Close S&P	0.391	1.019
Line Yards/carry	1.45	4.07

PASSING
EqPts	25.7	7.8
Close Success Rate	53.7%	30.8%
Close PPP	0.63	0.17
Close S&P	1.163	0.476
SD/PD Sack Rate	0.0% / 5.0%	0.0% / 25.0%

STANDARD DOWNS
Success Rate	43.5%	55.8%
PPP	0.37	0.25
S&P	0.803	0.803

PASSING DOWNS
Success Rate	38.5%	42.9%
PPP	0.50	0.50
S&P	0.881	0.928

TURNOVERS
Number	1	2
Turnover Pts	4.1	10.1
Turnover Pts Margin	+6.0	-6.0

Q1 S&P	0.675	0.991
Q2 S&P	0.796	0.382
Q3 S&P	1.128	1.031
Q4 S&P	0.866	0.956

1st Down S&P	0.541	0.783
2nd Down S&P	1.043	0.884
3rd Down S&P	1.105	0.870

Projected Pt. Margin	+12.6	-12.6
Actual Pt. Margin	+10	-10

Reactions

Here's where a stat nerd faces a conundrum. Nevada ran almost three-fifths of their plays in Mizzou territory, which is way too many, but they also gave up only three touchdowns, one of which came when the game was iced. There is not much of a place for statistical peace when it comes to the "bend but don't break" style, but...Mizzou didn't break. What to think?
Another dilemma: Mizzou faced way too many Passing Downs, but they responded very well to them. Is that a silver lining or a warning sign?
1.45 line yards per carry. Yeah. Though that was balanced out a smidge by what ended up being a damn solid pass blocking performance. Some credit for that has to go to Blaine Gabbert showing some really good escapability, but as David Yost pointed out on Tiger Talk last night, sometimes Gabbert escapes the pocket when he doesn't need to. It usually ends up working out okay (at least not including the first half of the Bowling Green game), but the protection really is probably a bit better than it gets credit for...which is good, because the run blocking most certainly is not.
Both teams did better offensively on Passing Downs than Standard Downs. Makes total sense. Mizzou couldn't move the ball on first downs to save their lives, but Blaine Gabbert was a laid-back assassin on third downs.
Q2 defense and Q3/Q4 offense won this game for Mizzou. Nevada's S&P rebounded with a near-flawless final drive after Mizzou had closed out the win, but in all Mizzou really did do enough to win this game--this wasn't a little lucky like the Bowling Green game. Nevada played well, and Mizzou played a bit better. This brings up an interesting situation with perspective: without knowing what happened in Nevada's first two games, this would have been exactly the type of effort I would have expected from Nevada. They made plays and had a chance to win, but Mizzou made more plays and won.

If I'd been told we'd win like this in the offseason, I'd have been thrilled. But thanks to a wretched two-game road trip to start the season, expectations on Nevada's capabilities changed pretty significantly. I guess we'll see how the Wolf Pack responds as the season progresses--they need to turn things around pretty quickly, or else they're looking at a 2004 Mizzou type of situation, where negative sentiment and lack of confidence in key moments affects what seems overall to be a pretty talented squad.
So here's something amusing: I spent all offseason writing approximately 125,000 words about Mizzou's 2009 prospects, and I came to the following conclusion about the offense: big plays might be a problem, but Mizzou should be able to fall back on their run game, a great offensive line, and solid possession receiving from guys like Andrew Jones and Wes Kemp to move the chains and take pressure off of Blaine Gabbert.

Yeah, the exact opposite has more or less happened. Teams are focusing on the run and stopping it more effectively than I anticipated, and Andrew Jones has been a complete non-factor...but Mizzou has made more big offensive plays than anybody else in the conference. Who knew? I sure didn't. Good thing I spent all season analyzing this instead of, you know, working out or something.

More after the jump.

