SB Nation - Jimmy Jackson

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.

The Greatest Win - FINALIST #1

Bill C. — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:00:18 -0000

The Greatest Win in Mizzou History

In anticipation of Friday's Greatest Win finals (that's right, I flipped the schedule around yet again...ain't I a stinker?), let's take a longer look at Finalist #1, 2007 Mizzou-Kansas. Fitting that it comes during Kansas Week, eh? Let's start with an expanded version of the game description you've been reading for the last month.

After decades of producing bad, to mediocre, to good, to occasionally very good results, Missouri and Kansas had simultaneously thrown together potentially their greatest seasons ever in 2007. Missouri was 10-1 and ranked #3 in the country. Kansas was 11-0 and ranked #2. Both programs were riding sudden and shocking momentum late into November. And did I mention, they were meeting at Arrowhead? And that ESPN's Gameday crew was in attendance? And that #1 LSU had lost the day before, meaning the MU-KU winner would move to #1 a week before the BCS Championship pairing was determined?

All photos here come from the lovely and missed Sarah Becking's epic gallery.

This was the biggest game in history for both schools, and they played like it early. Two untouchable offenses were out of sync, trading three-and-outs at the start. Midway through the first quarter, neither team had managed a first down, but when Jeremy Maclin struck with a long punt return to KU's 32, Mizzou was in prime position. But after a personal foul on William Franklin, Mizzou had to settle for a 39-yard field goal attempt. They faked it, with Tommy Saunders throwing a quick out to Franklin, but he was stopped by Chris Harris and Justin Thornton short of the first down, and the game remained scoreless.

After another KU punt, Mizzou finally got rolling. An 11-play, 78-yard drive, assisted by a 20-yard pass to Danario Alexander and a 13-yarder to Saunders set Mizzou up with first-and-goal. On fourth down from the 1, on the game's first huge play, Chase Daniel found Martin on a quick inside screen for the game's first touchdown. With under a minute left in the first quarter, Mizzou led 7-0.

Kansas started the second quarter with their first good offensive play, a 39-yard pass to Kerry Meier, but going for the jugular on the next play, Todd Reesing underestimated William Moore, who stepped in front of a bomb to the endzone.

Thirteen plays (including some great runs by an on-his-game Tony Temple) and 98 yards later, Daniel had his Heisman moment, scrambling for seemingly minutes before finding Alexander for an 11-yard TD and a 14-0 lead. Things were looking up for Missouri, and that didn't change when two potential KU drives ended in missed field goals. What was supposed to be an offensive shootout was actually a bit of a grind, and Mizzou went to halftime up 14-0, just 30 minutes from their first #1 ranking in 47 years.

In the third quarter, Mizzou won the game. Once again, Kansas drove to start the second half, but on third-and-nine from the Mizzou 16, Castine Bridges made a spinning interception of Todd Reesing and returned the ball 49 yards to KU's 40. Nice rushes from Temple and freshman Derrick Washington, and a 10-yard pass to Franklin, set Mizzou up at KU's 1, and Jimmy Jackson barreled into the endzone. 21-0 Mizzou.

Finally, after spotting Mizzou a cushion, KU started to get untracked. Dezmon Briscoe made an amazing, diving catch of a 34-yard Reesing pass, and Brandon McAnderson scored from one yard out, cutting Mizzou's lead to 21-7, but Mizzou's offense was clicking at this point. Playing a bit of keep-away, Mizzou methodically drove 69 yards (in 14 plays and six minutes), converting three short third-down attempts and scoring on a short dump to Washington. With 1:19 left in the third quarter, Mizzou was up 28-7. They would have to hold onto that lead with all their might.

Whether it was a more conservative defense from Mizzou or just an angry, dialed-in KU offense, the Jayhawks were pretty much unstoppable in desperation mode. They drove 65 yards in three minutes, and on fourth-and-two from the Mizzou 5, Todd Reesing bootlegged into the endzone to cut Mizzou's lead to 14. Mizzou responded with a 10-play drive of their own but settled for a field goal. Jeff Wolfert was thankfully automatic at this point, and Mizzou took a 31-14 lead with 9:55 remaining. Tick, tock.

It took Kansas only 83 seconds to score again. After a nice kickoff return by Marcus Herford, Reesing found Briscoe three times and found Kerry Meier on a gorgeous pass-and-catch to set up a Dexton Fields touchdown reception. 31-21, 8:28 left.

Of all the memorable plays in this game, potentially the single biggest came in the middle of Mizzou's ensuing drive. KU was within 10 points and had momentum on their side. After a holding penalty on Martin Rucker, MU faced a third-and-14 from their own 42 with under seven minutes to go. In both of their finest hours, Daniel found Alexander once again, this time for 16 yards and a huge first down. With new breath, Mizzou got another first down and set up Wolfert for a clutch, 43-yard field goal. Mizzou was trading field goals for touchdowns, but they still led, 34-21, with just 3:31 remaining.

Once again, it took KU just 83 seconds to score. Reesing scrambled for seven yards on fourth-and-three from the Mizzou 33, then found Marcus Henry for a 5-yard touchdown. Two minutes and three seconds remained, and Mizzou's lead was somehow down to six points, 34-28. Every Mizzou fan in the stadium just knew that KU was going to recover the ensuing onside kick, but they did not. Mizzou was unable to get a first down, but they made KU kill another timeout and ran the clock down under 30 seconds before having to punt.

Every Mizzou fan in the stadium just knew that KU was going to block the ensuing punt, but they did not. Not only did Adam Crossett get off a lovely pooch kick to KU's 7, but Aqib Talib was able to return it for only four yards. KU had 17 seconds to go 89 yards. Here's where the Sports God would apply the biggest dagger ever to Mizzou hearts. Somehow KU was going to win this game.

Nope. The Mizzou defensive line blew up KU's offensive line and gang-tackled Todd Reesing in the endzone for the game-clinching safety (Mike Kelly's call: "Safety! Ballgame! Bingo!"). Sod Reesing was born, and Mizzou had just won the biggest game in the history of the rivalry.

This win led to the single most celebratory week most Mizzou fans have experienced. Not only did they move to #1 with the win, but they had also ruined (somewhat) KU's best season ever. Mizzou was one win from the national title game--the closest the Tigers have ever come to a "Final Four." Here's something Michael Atchison wrote on RMN the days after the game.

I am prone to belief in the divine, but not the supernatural. I recognize the existence of coincidence, happenstance, and random events of bad fortune. Never in my life have I believed in curses. Except when it comes to the Missouri Tigers.

There are the lightning bolts of cosmic scorn that even casual fans know: Colorado’s fifth down, Nebraska’s kicked ball, Tyus Edney’s zero-to-heartbreak in 4.8 seconds. There have been other moments, equally powerful but more obscure, like first round NCAA flameouts against Rhode Island and Northern Iowa back when I’d never heard of Rhode Island or Northern Iowa (geography, alas, was not a strong suit). And then there were those times when we were made to pay for our prosperity, like when the undefeated, top-ranked football Tigers lost their shot at the national title by falling to Kansas in the 1960 season’s final game, only to have the game futilely forfeited back later. Or Norm Stewart being blindsided by cancer at age 54 in the midst of a season in which he had one of his best and toughest teams. Or 2002, when an ascending basketball program welcomed Ricky Clemons to town and became a national punch line. Sadly, I could go on. There’s more where that came from.

Despite what rational thought tells you, sometimes you have to believe your eyes. When water falls from the clouds, it’s rain. When calamity pours from the sky, it’s a curse.

