SB Nation - Tony Temple

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 Border War: Beyond the Box Score

Bill C. — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:30:10 -0000

Confused? Catch up with the BTBS Primer.

I'm not going to lie. As Mizzou-Kansas ended early Saturday evening, one of my first thoughts was that I was going to need help from the BTBS numbers to make sense of everything I just saw. In a game that featured over 1,100 yards of offense, Mizzou's defense made the plays in the last five minutes that won the game. In a game where Danario Alexander and Dezmon Briscoe combined for 29 catches and 475 yards (seriously), it was Andrew Gachkar, Jake Harry, Brian Coulter/Aldon Smith, Derrick Washington and Grant Ressel making the breakthrough plays down the stretch. So many people did so many amazing things ... what do the numbers say about what took place?

The best receiver in the country

	Kansas (39)	Mizzou (41)
Close %	100.0%
Field Position %	46.6%	46.7%
Leverage %	65.8%	66.7%

TOTAL
EqPts	31.9	33.3
Close Success Rate	50.7%	45.3%
Close PPP	0.43	0.44
Close S&P	0.944	0.898

RUSHING
EqPts	5.7	18.2
Close Success Rate	50.0%	51.5%
Close PPP	0.35	0.55
Close S&P	0.854	1.066
Line Yards/carry	3.15	3.53

PASSING
EqPts	26.3	15.2
Close Success Rate	50.9%	40.5%
Close PPP	0.46	0.36
Close S&P	0.969	0.766
SD/PD Sack Rate	2.8% / 4.8%	0.0% / 5.0%

STANDARD DOWNS
Success Rate	56.3%	54.0%
PPP	0.36	0.42
S&P	0.927	0.960

PASSING DOWNS
Success Rate	40.0%	28.0%
PPP	0.58	0.50
S&P	0.977	0.775

TURNOVERS
Number	3	1
Turnover Pts	14.3	4.9
Turnover Pts Margin	-9.4	+9.4

Q1 S&P	1.103	0.952
Q2 S&P	0.976	0.492
Q3 S&P	0.730	1.779
Q4 S&P	0.949	0.456

1st Down S&P	0.838	0.803
2nd Down S&P	0.730	0.888
3rd Down S&P	1.529	1.116

Projected Pt. Margin	-10.8	+10.8
Actual Pt. Margin	-2	+2

So many things here that I didn't expect to see:

Mizzou's offense was almost nonexistent in Q2 and Q4. Their passing numbers? Only decent, despite Danario Alexander's unbelievable third quarter (7 catches, 181 yards). And they still struggled on passing downs.
Both teams were only decent on 1st and 2nd down, but automatic on 3rd down. KU, especially, had Mizzou's defense on a string on 3rd down ... until their final two, in which Mizzou came up with two game-turning sacks.
Both teams were exactly the same from a Field Position and Leverage standpoint, despite KU starting three drives from inside their 3.
Unsung heroes: Mizzou's offensive line, which allowed one sack and plowed away for over three and a half line yards per carry.

What to make of Mizzou's pass defense

I was on Big 12 North Talk Radio Sunday night and was asked about Mizzou's struggling pass defense, and I stammered through an answer about how you probably shouldn't take much away from a rivalry game (after all, Texas A&M gained 530 yards on a dominant Texas defense Thursday night), and how Mizzou's struggles have been caused by different things at different times (no pass rush and poor LB play against KU, poor tackling against Baylor, complete miscommunication against Texas, Carl Gettis' backup getting burned against NU, etc.), but despite that, there's no question that something has been amiss in recent weeks.

Here are Missouri's Passing S&P+ numbers in terms of individual game "+" scores (disregarding Furman). Remember, a) 100 = average, and b) the higher number, the better the performance.

Nevada (193.5)
Colorado (182.3)
Bowling Green (148.9)
Nebraska (109.6)
Oklahoma State (105.4)
Illinois (103.7)
Iowa State (95.6)
Kansas (84.0)
Kansas State (72.9)
Texas (66.8)
Baylor (59.4)

Over the first five games (not counting Furman), Missouri averaged a 132.2. Over the last six, Missouri has averaged a 93.5, and that's with the Colorado outlier. Missouri's five worst games this season all came in the last six weeks (and remember, this is adjusted for opponent, so even if the offenses Mizzou faced improved, that doesn't mean Mizzou's numbers should automatically fall). Meanwhile, Missouri's sack rate has actually improved over that time (from 1.0% on Standard Downs and 8.9% on Passing Downs, to 6.0% on Standard Downs and 9.9% on Passing Downs), actually giving the pass defense numbers a bit of a boost. Obviously the pass rush wasn't great against Kansas, but it's been decent down the stretch.