Three Positives

Missouri > Circumstances. Tricky road trip, altitude, a desperate opponent, a young QB's first long-distance start...and Mizzou won. We can analyze data all we want, but this could have been a hornets' nest, and Mizzou handled it well, making all the big plays when the game was on the line in the second half.
The Receiving Corps. Needless to say, when your top three receivers combine for 20 catches, 341 yards, and three touchdowns, the receiving corps is a strength. Danario can do it all, Jared Perry is a master of the screen, and Wes Kemp is great on both out routes and deep balls. Again, I could go a lot further into the numbers on this one, but why? The typical box score stats do just fine.
The Pass Rush. Or to specify, the Passing Downs Pass Rush. The "scorpion" defense is successfully doing exactly what it was supposed to do--get after the quarterback. Colin Kaepernick escaped the rush because he's Colin Kaepernick, but on 12 Passing Downs pass attempts, Mizzou registered three sacks and almost had a couple more. With this sort of pass rush, it's no wonder our pass defense as a whole is looking better. You can still complete short passes on us on Standard Downs, but in the grand scheme of things, that's allowable. You can complete those passes against just about anybody, not just Missouri.

From here on out, against Nebraska and beyond, the key for Missouri will be forcing Passing Downs. Clearly Nebraska's personnel is completely different than Nevada's--Zac Lee is obviously less mobile than Kaepernick, but NU will also have more receiving threats to worry about...plus they actually have a tight end--not sure Nevada does, really. How Mizzou uses the next week and a half to work on its weaknesses, and how it defines its weaknesses, will go a long way toward defining the season.

Three Negatives

Another slow start. If there's one single difference between this year's Missouri team and the Chase Daniel-led Missouri team, it's first-quarter stats. The first time Mizzou touched the ball, they went three-and-out. The first time Nevada touched the ball, they scored a touchdown. Granted, Mizzou was done a favor with Vai Taua's muffed punt, and they were able to get a field goal on their second-chance first possession; but in all, Missouri was -0.316 in Q1 S&P margin. Eventually this will bite us.
The interior defensive line. I'm not at all ready to label this a weakness, but the fact is, while Jaron Baston made a handful of really nice plays, when he wasn't making a play, there were holes wide open for Nevada between the tackles. One game does not define a unit, but they failed that test, and obviously with Roy Helu, Jr., on the horizon, this is at least a bit of a concern. I'm not at all worried about Helu's ability to get outside--he's not a burner, and our perimeter speed is absolutely fantastic, as shown by guys like Andrew Gachkar and Jacquies Smith and the plays they made against Nevada. But interior rushes were a huge success for Nevada, and now Missouri has to prepare for a better running team. Or at least, a team with better running backs. Nothing against Luke Lippincott--he did a helluva job--but Helu's better.
Duh...the running game. On This Week in Mizzou Football, Gary Pinkel mentioned that most defenses this year (everybody but Bowling Green) have aimed to take away the run at all costs. Simply because Blaine Gabbert has been so successful throwing the ball, I don't expect many defenses to focus on that as much. That alone should open up some running lanes for Derrick Washington, who aside from the late-Q2 fumble, I thought actually ran pretty well. He still doesn't get arm tackled, and he falls forward a lot...but he's just having to make moves too early, and the line isn't blocking well enough, period.

I should also mention that I think the people who are complaining about the slow-developing runs are missing the point. This team has produced three straight 1,000-yard rushers with these running plays. The slow development also allows the blockers to do their thing, so if the blocking is good, the speed of the runs really does not matter. The plays aren't the problem--the blocking, and the successful shooting of gaps, are.

Three Keys Revisited

Seen here.

Circumstances

You've got a young quarterback making his first out-of-state start (and for that matter, you've got a team with almost 30 frosh/sophs on the two-deep playing really far away from home for the first time). You've got altitude. You've got a team that has gone from simply being motivated by revenge against Missouri to being motivated by a desperate need to make something (anything) positive happen. You've got a two-timezone trip west. All of these things are working in Nevada's favor.