After one remarkable week in Kansas City, though, I proclaim Mizzou to be cleansed. The curse is over.

It started on a Sunday night, in a reborn downtown, in a shimmering building, when Norm Stewart took his place in the National Collegiate Basketball Hall of Fame. As the coach stood at the podium nearly nineteen years after beating cancer – and helping countless others do the same through his charitable efforts – you knew that he was blessed. He was surrounded by family, including Virginia, his wife of fifty-one years, and his son Lindsey, who gave a world-class induction speech, full of the humor and fire he inherited from his dad. Coach Stewart also was joined by the other starters from his high school basketball team, and by members of the Stalcup, Faurot and Devine families who brought him back to Columbia in 1967. And he was surrounded by his players, Tiger titans like John Brown, Willie Smith, Steve Stipanovich, Jon Sundvold and Derrick Chievous, who won eight league championships and eleven conference tournaments (five old holiday affairs, six post-season events) in the 1970s, 80s and 90s. To see this living history mingling in the same room, it was plain that the good times have far outnumbered the bad, and hard to fathom that we might ever have considered ourselves unlucky, let alone cursed.

It continued the next night in the same building, when the Tiger basketball team played eleventh-ranked Michigan State. I had heard laments that years of scandal and mediocrity had crushed fan enthusiasm, as evidenced by only 5,000 turning out to see the Tigers play Central Michigan on a Monday in Columbia. But what I saw in the Sprint Center suggests that the problem may be playing Central Michigan. On a Monday. In Columbia. In Kansas City, against a top-flight opponent, an overwhelmingly pro-Mizzou crowd of more than 18,000 turned out, and those fans were fierce and hungry for success. And though the Tigers’ rally from sixteen points down fell just short, they played with purpose, and the crowd loved them for it. The next night, when those fans returned to see the Tigers drill Maryland – a program with a national title this decade – it was plain that Mike Anderson’s team is immune from the voodoo of Mizzou’s recent past.

Then, on Friday, already surrounded by a family of Tigers in town for Thanksgiving, I drove to the airport to meet my friends Scott (in from Denver) and T.J. (New York). In recent years, with the demands of careers and families, our gatherings had been limited to weddings and funerals. But with our alma mater’s football team set to play its arch-rival in the year’s biggest game, we ran out of excuses not to get together. As we caught up and remembered winter nights at the Hearnes Center and spring Saturdays at Simmons Field, I realized that the Missouri Tigers had blessed me with the chance to share time with these great friends.

And then, of course, came Saturday night. I’ve never seen a stadium so electric, or a Tiger team so self-assured. From my perch on the verge of 40, it’s easy to forget how young these guys are. Chase Daniel and Martin Rucker are barely old enough to remember the past’s great disappointments. They don’t believe in curses, they believe in each other. When Stryker Sulak and Lo Williams fell down like hard rain on Todd Reesing to secure a heart-stopping triumph, I looked to my right at my wife, who has shared the joy and despair of Tiger sports with me for nearly two decades, and I saw relief. I looked left at my father-in-law, who played on that star-crossed 1960 team, and I saw vindication. Then, as I thrust my hands in the air and looked up into the night sky, from which no calamity had fallen, my mind drifted to the elegant toast T.J. made at Scott’s wedding. Traditionally, he said, the guests bless the newly wedded couple. But when a bride and groom like this share their moment, they bless us.

Missouri Tigers, you bless us. The curse is dead.

Mizzou 2009, Part Two: Putting 2008 to bed

Bill C. — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:00:10 -0000

More photos » by Donna McWilliam - AP

He just doesn't look right without the visor.

Browse more photos »

Part One: Blaine Gabbert and the Four-Year Precedent - Why establishing expectations is so difficult

It struck me as I was hammering out the K-State preview this week that...well, I haven't actually talked about Missouri much this offseason, in BTBS-ese or English. In honor of preseason camp's kickoff, why don't we change that, mmkay?

Consider this Part Two of an ongoing Mizzou 2009 series, following rptgwb's Blaine Gabbert post from Tuesday. Moving forward, we'll take a look at the same types of BTBS projections that we've been making for all the other teams on the 2009 schedule, we'll take an in-depth position-by-position analysis (like you didn't know that was coming), we'll revisit the "Gary Pinkel vs History" series from last December, and...well, we'll do a whole bunch of other things as well. August is going to be a fun month.

So without further adieu, it's time to put 2008 to bed once and for all. The games that were lost are still lost, the players that have gone are still gone, and the 2009 season is less than a month (!!!) away. Over the next couple of days, we'll look back to 2008 to try to understand specifically what might have gone right or wrong and get a read for what it might mean for 2009. Let's get started!

2008

Record: 10-4 (5-3 in conference, Big 12 North Champions)
S&P+: 241.1 (10th in the country, 3rd in the Big 12)
Scoring Margin: 591-381 (+210)
Conference Scoring Margin: 325-213 (+112)
Wins (S&P+ Ranking in parentheses): #21 Nebraska, #25 Illinois, #36 Nevada, #40 Baylor, #44 Northwestern, #79 Kansas State, #81 Buffalo, #82 Colorado, #104 Iowa State, 1-AA SEMO
Losses: #3 Oklahoma, #5 Texas, #14 Oklahoma State, #20 Kansas

So how exactly does Missouri end up 10th in the S&P+ rankings despite four losses and an overall drop-off in play over the last few games of the season? Easy answer: they were just that good in their wins. Despite what amounted to an average performance against OU and below-average performances against Northwestern, Kansas, Baylor, Texas, and Oklahoma State, Mizzou was flat-out untouchable in the other eight games of the season (in close-game circumstances, mind you...so none of those late-game points and yards against Kansas State, Nebraska, Illinois, etc., counted in the totals). There is no late-season bias in the numbers--the whole season is evaluated equally--so clearly the good times outweighed the bad when it came to Mizzou's "+" performance.

And let's be honest. The 2008 season didn't play out as Mizzou fans wanted or expected it to, but...well, stuff happens. Things don't always bounce your way. A year after becoming basically the only team in the country that didn't lose a game it shouldn't lose in 2007 (LSU lost to Arkansas and Kentucky, Ohio State lost to Illinois, Oklahoma lost to Colorado and Tech, etc.), Mizzou lost two such games in 2008, to Kansas and Oklahoma State. But beyond that, there was another reason Mizzou's title run never took shape: OU and Texas were great again. Whereas Mizzou made a move in 2007 when Texas was struggling a bit and OU was going through a couple of brainfarts (lord knows they wouldn't have lost a game if they played every game like they played the Big 12 title game), their title hopes really ended before anybody had noticed--they ended when OU and Texas became OU and Texas again. To win a national title, they had to at least go 1-1 at Texas and in the Big 12 title game. Texas played just about the most perfect game of the season against Mizzou in Austin, and nobody in the country was beating OU the Saturday of the Big 12 title game.

So really, the disappointment comes down to the two losses to OSU and KU. Mizzou was out of sync offensively in both games, and the defense had just enough breakdowns to lose the game, but in the end they were one bounce or break from winning either or both games. Sometimes it just doesn't happen like you want it to.

So before we officially close the door on 2008, let's compare the S&P+ rankings from 2007 and 2008. It's rather surprising.