So what has changed in the last six weeks? For one thing, Carl Gettis got hurt. It was hinted in October and early-November that he hurt himself worse than anybody thought against Nebraska, but while his and Jasper Simmons' injuries absolutely played a role in the Baylor debacle, he's still seemed steady enough that his ankle alone can't explain a 29.2% drop in pass defense. What else has changed? Well, Hardy Ricks was lost for the season. I wouldn't have thought that would have made a difference, but maybe it did? Plus, opponents got film on Simmons and Jarrell Harrison and were probably better able to take advantage of whatever weaknesses they may have. And quite frankly, Kevin Rutland has been maddeningly inconsistent, matching nice pass break-ups with horrible mishaps.

Is there something else I'm missing here? It's not like the scheme has changed. Like it or not, the general philosophy of pass defense is simply not going to change as long as Gary Pinkel is in charge. We are going to run a basic Cover-2, and we're going to give receivers giant cushions and allow the short passes while hoping to tackle well, not get burned deep, and bend just long enough to force a mistake from the opponent. When and how we blitz may change, but in general, we defend the pass as we always have under Pinkel, and that's just the way it is. It's not like opponents suddenly figured out what we were doing and changed their approach halfway through the season. Anyway, I'm all ears. Let me know why you think things have regressed.

No matter what the cause, there's no question that, with opponent taken into account, this pass defense is not as good as in recent years. Whether you want to believe it or not, the opponent had as much to do with last year's regression in raw stats than anything else. Missouri ranked 26th in Defensive Passing S&P+ in 2008 and 17th in 2007, but they rank only 66th this season. Maybe this is just what we should have expected in losing three of four starters in the secondary (and a hit-or-miss pass rush hasn't helped). Or not.

But that's enough negativity. We did, after all, beat Kansas.

Three Positives

Always. Be. Closing. For 55 minutes, the 2008 and 2009 MU-KU games were strikingly similar. For the first half, KU's offense was strong and Mizzou made a series of mistakes, leading to a halftime deficit that could have been a lot worse than it actually was (19-10 in 2008, 21-13 in 2009). Then, Mizzou found their offensive rhythm in the third quarter and stormed back to take a fourth quarter lead (30-26 with 6:52 left in 2008, 36-28 with 13:29 left in 2009). But thanks to some combination of Reesing, Briscoe, and Kerry Meier, KU got the momentum back and, with roughly five minutes left, faced a third down in Mizzou territory.

Here's where things start to diverge. In 2008, Reesing completed a 31-yard pass on 3rd-and-11 to Marcus Herford, setting up a go-ahead TD pass to Meier (who forever earned the middle name of "Effing" after this game). Mizzou responded with a go-ahead drive of their own, but as we all know, Reesing and Meier connected again to win the game in the final minute. For the last five minutes, Reesing was 8-for-11 for 106 yards and two touchdowns.

For the last five and a half minutes on Saturday, Reesing was 0-for-3 passing with two "sacks" (the second one was considered a rush, not a sack) for a loss of 19 yards. After 55 game minutes of stress and momentum changes, KU faced a third-and-goal from Mizzou's 5, and there was absolutely no reason to think KU wouldn't convert. All game long, if Mizzou blitzed, they got burned; if they dropped into coverage, they eventually got burned. Todd Reesing was able to do whatever he wanted to do. But for the first time all game, Mizzou blitzed effectively. Kevin Rutland came at Reesing on a CB blitz, and while Reesing got away, Andrew Gachkar tracked him down and forced an intentional grounding penalty (and yes, it was a good call, as the pass landed about two yards short of the line of scrimmage). Then, nursing a three-point lead, KU now-notoriously attempted to pass out of their endzone and landed two incompletions before Reesing was sandwiched by Aldon Smith and Brian Coulter. He came within about two inches of getting out of the endzone, and those two inches gave Mizzou two points in a two-point win.