Mission accomplished. This wasn't exactly a hostile environment--less than 20,000 fans filled the 30,000 seat stadium, and a decent number of those were Mizzou fans. Regardless, Mizzou handled it pretty well, especially their quarterback. Nevada played well, and I would expect that they'll have no trouble making a bowl game if they continue to play like that, but Missouri was better.

Passing Downs

Nevada wins this game by forcing Blaine Gabbert into making mistakes he hasn't made yet. Those will almost certainly come in Passing Downs. Minimize the number of Passing Downs Gabbert faces, and you minimize the risk of mistakes. That means a) good running, especially early in the game, b) no drops, and c) no penalties. You want the Nevada crowd to get into the game, and the Nevada team to get its confidence back? Face a lot of 3rd-and-9's and see what happens. Again, Missouri is the better overall team here, but this is still a dangerous game because of what Missouri could do to Missouri.

Big fat fail here--penalties and drops weren't a problem, but obviously running was--but it didn't matter. Thanks to Nevada's successful run defense, Missouri faced far too many passing downs...and did just fine. Let's not push the limits on our sudden Passing Downs effectiveness, however.

Tackling

Tackle well, shadow Kaepernick, don't give up big gains, and you give your young offense more margin for error. Nevada's big-play potential just hasn't made an appearance yet this year, and they might need Missouri's help in breaking out.

In the end, this one probably won the game. Yes, Kaepernick escaped the rush on his touchdown run, but that was only one of two scores Nevada managed when the game was "close." Most of Kaepernick's passes were short (ten yards or less), and only once did a Missouri defender miss the tackle and allow a bigger gain. It's pretty clear that the Missouri strategy on Passing Downs is to not blitz much, let "The Scorpion" get after the quarterback, and let 6-7 defenders form a cloud in the secondary and either make the tackle immediately (if the QB gets a throw off) or break up the pass. With good tackling, that's a winning defensive strategy.

Summary

Obviously, stat nerds don't particularly like the "A win is a win" cliche, but that's really all I wanted to get from this game, and Missouri got it. They're undefeated in non-conference play over the last four years now, and if nothing else, that all but assures that Goal #1 for the season--bowl eligibility--is in the bag. Goal #2--competing for a North title? We'll learn about this one next Thursday night. Missouri's initial "+" numbers don't look too hot right now, and it's easy to figure out why. They dominated an Illinois team that got dominated by Ohio State. They beat a Nevada team that got dominated by Notre Dame. Bowling Green followed up a well-gameplanned performance against Missouri by losing at Marshall and getting blown out by Boise State.

What we've learned about this team is that a) what we thought would be a concern (QB play, big-play threats at WR, pass defense) isn't...and b) this team still has plenty of concerns. Making any serious judgements beyond that would be crazy, though, and there's a pretty easy reason why: look at 2007. The 2007 season showed that Missouri's coaches use the non-conference season to prepare for the conference season. That year, the defense that gave up 100+ yards to Illinois State's Geno Blow would soon hold just about every 2007 conference opponent below its season averages. We have no idea what type of adjustments this staff will be making before next Thursday night, but it's pretty clear that, for better or worse, adjustments will be made. Gary Pinkel and his staff now know what they have to work with--now let's see what they do with it.

SB Nation - Andrew Jones

Targets and Catches (Part Two, a.k.a. Will Franklin's Redemption)

2006

2007

2008

2009

Targets and Catches (Part One)

2006

2007

2008

2009

Mizzou-Iowa State: 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-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

The North in 2010

Missouri

Colorado

Iowa State

Kansas

Kansas State

Nebraska

Texas: 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 Links, 10-22-09

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, 10-5-09

Mizzou-Nevada: Beyond the Box Score

Mizzou(31)

Nevada(21)

Reactions

Three Positives

Three Negatives

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

Mizzou
(38)

K-State
(12)

Mizzou
(31)

Nevada
(21)