S&P+ Offensive Rankings, 2007 vs 2008

Close-Game S&P+: 8th in 2007, 11th in 2008
Rushing S&P+: 17th in 2007, 27th in 2008
Passing S&P+: 7th in 2007, 12th in 2008
Standard Downs S&P+: 10th in 2007, 8th in 2008
Passing Downs S&P+: 5th in 2007, 21st in 2008

So the rushing game was a bit worse in 2008 than 2007, not necessarily in the way you would expect. Derrick Washington outproduced Tony Temple (5.9 yards per carry versus 5.6), Jeremy Maclin and Chase Daniel were basically equally effective in both years, and the 2008 backups (Jimmy Jackson, De'Vion Moore) produced more than the 2007 ones (JJ, Marcus Woods, D-Wash). Basically the only thing that changed was the strength of the run defense Mizzou played against. The offenses on the schedule improved, as did the pass defenses, but the run defenses did not.

Even more than the 10-place drop in rushing, there was one major drop in 2008: Passing Downs success. Every time I I've talked about Texas this offseason, I've mentioned their disproportionate Passing Downs success and how it might not be sustainable from one year to another even if the talent of the next year's offense is as good or better. Missouri's 2007 success wasn't as disproportionate as Texas' in 2008, but it was apparently a little too good, and despite the presence of Jeremy Maclin and Chase Coffman, their success ended up falling as the year progressed, especially after avoiding three-and-outs for the first five games of the season. The timing just wasn't quite there in Mizzou's losses, and it cost them.

So the offense regressed ever-so-slightly from 2007 to 2008. The storyline from the offseason was just how infintiely terrible Mizzou's defense was, particularly their pass defense. Is that what the numbers actually tell us?

S&P+ Defensive Rankings, 2007 vs 2008

Close-Game S&P+: 21st in 2007, 20th in 2008
Rushing S&P+: 34th in 2007, 14th in 2008
Passing S&P+: 17th in 2007, 26th in 2008
Standard Downs S&P+: 32nd in 2007, 33rd in 2008
Passing Downs S&P+: 22nd in 2007, 32nd in 2008

I realize this is probably kind of hard to accept, but according to national "+" ranking, the Mizzou defense was actually a smidge better in 2008 than 2007. You read that correctly. The Mizzou defense was actually better in 2008 than 2007. So how the hell does that happen? Haven't we heard all offseason that "Mizzou had the fourth-worst pass defense in the country*?" Two reasons:

* If I hear that line one more time without the disclaimer that a) nobody played a tougher slate of passing offenses, and b) for over half the year, opponents were getting drubbed by Missouri and therefore throwing a ton of passes on Mizzou's second string, I'm going to lose my mind. But we'll return to that...well, right now.

The slate of offenses Missouri played in 2008 was so, so much better than the 2007 slate. According to Passing S&P+, Mizzou played the #1 (Oklahoma), #9 (Texas), #10 (Nebraska), #11 (Oklahoma State), #24 (Illinois), and #25 (Kansas) passing offenses in the country in 2008. Of COURSE they were going to give up a ton of passing yards. Yes, there were some breakdowns, particularly against Illinois and Kansas, but in the end, against the six teams listed above, Mizzou fared alright. They got roasted by Texas and Oklahoma, but so did everybody else, so that doesn't really count against them. They held Oklahoma State well below their per-game averages. They held Nebraska very well below their per-game averages. Kansas was a glitch, and most of Illinois' damage came when Mizzou was up a healthy margin and the game was not considered "close." As soon as Illinois cut the game back to within a close margin, the Mizzou defense stepped up and made plays again. Which brings us to...
Junk time was very, very cruel to Missouri's per-game yardage figures. Missouri blew teams out in eight of 14 games in 2008, meaning their second string was facing the blown-out opponents first- and second-string, and most of the time those opponents were passing the whole time. But in general, Mizzou's defense took a tumble when the close-game margin (game with 28 points in Q1, 24 in Q2, and 16 in Q3/Q4) was broken.

Against Illinois, Mizzou gave up 9.1 yards per play (36 for 327) when the game was not "close" and 5.0 (41 for 205) when it was. Against Kansas State, it was 7.0 per play (39 for 274) when not close, 2.5 (36 for 89) when close. Against Nebraska, Mizzou's second/third stringers gave up 70 yards in 8 plays on the final drive. Against K-State, Mizzou's second/third stringers gave up 150 yards in 7 plays in the final two minutes. Plus, because of Gary Pinkel's obsession with not running up the score (which made the third-quarter fake field goal against Nevada all the more disorienting), Mizzou's second-stringers tend to play very conservatively, handing the other team quite a few fourth-quarter yards (against Buffalo, Nevada, Nebraska, Kansas State, and Iowa State).

Here's the bottom line: for a number of reasons, Mizzou's defense didn't make enough plays in 2008. William Moore may not have been utilized correctly, members of the secondary didn't communicate well at all at the end of the year and gave up too many big plays to KU and Northwestern, etc. But the main thing that hurt Mizzou last year was that their defense stayed about the same, while everybody's offense got better. In 2007, three of Missouri's opponents ranked among the Offensive S&P+ Top 20 (OU #10, OU #10, Kansas #12). In 2008, that number was five (OU #2, Texas #10, OSU #13, Nebraska #18, Kansas #19).

Summary

So that's why the defensive numbers didn't really change from 2007 to 2008. Here were two other factors that doomed Mizzou's dreams of 12 or 13 (or 14) wins:

In 2007, Mizzou recovered 58.7% of all fumbles that occurred. In 2008, they recovered 40.6% of them. That's a rough difference of about seven turnovers that went to Mizzou in 2007 and not in 2008. Think about what kind of difference that can make. In 2007, Pig Brown recovered two Eddie McGee fumbles and returned one 99 yards for a touchdown. In 2008, Chase Daniel ran for 50 yards in the first half against Kansas and was stripped at the end, and KU recovered. And of course, the "Danario Alexander trips and has a pass bounce off his helmet and into the arms of an OSU defender" play doesn't even count as a fumble. Mizzou just didn't get the bounces in 2008.
Passing Downs didn't go in Mizzou's favor. While the offense still did enough to rank 12th overall in Offensive S&P+ (a very good number no matter how you cut it), they improved slightly on Standard Downs and regressed rather significantly on Passing Downs (from 5th to 21st). On defense, they made enough plays to rank just about the same in Defensive S&P+, but unlike 2007 the plays they didn't make came in big Passing Downs situations (they fell from 22nd to 32nd in that regard). Passing Downs are volatile--the rankings for Passing Downs appear to change more from year to year than Standard Downs success.

For whatever reason--potentially the lack of Martin Rucker on offense, or the misuse of a blitzing William Moore on defense--those pivotal plays didn't work to Mizzou's favor in 2008, and it made certain games (two in particular) close enough that they could be doomed by bad bounces.

What does all this mean for 2009? Well, let's be honest--not much. While Missouri still has the second-most proven offensive talent in the North, the second-best defensive tackle in the North, the best linebacker in the conference, and the Carl Gettis Treatment™ (yes, I'm going to blindly pretend that all of the late-season breakdowns were Justin Garrett's fault--sue me), the onslaught of youth means that last year's performance really won't have a lot of bearing on this year's, good or bad. But if Missouri wanted to recover 60% of all fumbles again in 2009, I wouldn't complain.

Rock M Roundtable!

Bill C. — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:00:05 -0000

1 - In preparation of the most emotional Senior Day EVER at Mizzou, what is your favorite unsung moment (i.e. not just "beating Kansas at Arrowhead", but something not everybody thinks or talks about) involving this year's Mizzou senior class? Doug, if you want you can just say "Chase Daniel eating boogers."

2 - If NU beats Kansas and Missouri beats KSU and ISU, the North title is Missouri's before Armageddon at Arrowhead II even takes place. How likely is this?