Those two inches took 2009 from a decent season to a good one. Coffee is for closers.
Blaine Gabbert's ankle. How freaking big and fast did Blaine Gabbert look in those first-half keepers?? He had a 30-yarder and a 40-yarder in the first half, and while his arm was scattering some inaccurate passes in the second quarter, his legs kept Mizzou in the game before Danario took over in Q3. This goes without saying, but it really is simply amazing how much different Gabbert looks now than he did about six weeks ago, and if Mizzou has any sort of steady receiving weapon in 2010 (Jerrell Jackson, you've got all the opportunity in the world to show what you can do), I cannot wait to see what #11 might be able to do if/when healthy for an entire season.
Domino Axelrod. Remember when Danario Alexander caught eight passes for 123 yards and two touchdowns against Colorado and was the primary reason Mizzou broke out to a 30-point first-half lead? Yeah, that was his eighth-best game of the season. His output from just the last three games (606 yards) would have led the team in receiving in 2005. His three 200-yard receiving games in November match Mizzou's all-time total of 200-yard receiving games before November. The list of Alexander's superlatives this year top anything Jeremy Maclin, Chase Coffman, etc., ever managed ... and trust me, I know what I just said, and I mean it. As I said during the game, we are never going to see sustained WR play like this again, and we need to soak it in for all it's worth.

Three Negatives

Bad time for the linebackers' worst game of the year. I'm a forgiving soul, and I try to stay even-keeled as much as possible. I'm willing to accept that Todd Reesing was simply in a zone for much of the game, and no matter what Missouri did on defense -- blitz, drop everybody into coverage, etc. -- he was just going to make some plays, as was (obviously) Dez Briscoe. But there was one part of the defensive play that I found completely unacceptable, particularly in the first half: coverage of Jake Sharp (and later on, Rell Lewis) out of the backfield. For three years, Sharp has been a more dangerous receiver than runner, and it was no surprise that Reesing would check down to him whenever possible. And yet we left him wide open with run to room, over and over again. For the game, Sharp/Lewis had nine catches for 120 yards. Seven of Sharp's eight catches came in the first half, and four went for first downs, including an inexcusable 17-yard reception on 3rd-and-11 from KU's 1 that allowed KU to get momentum, eventually scoring a touchdown to cap off a 99-yard drive.

How did the dump to the RBs succeed in ways it hadn't in the previous two games at Arrowhead? Who was to blame for this? Again, I have more questions than answers, but in the Cover-2 structure, the main people responsible would appear to be the outside linebackers and the cornerbacks. Indeed, in previous seasons, it was Sean Weatherspoon and Van Alexander making most of the tackles or defending the pass to the RB. Maybe the strategy changed this year, or maybe the LBs were just overloaded with coverage responsibilities considering how long the coverage lasted (thanks to the lack of a pass rush), but between Sharp's and Lewis' success, and the awful personal foul penalty on Spoon that allowed KU to prolong a drive and get seven points instead of three, and the fact that Gachkar went completely missing until the late-game sack, this did appear to be the worst game of the season for the Mizzou LB corps. We survived, and that's good, but they picked a bad time to have their worst game.
"The Scorpion". Again, all's well that ends well, but do you remember at the beginning of the season, when we thought the "Scorpion" defense (where Mizzou features three DEs in passing downs, lining up Aldon Smith at DT) was going to wreak havoc on most of Missouri's opponents? That didn't so much happen. Missouri now ranks 84th in Sack Rates+ this season, and even though things have improved in general over the last half of the season (again, while the overall pass defense was regressing), the pass rush produced almost nothing whatsoever for the game's first 55 minutes on Saturday. That's not a good thing when your general defensive strategy is to blitz as little as possible, drop a ton of defenders into coverage, and hope your pass rush gets to Reesing before somebody comes open. Reesing had a ton of time to find receivers, and his receivers are good enough that they're going to break open eventually. This was like playing Missouri in 2007, and honestly, Reesing looked better for most of Saturday than Chase Daniel did in 2007 when facing the same strategy.

Considering the mid-season improvement, and considering the overall youth of the defensive line (only Jaron Baston and Brian Coulter leave this season, and a majority of the team's DL playmakers return), I'm still guardedly optimistic about this unit in the future, especially considering how well Mizzou stopped the run in conference play, but for the season the pass rush has still been a major disappointment.
The two-point conversion. When Mizzou scored early in the third quarter to get to 21-19, I told my dad to brace himself -- with Gary Pinkel's history with the two-point conversion, there was absolutely a 100% chance that we were going for two, even though it was still early, and there were obviously a ton more points yet to be scored. It's not right, but it's what he does. And being that it's a consistent mind-set, I can more-or-less accept it even though I disagree with the strategy. But man oh man, that one point could have made a huge difference.