3 - Quick: one reason Missouri fans should be scared of the KSU game.

4 - Big 12 picks!

* Kansas State at Missouri
* Kansas at Nebraska
* Oklahoma State at Texas Tech
* Oklahoma at Texas A&M
* Baylor at Texas
* Iowa State at Colorado

5 - Finally, who will be Kansas State's head coach in 2009?

The Beef: 1 - There was a run during the NU game last season that crystallized it all pretty well for me. I don’t remember the exact play, but Chase ended up scrambling out (as he did for a good number of yards in that game) and gained a number of yards running down the east sideline. He was eventually forced out of bounds, but kept his feet and momentum (hey…I’m a fat guy and know how hard it is to stop sometimes) and continued to run down the sidelines. He started to jump up and down and waive his hands, even I believe trying to give someone five as he went by them. That sort of passion has certainly been displayed before on our field, but he (Chase) just seemed to connect so well with the crowd at that moment. All the more interesting to me because this was a kid coming from TX who had no ties to our state or school and who gave (or was giving at the time) everything for us to change us…and he did.

2 - Obviously I think it is pretty likely Mizzou defeats ISU and kSU…am not as sure about kU losing to NU. Yes the game is in Lincoln, but I would suspect kU got a little healthy last week against kSU coming off of their tough few weeks. It is a big game for both teams, but I still see kU having more talent on the field and on the sidelines so I am thinking they go up to NU and pull off the win.

3 - Because last week happened I guess…but that is the best I can come up with. I suppose we should be a little trepidatious (not sure that it is a word) about our emotions early in the game giving kSU any sort of hope. And while I do not believe they can do anything on defense to stop us, our pass rush does need to get to Freeman.

4 - Big 12 picks!

* Kansas State at Missouri – Mizzou by a whole bunch

* Kansas at Nebraska – kU by 10-14 in the end

* Oklahoma State at Texas Tech – ooooh….good one. My first thought is let down by TTech…so I will go with that. Okie State eeks one out.

* Oklahoma at Texas A&M – Can someone tell OU the white flags being waved by the folks down there are because they are surrendering? Seriously though, good for aTm for showing some signs of life the past couple of weeks…it gets beaten out of them this week by an OU team that needs to start positioning itself in possible hopes of stealing a BCS berth should other national teams start to falter (like they have in the past).

* Baylor at Texas –I refuse to comment on this game since it appears to be this game which pushed us to the ridiculous 6:00 p.m. start time.

* Iowa State at Colorado – I refuse to comment on this game because it might set football back 75 years.

5 - The only name I have heard/seen mentioned so far would be a run at Patterson from TCU, who I think would be a great get for them (especially since he would not have to replace most of his tie collection). However, I have also seen that name floated for the Tenn opening…and let’s face it…they have more money. Seems to be a strange year for coaching openings…so it will be interesting to see how it plays out. But…if it is Ron Prince, someone better find TB and put him on suicide watch…or buy him a bunch of Mizzou apparel and a season ticket and start the conversion

The Boy: 1 - As the 2004 season was finishing its collapse, and we found ourselves down 28-0 to Kansas in the second half, I more or less stopped watching the game and started watching this cluster of players on the sidelines. Every time Mizzou did anything good at all, this group started jumping up and down and chanting and cheering...Mizzou scored to make it 28-7...then 28-14...and the cluster of players started growing. I started recognizing jersey numbers and names...#14 Patton...#5 Alexander...it was basically the entire group of redshirting freshmen. For a split second, it looked like we'd come all the way back and win that game, but when it didn't happen, I found myself thinking "If it is ever going to turn around for Gary Pinkel here, it's going to be that group of players that does it." Now...that was only half-right. Some of the biggest reasons for the turnaround--Daniel, Coffman, Hood, Christopher--didn't show up on campus until the next summer, but in that cluster of chanting freshman were guys like Tommy Saunders, and Stryker Sulak, and William Moore, and Steve Redmond, and, of course, Aaron O'Neal...a bunch of guys who made significant contributions (intended and unintended) to the program on and off the field...and without those contributions, Gary Pinkel would not be coaching in Columbia right now.

2 - Before last week, I'd have said hell yeah to the idea of NU beating KU. But now I'm not so sure. KU's defense is porous enough that NU could be able to move the ball, especially if the Fightin' Pelini's are fired up after embarrassing themselves last weekend--but I think the run-pass threat that KU has going on right now will be too much. Man oh MAN would I love to see NU knock the 'Hawks off, though.

3 - I'm just going to assume that Mizzou is going to be emotionally drained and flat for most of the first quarter, and if KSU starts the game off like they did in '06 (getting a fumble return TD on the first play and moving the ball well on the ground), then they'll at least have a fighting chance of staying in the game for a while. But...no. We're not losing this game. We're just not.

4 - Mizzou 52, KSU 16
Kansas 41, Nebraska 31
Texas Tech 35, Oklahoma State 28
Oklahoma 49, Texas A&M 27
Texas 44, Baylor 10
Colorado 1, Iowa State -1

5 - Honestly, for the long-term it might make more sense to let Ron Prince sink with the "18 senior starters, about 3 of whom are talented" ship next year and bring in a new coach with a new batch of scholarships to start from scratch in 2010. And it certainly sounds like the KSU higher-ups are (the only ones) in Prince's corner. I don't know what to think about this one. It might come down to whether they win another game this year or not...if they show well against NU and ISU, maybe he sticks around...but if they humiliate themselves again in those two games, they'll have no choice but to can him.

Doug: 1 - Chase... Daniel... eating... boogers. Yeah, yeah, that'll work quite nicely.

2 - It's a road game for Kansas this weekend, and they're 1-1 in conference road games this season... but, it happened for Missouri this season, I don't see why Kansas can't win at Nebraska on Saturday. I think KU is back on track (Thanks K-State!) and now it's a question of which Nebraska team shows up, the one that played Texas Tech tough, or the one that rolled over against Oklahoma. I have no idea. That said, I think the Big 12 North title will come down to Arrowhead.

3 - Because crazier things have happened? I don't know what it is, but Kansas is like Josh Freeman's kryptonite. I've never seen a guy be that bad against one team... especially if that one team is KU. That said, he wasn't that awful against Missouri last year, 256 yards, 2 touchdowns, 1 interception. A lot depends on how well Lemark Brown can run the ball and take some pressure off of the throwing game, though I think KU was willing to sacrifice 3 meaningless rushing touchdowns to constantly be in Freeman's face. No matter what the school says, part of Ron Prince has to think his job is on the line, and maybe that'll change the way he preps the Wildcats for this game. They've got nothing to lose... and that's when a foe is at their most dangerous. (Or is that wounded and backed into a corner? I can never remember.)

4 - Missouri - And, after all that, I'll still go with the safe pick.
Kansas - I don't know if the game only being on pay-per-view is because NU isn't very good, or because the conference knows the entire state of Nebraska will shell out the $30 for the broadcast.
Oklahoma State - Why should anything be easy for the BCS?
Oklahoma - Seriously, this game is on TV? National TV?
Texas - I don't know if the Longhorns and Mac Brown ever get pissed off... but I still wouldn't want to be Baylor on Saturday.
Colorado - Because it's in Boulder... and because I had to pick a winner.