(And if you insist on going for two, and you've had to blow a timeout early in the half to figure out what play to call, at least make sure to not call the single most predictable play of the game after the timeout. Those five minutes, which included the decision to go for two, the blown timeout, and the awful play call, were the worst-coached five minutes of the game for Mizzou.)

Three Keys Revisited

Seen here.

Passing Downs

KU's offense will likely be relatively efficient on Saturday, meaning Mizzou must make stops on passing downs when given the opportunity. They have a pass-rush advantage in those situations, but if they don't make the sack or force a poor throw from Reesing, their propensity for breakdowns makes them extremely vulnerable. If they're giving up the dink-and-dunk stuff and allowing big plays on Passing Downs, they probably cannot win.

In the end, KU's 40% success rate on passing downs was neither great nor terrible. But the plays they did make on passing downs were gigantic. The 3rd-and-11 dump-off to Sharp that set up the game's first touchdown. The 33-yard pass to Tim Biere on 3rd-and-18 that set up the second touchdown. The 33-yard pass to Briscoe on 3rd-and-9 that set up the third touchdown. And of course, the 74-yard TD bomb to Briscoe on 3rd-and-12 in the fourth quarter. On almost every KU scoring drive, Mizzou had the Jayhawks on the ropes and let them off the hook, and while Reesing deserves quite a bit of credit for the role he played in those passes, that many breakdowns is still inexcusable, and it almost cost Missouri the game.

Danario Alexander vs Dez Briscoe

Alexander has been the best receiver in the country over the last month, and if he performs to that level again, Mizzou could score at will. Primarily because of Domino, Mizzou's offense has a significant advantage over KU's defense in terms of The Big Play, and if KU successfully takes that away (lord knows they've got the talent and experience to do so), they take away the biggest weapon in the Mizzou arsenal. Meanwhile, the other scariest guy on the field is Briscoe. While Meier gives Mizzou fans nightmares after last year's heroics, Briscoe is still the more dangerous guy. The winner of the Alexander/Briscoe battle will go a long way in determining the winner of the game.

Rarely will I nail a game key this tremendously, but for the first 55 minutes, this game was absolutely decided by these two players. Back and forth they went, with Briscoe winning the first two quarters, Alexander almost scoring a TKO in the third quarter, and Briscoe bouncing back in the fourth. For the game, Alexander had more catches (15 to 14) and Briscoe had more yards (242 to 233), but Briscoe's two fumbles and the two miscues to Briscoe on KU's final drive give Danario the edge here. But what a freaking battle it was.

MU's Running Game

[I]f Mizzou's slowly improving run game can eat away chunks of yards and Mizzou is able to both overpower KU and beat them with the big play, then they can both run up points and dominate the flow of the game. Potentially the most underrated facet of the last two games at Arrowhead was MU's running game. In 2007, Tony Temple racked up 98 yards in 22 carries. In 2008, Derrick Washington ended up with a respectable 54 yards in 11 carries but averaged under four yards per carry for the first three quarters, when Mizzou's offense was struggling and the defense was unable to get off the field. If Mizzou is running well from the start, their passing game will open up like a Venus Flytrap.

Again, nailed it. While Briscoe and Alexander more or less canceled each other out, thanks to Meier and Sharp, KU won the battle of the passing games. But Mizzou won the war because of Derrick Washington and Blaine Gabbert. Gabbert took advantage of openings in the first half and ended up with 94 yards rushing for the game; meanwhile, Washington was the finisher, closing with 111 yards and setting up Grant Ressel's game-winner with a wonderful 27-yard run on 3rd-and-2. Throw in Jerrell Jackson's 37-yard end around for a TD, and Mizzou's running game came up bigger than it had all year. Just in time to give us extreme optimism for 2010, huh?