5 - Bob Krause. At this point, he's about as qualified to be head coach as he was to be Athletic Director for a Division I school

rptgwb: 1. Rather than just giving a blanket statement, I'll note some of my favorite moments for each player just going down the list:

Daniel - How do you choose just one?
Patton - Hearing the students explode every time Patton came on the field as a way of saying "thank you" for staying at Mizzou
Coffman - Which is YOUR favorite nunchuck?
Willy Mo - The pick at Arrowhead was huge, but I'll always remember the image of WillyMo standing up and flexing after picking off Juice in 2007
Jackson - Hearing Mike Kelly call him "the kid form Caruthersville" 900 times
Saunders - No defining moment for Mr. Dependable
Bridges - Without a doubt, the one-handed spinning pick of Reesing

There are obviously others, but that's where I'll cut the list for now.

2. Depending on which Nebraska and Kansas teams show up, it could be very likely. But Kansas appears to be getting its act together at least a little bit, while Nebraska can't exactly be overflowing with confidence right now. I think if they played 10 times, KU would win 6 or 7 times. Can NU play one of the 3 or 4 games this weekend? I don't know.

3. Because we just SURVIVED BAYLOR BY ONLY THREE POINTS.

4. Picks:
Mizzou over Kansas State by 35
Kansas over Nebraska by 10
Oklahoma over Texas A&M by 20
Texas over Baylor by 24
Colorado over Iowa State by 7
*Upset special: Oklahoma State over Texas Tech by 4

5. Jon Wee-fald? Weff-ald?

rptgwb: By the way, Kansas State this week = Homer Simpson in this clip:

Michael Atchison: 1 - Chase Daniel, as a freshman, relieving Brad Smith in a lost-cause game against Iowa State, and rallying the Tigers to victory. Think of the ripples. They lose that game (as they surely would have), they probably don’t go to a bowl game, Gary Pinkel likely gets fired, there’s turmoil in the program, and the last two years never happen.

2 - I think the odds of Nebraska beating Kansas are about one in four, making the odds of hypothetical outcome one in four point five.

3 - There is no reason for Missouri fans to be scared. In the parlance of this political season, I just can’t see KSU’s path to victory.

4 - Mizzou by 23.
Kansas by 6.
Tech by 2.
Oklahoma by 31.
Texas by 24.
Colorado by 4.

5 - I’ll say Ron Prince is the head coach in 2009, because if it’s not him, I have absolutely no idea who takes the job. Perhaps they should make a run at Phil Fulmer.

ZouDave: 1 - It's a virtual collage of greatness in my mind. From Stryker Sulak's pick 6 against Texas Tech in 2007, to Willy Mo's steamrolling of Marlon Lucky in 2007, to Tommy Saunders' raised finger in salute to his Grandfather, to Jimmy Jackson's GREAT performance in place of Temple against Texas Tech in 2007, to Ziggy Hood's mere presence, to Brock Christopher's INT against Nebraska this season, to Colin Brown destroying defenders all day long in the Cotton Bowl.....to Chase Daniel. I am going to miss that pudgy little bastard.

2 - Let's say 35%. kansas has been a bit more bipolar this year than even Mizzou has in that sometimes they look really good and sometimes they look really bad. Nebraska has looked better since we caved their faces in a few weeks ago, and I think they were a lot more pissed about the loss to ku last year than the loss to Mizzou. I think *this* is the game they've had circled all year. They're going to be pumped, both players and fans, and if ku starts slow again (which they've done on the road a couple of times) I'm not sure Nebraska gives them a window to come back. If kansas just plays their game, though, the Huskers can't keep up.

3 - Injury.

4 - Missouri by 42. I think we're going to rape this team.

kansas by 7. I think NU closes late but cannot make it happen.

Texas Tech by 14. Everyone is going to be looking for a letdown game for Tech, but I don't think OSU is quite as good as the rest of the South (their win over us not withstanding).

Oklahoma by as much as they want. I think OU ends up the South champion but they're going to keep getting style points just in case.

Texas by 24. They'll right the ship.

Iowa State by 10. 13-3.

5 - Honestly I think it will be Ron Prince, but I think he'll have brand new coordinators. Once 2010 is also a flop, they'll all be gone.

rptgwb: One moment I'd forgotten was the pick-six by WillyMo in Lubbock in 2006, one play after the Xzavie Jackson pick-six. That has to be one of my favorite moments of all time for vindictive reasons, leading into the depressing shot of the Tech girls with the "What the hell just happened... but, we're Texas Tech!" look on their faces.

That was a great night - I was at the American Airlines Center watching the Stars open the home season by beating Beef's Devils while catching glances at luxury boxes to keep up with MU/TTU.

ZouDave: Well maybe it's just me, but I'm much happier with a 6:00pm kickoff than I would have been with a 11:00am kickoff (or 11:30am). Not that I wouldn't have been there, early, and ready to go but I hate leaving KC at 6:30am to get to a football game. I find it difficult to get any kind of meaningful buzz going prior to the game when it's that early in the morning. And no, that's not my only concern, but it's nice when I can take my time during the day, leave KC around noon, have a solid few hours of tailgating time and then get to enjoy the game. I love Faurot Field at night (despite the OSU game this year).

2:30pm would have been the best, but KSU isn't a good enough opponent for us to have hoped for that.

The Beef: Personally, the 6:00 pm game time changed some of our plans and plans of friends visiting from out of town...but that is what it is. However, the fact it will be back into the 30's (very likely) during the game is going to kind of suck, and will keep some folks at home (which is always too bad)

ZouDave: I have faith in the Missouri fans. A year ago we though there was NO WAY we'd get a sellout against A&M on Senior Day with the early kickoff vs deer season but the fanbase stepped up and made that day great.

It's easy to dress warmly for games. Especially with it being Blackout Day, because everyone has black Mizzou sweatshirts already. I expect the fans to be packed starting the game, but the crowd will taper faster since we'll be up huge and it will be late and cold.

I just hope everyone that is there gets their asses into the stadium earlier than normal to see all of the Senior Day stuff. This is one we won't soon forget. I'm going to be openly weeping, there's simply no chance I won't be. I will probably hug a stranger.

The Beef: You are a bit of a crier....

ZouDave: You have no proof.

The Beef: Hmmm...I bet I could find some...

Doug: Will Dave's sister be there?

I'll hug her.

Michael Atchison: I don't mean to intrude on the festival of weeping over guys named "Chase," but would it be fair for me to note that basketball season starts with exhibitions this week, and that since we last convened, Marcus Denmon played the role of a white-hot Clarence Gilbert in the Black and Gold game?

The Beef: It is a fair note...so who is going to be present at the first exhibition game of the season tomorrow? Who plans to watch the proceedings on TV?

Michael Atchison: I forwarded my tickets to the nerdy guy on this site who does all those statistical pieces that no one reads. As soon as I'm back from Family Math Night at my daughter's school, I'll be settling in front of the TV.

The Beef: Boy...sure hope the nerdy guy goes to the game with those tickets

ZouDave: I will not be remotely present, and while it's on I will probably be working on the Baylor game highlights. I think some of you will be happy with the music choice...

ZouDave: I think I've cracked your code....

The Boy: Let's just say that the nerdy guy hasn't actually received the tickets in the mail yet, therefore the nerdy guy has no obligation just yet.

And the nerdy guy prefers this picture instead:

Michael Atchison: Nerdy guy need not fret. The tickets were placed in the U.S. Mail in Kansas City on Monday. They should arrive in Columbia today, or tomorrow at the absolute latest.

The Boy: And by the way...what the hell is Family Math Night???

ZouDave: In Independence it would be Family Meth Night

Michael Atchison: It’s where families from the elementary school gather to eat hot dogs and play math games to stimulate the young people’s interest in the subject. Tell me how much you want to trade lives with me.

The Beef: Does not sound all bad…I mean…I like hot dogs…what kind of condiments are we talking about though? Anything fancy? (cheese? Onions?)

Michael Atchison: Little packets of mustard and relish.

The Beef: Eh…I’ve been to worse outings…

Doug: How are the hot dogs prepared? On the rollers? Or boiled?

Try to hold out for the rollers.

ZouDave: Worst. Topic. Ever.

Michael Atchison: You guys asked. I never indicated it would be interesting.

The Beef:

ZouDave:

(An hour later...)

The Boy: I'd just like to remind everybody that the last time we had a Roundtable this lackluster, Mizzou lost. LOST!

rptgwb: You guys have no idea how scared I get on Roundtable days when I'm in class and I click an email with the "paper clip" attachment graphic next to it.

It's not easy to explain to people why I just opened an email with a huge picture of Rupaul in the middle of a lecture. Or any other time for that matter.

Doug: Oh, well now you're just going to encourage them.

The Boy: This could get ugly.

The Beef: So…um…does this change things? From GoPowerCat.com

Kansas State football coach Ron Prince is expected to announce his resignation during a 4 p.m. teleconference Wednesday sources have told GoPowercat.com. More news as this story develops. Prince was hired as K-State head prior to the 2006 season, and collected a record of 16-18 during his tenure as head coach. K-State is scheduled to play at Missouri on Saturday

Doug: Holy f...

The Beef: Yeah…that ought to spice things up

Doug: It ain't exactly Fulmer... but I never expected Prince to throw himself on his own sword like this.

The Beef: Or be pushed onto the sword bolstered by some nice compensation?

Doug: I don't know. K-State isn't exactly over-loaded with big money donors. I imagine he was offered the buy-out money and maybe next year's salary on top of that, but I highly doubt there's some comically large check with a comically large dollar figure sitting by his door right now.

The Beef: I thought there was one name I remember reading that they needed to get on board…maybe something with a V? I could be making that up though

Doug: Are you thinking of Varney's Bookstore?

Seriously though, I just pulled up the list of $50,000+ donors for the K-State Athletic Scholarship fund. There is a Dennis Von Waaden on there. Ring any bells?

The Beef: No…let me go back and try to find it…was probably on TB’s site

The Beef: From TB…

He needs to get the big boosters, primarily the Vaniers, on his side.

Doug: Oh yeah, I think that's the name on their football complex that's attached to the stadium.

The Beef: Ah…then yes…you would want to get those folks in your boat

ZouDave: Just finally able to jump in here...this is crazy! Was this his secret plan?

rptgwb: Did anyone else notice that this is two years in a row that the opposing coach has been put on the "resignation" block a few days before the Mizzou senior day game?

First Franchione in 2007, now Prince in 2008. Gene Chizik better watch himself in 2009.

ZouDave: That goes in line with us playing against what's-his-nuts up at ISU in 2006 for his last game, and against Bill Snyder in 2005 in his last game. Neither of those went well for us.

Doug: Otherwise known as Dan "What's-his-nuts" McCarney.

ZouDave: That's him

rptgwb: By the way, to refer back to my favorite Willy Mo moment from the 2006 Tech game, I finally got around to grabbing a (low-res) screenshot:

THAT is what Mizzou football does.

The Boy: The best thing about that game was, Graham Harrell had the exact same look on his face after Moore's pick. Leach had to take him out of the game for a series because he was so shell-shocked.

ZouDave: for what it's worth, I like these Texas Tech girls better:

The Beef: Good lord the one on the bottom right is a whore….

ZouDave: you know her?

The Beef: Nope….just guessing…it would be like passing Jenna Haze on the street…I might not know it was her…but I would draw the same conclusion…

And with that…we should probably wrap this up

ZouDave: especially if you're gonna be with Jenna Haze....

The Boy: He's here all week, folks.

Mizzou-OSU: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:00:05 -0000

So as I was entering play-by-play data yesterday, I had an extra spring in my step. I was very curious what the BTBS data would say about this game...how it would explain the whole "outgained them, broke even on turnovers...still lost at home" thing. Well...now I'm wishing I hadn't looked at this...wishing I had just skipped right over the BTBS piece this week. Mizzou dominated in almost every statistical category except one: Passing Downs. You know that whole concept of "leverage" that I've been pushing recently? If you haven't hopped on board the Leverage train yet, you might want to do so now, as Leverage cost Mizzou an undefeated record.

Missouri		Okie State
	% Close = 100.0%
53.8%	Field Position % *	46.2%
81.4%	Leverage % **	65.3%
	TOTAL
70	Plays	72
28.09	EqPts	26.73
55.7%	Success Rate	41.7%
0.40	Points Per Play (PPP)	0.37
0.958	S&P (Success + PPP)	0.788

	RUSHING
7.46	EqPts	13.24
56.3%	Success Rate	35.7%
0.47	PPP	0.32
1.029	S&P	0.672
2.83	Line Yards/carry	2.28

	PASSING
20.63	EqPts	13.48
57.7%	Success Rate	50.0%
0.40	PPP	0.45
0.974	S&P	0.949

	NON-PASSING DOWNS
63.2%	Success Rate	44.7%
0.45	PPP	0.39
1.077	S&P	0.834

	PASSING DOWNS
23.1%	Success Rate	36.0%
0.21	PPP	0.34
0.438	S&P	0.701

	TURNOVERS
3	Number	3
8.85	Points Lost	8.28
6.09	Points Given	5.78
14.94	Total T/O Pts	14.06
-0.88	Turnover Pts Margin	+0.88

So Missouri outgained OSU in terms of yards and EqPts...
They split in turnover margin...
They out-leveraged them (in terms of how many Passing Downs they forced)...
They won the field-position battle...
They dominated the OSU O-line in terms of line yards (OSU was averaging over 3.6 line yards per carry)...
They didn't miss their season S&P average by much...
They held OSU to what was by far their lowest S&P of the season...
And they lost. Because they were absolutely horrific on Passing Downs.
There were 6 turnovers in the game, and almost all of them were relatively huge. Mizzou's were worth 4.68 points (Danario trips and falls), 5.89 points (Daniel bombs it to nobody in particular), and 4.37 points (Lavine steps in front of Maclin). OSU's were worth 6.13 points (Baston recovers fumble at end of half), 3.66 points (Bridges INT) and 4.28 points (Moore sticks Bryant, Gettis recovers). Any one of those doesn't happen, and the result is probably significantly different.
Finally, I can't say enough about how well OSU tackled. They were fast, and they didn't miss. That was the biggest reason they held Mizzou to 0.40 Points Per Play.

More analysis after the jump.

Let's go into a little more detail...

S&P by Quarter

Q1
Missouri: 53.8% / 0.36 PPP / 0.894 S&P
Oklahoma State: 59.1% / 0.37 PPP / 0.956 S&P

Q2
Missouri: 45.0% / 0.39 PPP / 0.843 S&P
Oklahoma State: 33.3% / 0.10 PPP / 0.428 S&P

Q3
Missouri: 65.0% / 0.43 PPP / 1.082 S&P
Oklahoma State: 35.7% / 0.85 PPP / 1.203 S&P

Q4
Missouri: 58.8% / 0.41 PPP / 0.998 S&P
Oklahoma State: 33.3% / 0.29 PPP / 0.619 S&P

You see a nice spike in Mizzou's numbers in the second half, once they basically gave up on the run and focus on quick short passing as their new "running game". Meanwhile, OSU did a good job of gameplanning (success in Q1 and Q3), while the Mizzou defense made very good adjustments (success in Q2 and Q4).

S&P by Down

1st Down
Missouri: 60.5% / 0.41 PPP / 1.014 S&P
Oklahoma State: 36.4% / 0.25 PPP / 0.618 S&P

2nd Down
Missouri: 60.9% / 0.50 PPP / 1.111 S&P
Oklahoma State: 52.0% / 0.51 PPP / 1.034 S&P

3rd Down
Missouri: 22.2% / 0.11 PPP / 0.332 S&P
Oklahoma State: 38.5% / 0.40 PPP / 0.780 S&P

Just a staggering job by OSU of preventing Mizzou from having success where they're used to it the most--3rd downs (and, somewhat consequently, Passing Downs). Mizzou was as consistent as always on 1st and 2nd downs, but the clutch plays belonged to OSU. Yet another reason why I wish we could play this team again...like, right now.

Projections vs Performance

Here, we'll look at actual performance compared to what was projected in last week's BTBS preview.

Mizzou Rushing

Avg Projected Mizzou Rushing Output: 13.6 EqPts
BTBS Adjusted Projection: 19.0
Actual Performance: 7.5

Chase Daniel: 2.97 EqPts, 100.0% success rate, 1.595 S&P
Derrick Washington: 2.49 EqPts, 25.0% success rate, 0.561 S&P
Jimmy Jackson: 1.38 EqPts on 1 carry
Jeremy Maclin: 0.62 EqPts on 2 carries

Though it was on Passing Downs where Mizzou had its biggest failures, chances are that failure in the running game caused a lot of those Passing Downs, especially in the first half. Chase Daniel did well at eating away chunks of yards when given the opportunity, and you could make the case that he should have run the ball a bit more, but seeing how dead his arms and legs seemed to be in the 4th quarter already, he probably took enough hits as is. But the game hinged at least somewhat in OSU's ability to shoot the gaps at just the right times and take away Derrick Washington's effectiveness.

Mizzou Passing

Avg Projected Mizzou Passing Output: 23.7 EqPts
BTBS Adjusted Projection: 28.0
Actual Performance: 20.6

Jeremy Maclin: 5.16 EqPts, 100% success rate, 1.645 S&P
Chase Coffman: 4.91 EqPts, 63.6% success rate, 1.083 S&P
Tommy Saunders: 3.44 EqPts, 100% success rate, 1.689 S&P
Derrick Washington: 2.78 EqPts, 71.4% success rate, 1.111 S&P
Danario Alexander: 2.48 EqPts on 2 catches
Earl Goldsmith: 1.32 EqPts, 100% success rate, 1.441 S&P
Jared Perry: 0.53 EqPts on 2 catches
Andrew Jones: 0.49 EqPts on 1 catch

Once again, both the projections and my own projections were too optimistic about Mizzou's offensive performance. Credit OSU's gameplan for a lot of that.

OSU Rushing

Avg Projected OSU Rushing Output: 13.7 EqPts
BTBS Adjusted Projection: 14.0
Actual Performance: 13.2

The projections were actually a smidge optimistic about OSU's offensive performance too. Just imagine how good these numbers would look for Mizzou without Hunter's one long TD run. If if's and but's were candy and nuts...

OSU Passing

Avg Projected OSU Passing Output: 17.7
BTBS Adjusted Projection: 15.0
Actual Performance: 13.5

Credit where it's due: Mizzou's pass defense came to play. They were hitting hard, and they were two plays away from a wonderful performance. Of course, both of those plays went for TDs--one an obvious miscommunication on the play-action TD; the other, a confusing play where there ended up being two OSU players (Bryant & Davis) and one MU player (Ricks) in the same part of the endzone. Unfortunately, Davis made the catch. Regardless, Mizzou's pass defense played better than the numbers suggested they would, and this further reinforces the fact that it wasn't the Mizzou defense that cost them this game.

Mizzou Defense

Because of the solid defensive play, I thought I'd show you the breakdown for "successful" defensive tackles...

Sean Weatherspoon: 4.5 successful tackles (69.2% success rate)
Justin Garrett: 3.5 (46.7%)
William Moore: 3.0 (42.9%)
Jaron Baston: 2.5 (100.0%)
Tommy Chavis: 2.5 (100.0%)
Brock Christopher: 2.5 (71.4%)
Carl Gettis: 2.5 (55.6%)

Three members of the secondary with a success rate above 40% is just weird. But this does further support that our secondary a) hits hard and b) supports the run defense wonderfully.

Summary

For regular football fans, this game was a treat. Big plays were made on both sides of the ball. All the big-name offensive players (Daniel, Maclin, Coffman, Robinson, Hunter, Bryant) made plays at one point or another; all of Mizzou's defensive playmakers made some big hits and stops; OSU had guys like Jeremiah Price and Orie Lemon making names for themselves. It was a fun game...unfortunately, the result left something to be desired.

If nothing else, the BTBS stats point to what we basically already knew: Mizzou played well...except for when it didn't. (Brilliant analysis, I know.) The Mizzou Offense clicked along as always on Non-Passing Downs...but for really only the second time in the last 20 games, they were horrific on Passing Downs. The Mizzou receivers played well...except for the dropped passes (which don't really work themselves into BTBS numbers). The Mizzou defense played great...aside from three specific plays.

All these things point squarely to the "It just wasn't our day" truism, but that doesn't make the loss any easier to accept. Mizzou fans should take comfort in the fact that the Tigers still match up relatively well against Texas, and they're still clearly (to my eyes) a Top 10 team. The problem is...5-1 isn't nearly as promising as 6-0, and the Tigers quite obviously need to beat Texas to keep their national title hopes (and possibly Chase Daniel's Heisman hopes) alive.

Poll

Who was Mizzou's statistical MVP of the OSU game?

Chase Daniel (0.974 S&P Passing, 20.63 Passing EqPts, 2.97 Rushing EqPts)

1 votes

Jeremy Maclin (5.78 Total EqPts)

3 votes

Sean Weatherspoon (4.5 Successful Tackles)

5 votes

William Moore (3.0 Successful Tackles, 1 forced fumble)

3 votes

Jaron Baston (2.5 Successful Tackles, 1 fumble recovery)

10 votes

No MVP--we lost!

66 votes

88 votes | Poll has closed

Mizzou-SEMO: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:00:04 -0000

So...does anybody really feel a great desire to dive into the intricacies of the BTBS stats for a 52-3 win that could have been 100-3 with the starters in? I thought not. But there are a few things I have to point out.

Almost Perfect

After the jump, you can check out my BTBS "box score" table for the SEMO game. In it, be sure to check out the 'close-game' stats.

Mizzou ran 17 plays while the game was 'close' (i.e. within two possessions).
Of those 17, 15 were successful.
Those 17 plays resulted in 17.25 EqPts.
Anything over a 45% success rate is solid. Mizzou's close-game success rate was 88.2%.
Anything over a 0.50 PPP is solid. Mizzou's close-game PPP was 1.01.
Adding those together, anything over about a 0.950 S&P is solid. Mizzou's close-game S&P was 1.897.
Looking back at my 2007 stats, only one offensive performance can top Mizzou's near-perfection here: Florida put up a 92.3% close-game success rate, 1.40 close-game PPP, and 2.321 close-game S&P versus Western Kentucky last year. F---ing Tim Tebow...always getting in Chase Daniel's way on the greatness scale...

QBs

For the game, Mizzou QBs put up the following numbers...

Chase Daniel

Passing: 88.2% / 1.07 PPP / 1.949 S&P
TOTAL: 80.6% / 0.90 PPP / 1.706 S&P

Chase Patton

Passing: 75.0% / 0.37 PPP / 1.121 S&P
TOTAL: 75.0% / 0.57 PPP / 1.321 S&P

Blaine Gabbert

Passing: 22.2% / 0.06 PPP / 0.280 S&P
TOTAL: 40.9% / 0.18 PPP / 0.589 S&P

Now...anybody who watched the game knows that Gabbert struggled more than Daniel and Patton. But slack should be cut toward him due simply to the personnel on the field...especially on the last drive, when he was handing to Shaun Scott (who actually looked decent) and Tyrone Reece (who didn't). In all, though, I do think it was good for Gabbert to get out the butterflies against SEMO. Hopefully he'll get some snaps against Nevada, Buffalo, and one or two conference opponents as well. Redshirt's off--might as well take advantage of it.

RBs

Derrick Washington: 7.57 EqPts (75.0% / 0.95 PPP / 1.696 S&P)
Jimmy Jackson: 4.93 EqPts (60.0% / 0.49 PPP / 1.093 S&P)
De'vion Moore: 4.09 EqPts (66.7% / 0.45 PPP / 1.121 S&P)
Shaun Scott: 0.61 EqPts (100.0% on 2 carries / 0.31 PPP / 1.305 S&P)
Tyrone Reece: -0.25 EqPts (0.0% on 2 carries / -0.13 PPP / -0.125 S&P)

Yes, it was SEMO, but it's still fun looking at unbelievable stats.

Receivers

Small sample sizes make it not really worth looking at S&P stats for the receivers, but here's a list of the receivers and how many EqPts they accounted for...

Jared Perry: 5.19 EqPts
Derrick Washington: 4.50 EqPts
Jeremy Maclin: 2.76 EqPts
Jerrell Jackson: 2.73 EqPts
Chase Coffman: 2.11 EqPts
Tommy Saunders: 2.10 EqPts
Wes Kemp: 1.09 EqPts
Jimmy Jackson: 0.58 EqPts
Michael Egnew: 0.56 EqPts
Andrew Jones: 0.35 EqPts

Tackles

Defensive Line: 85.7% success rate, 7.0 total tackles, 20.0% of overall tackles
Linebackers: 58.3% success rate, 12.0 total tackles, 34.3% of overall tackles
Defensive Backs: 18.8% success rate, 16.0 total tackles, 45.7% of overall tackles

Not to read too much into this, as it's impossible to stay focused when you're up 42-0 after 22 minutes, but there are a couple negative figures here.
The DB success rate is never going to be great, but it should probably be in the 25% range, not 19%.
The DL should be making 25%-30% of the team's overall tackles, not 20%. And on the flipside, the DBs shouldn't be making 46% of the tackles.
The LBs were just about where they should be.

Top Successful Tacklers

Andrew Gachkar, 2.0
Sean Weatherspoon, 2.0
Chris Earnhardt, 1.5
Will Ebner, 1.5 (seemed like about 12)
Kenji Jackson, 1.0

The tackles were spread across so many players that there really wasn't much to go on here.

Final BTBS Stats

Missouri		SEMO
	% Close = 19.79%
	TOTAL
69	Plays	81
40.99	EqPts	14.46
66.7%	Success Rate	35.8%
0.59	Points Per Play (PPP)	0.18
1.261	S&P (Success + PPP)	0.537

	CLOSE GAME ONLY
17	Plays	20
17.25	EqPts	3.57
88.2%	Success Rate	40.0%
1.01	PPP	0.18
1.897	S&P	0.579

	RUSHING
19.36	EqPts	3.50
65.7%	Success Rate	29.6%
0.59	PPP	0.13
1.251	S&P	0.426

	PASSING
21.62	EqPts	10.96
67.6%	Success Rate	38.9%
0.64	PPP	0.20
1.312	S&P	0.592

	NON-PASSING DOWNS
76.8%	Success Rate	39.2%
0.61	PPP	0.17
1.312	S&P	0.559

	PASSING DOWNS
23.1%	Success Rate	30.0%
0.55	PPP	0.20
0.778	S&P	0.499

	TURNOVERS
0	Number	2
0.00	Points Lost **	5.29
0.00	Points Given ***	8.57
0.00	Total T/O Pts	13.86
+13.86	Turnover Pts Margin	-13.86

Poll

Who was the statistical MVP of Mizzou-SEMO?

Chase Daniel

45 votes

Derrick Washington

9 votes

Jared Perry

2 votes

Sean Weatherspoon

10 votes

Andrew Gachkar

3 votes

69 votes | Poll has closed

Mizzou pounds SEMO, 52-3

RPT — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:51:16 -0000

via images.pictopia.com.edgesuite.net (Joel Kowsky, MUTigers.com)

Overflow thread for immediate reaction. Analysis to come in the form of the postgame podcast some time in the next 24 hours.

**SUNDAY MORNING UPDATE, by rptgwb: Good, Bad, and Indifferent now added after the jump. And I promise it doesn't just say "Good: Mizzou, Bad: SEMO."

GOOD

Football's back in CoMo: The clouds loomed, rain threatened a bit, and the opponent wasn't exactly a top draw, but it was football time in Columbia, damn it.
The tribute to AO: Arguably the coolest thing we saw all night was the debut of the tribute to fallen linebacker Aaron O'Neal, who would be in the midst of his senior year if not for his tragic death. The idea to have a senior wear an unnamed No. 25 jersey in his honor at home games this year is a fantastic idea. Brock Christopher shed his name and his No. 34 on his jersey to honor AO last night, and he represented No. 25 well.
Chase Daniel: He lacked some velocity and he forced a lot of throws that would have been picked by better competition, but 16-of-17 for 240+ in less than two quarters of play gets you in the "Good."
The RB trio: We all know how much I love Derrick Washington and how effective of a battering ram Jimmy Jackson is. But Gabe DeArmond and Dave Matter told us all offseason about De'Vion Moore and, boy, were they right. Shifty, shifty, shifty.
Health: Outside of Tru Vaughns and Brock Christopher getting a little banged up, most everyone came out healthy. Jeremy "Cheat Code" Maclin kept all his ankle ligaments intact.
The backup linebackers: OK, we REALLY need a nickname for the duo of Will Ebner and Andrew Gachkar involving the word "pursuit." Ebner and Gachkar were FLYING to the ball, and SEMO didn't run a play in the second half that these two didn't seem to have a hand in.
Other freshmen: Jerrell Jackson and Jacquies Smith announced their presence with very solid performances, and Kenji Jackson saw a large amount of playing time.

BAD

Trick plays... Really? As much as I loved seeing the double pass form Maclin to Daniel to Washington, did we really need it to knock off SEMO?
Four years of eligibility: So, those snaps against SEMO are going to have Blaine Gabbert ready for Illinois next year? That's what I'm being told?

INDIFFERENT

Tinkering: Eberflus continued to fiddle with the blitz and the coverage schemes, as we saw more of the bend-and-don't-break D from early in 2007 last night. As The Beef noted in the podcast, that happy medium is still out there waiting to be found.
The backup QBs: It was hard to judge Patton and Gabbert because no one seemed to want to run up the score. Patton seemed to move the ball fine, but I was a little concerned with Gabbert. His scramble was impressive, but his accuracy was a little off, missing a lot of targets, especially high where he was hanging his receivers out to dry.