Summary

While at home yesterday, I watched the replay of the game on ESPNU, and it really is amazing how many times the momentum turned and, over the course of the game, how many players made contributions to this win. Blaine Gabbert with his first-half rushes and great decision-making in the second half. Jacquies Smith with the forced fumble of Briscoe, and Carl Gettis for a forced fumble and two recoveries. Danario Alexander with his third quarter for the ages. Wes Kemp with his killer down-field blocking. Jerrell Jackson with his end-around (and De'Vion Moore with his amazing blocking on the play). Kip Edwards with his interception of Reesing, ensuring a one-possession deficit at halftime. Derrick Washington with his devastating second-half rushing. Andrew Gachkar with his fourth-quarter sack. Kevin Rutland with his fantastic man-to-man defense on the bomb to Briscoe on KU's final drive. Coulter and Agent Smith for their safety. Jake Harry for getting THREE punts downed inside the 3. Grant Ressel for capping off the most improbably great kicking season ever with a ride on the shoulders of his teammates. Despite all the breakdowns and all the stress the game's first 55 minutes produced, Mizzou made every play when the game was on the line, and they came away with one of the more satisfying, endearing wins of the Pinkel era. We now await the bowl announcement, knowing that a) Missouri will finish no worse than they did in 2006 (Chase Daniel's sophomore season), and b) Todd Reesing's career ended in the same endzone in which KU's national title hopes ended two seasons ago. There's poetry, and then there's poetry.

Morning Border War Links and Discussion

Bill C. — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:00:25 -0000

More photos » by L.G. Patterson - AP

about 1 month ago: Missouri's Danario Alexander, left, flies through the air after he is tripped up by Baylor's Jeremy Williams, right, during the second quarter of an NCAA college football game Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009, in Columbia, Mo. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

Browse more photos »

Consider this your pre-game discussion thread. Below are some gameday links and a discussion I had with the sports editor of the Lawrence Journal-World and a closeted stat-nerd, Jesse Newell.

First, the links:

The Trib: Bowl options remain wide open
The Trib (Dave Matter): Emptying the Bowl Notebook
The Missourian: Mangino could be coaching final game for Kansas
The Missourian: Senior Missouri football players pass down meaning of Kansas rivalry
The Missourian: Missouri's bowl possibilities still confusing
The Missourian: 10 things you didn't know about Kansas
10. Since 1912 the KU campus power plant steam whistle has announced the end of each hour's classes. The whistle has become a part of the eternal end of class struggle between long-winded professors and eager-to-leave students. Our favorite part? They call it the "Big Tooter." Hey, we said we were above jokes about boxed wine and street fights over girls. We said nothing about kindergarten toilet humor.
KC Star: Border War preview
KC Star: Parking information for Saturday's Border War game
KC Star: The old Blaine Gabbert is back for MU
KC Star: Danario Alexander towers over Big 12's other receivers
KC Star: KU has a lot on the line in Border War battle
KC Star: Todd Reesing era is nearly over, so who'll be KU's next QB?
KC Star: Kerry Meier and Dezmon Briscoe ran different routes to success
KC Star: Gwinn Henry saw both sides of the Border War
KC Star (Jason Whitlock): There's no defense for Mangino's offense
KC Star (Campus Corner): Caring When Few Others Do
Post-Dispatch: Missouri, Kansas 'hate each other'
Post-Dispatch (Bryan Burwell): Mizzou has plenty to gain by beating KU
Post-Dispatch: MU is uniform in its focus on beating KU
Post-Dispatch: Mark Mangino a bully or motivator?
Post-Dispatch: Career year for Tiger
PowerMizzou: Tiger line leading the way back
PowerMizzou: Secondary concerns
PowerMizzou: Zo Knows Kansas
PowerMizzou: Jayhawk Insider: Five questions for Saturday
Daily Kansan: Kansas vs. Missouri game day
Lawrence Journal-World: Jayhawks: We are focused on Tigers
Lawrence Journal-World (Jesse Newell): Six wins might not be enough to get KU into a bowl
Topeka Capital-Journal: KU fans rally for football

---

Between Denverjhawk, KU Doug from the Roundtable, and Jesse Newell, we've had all sort of mostly cordial conversation with Jayhawks this week, and honestly, I feel rather dirty.

Bill C.:
1 - I mentioned in my BTBS preview that I can't take the loss of Toben Opurum too seriously because I think he and Jake Sharp are basically the same quality of back (Opurum a bit bigger, Sharp a bit faster). If Sharp is 100% healthy, is there any drop-off from Opurum to Sharp?

2 - Last year, Kansas absolutely assassinated Missouri with the dink-and-dunk pass and, when Mizzou's defense finally got tired in the second half (as much a factor Mizzou's offense not being able to stay on the field in the first half as much as anything, I think), KU burned them downfield too. I would have to figure the same type of offensive strategy will be on display this year, especially since that's the exact strategy that Baylor used to burn Mizzou late. Do you have any reason to believe KU won't try as many quick sideline-to-sideline passes this year?

3 - There have been all sorts of personnel shifts throughout the season in the KU secondary, leading to nine guys registering double-digit tackles. Where do you feel the secondary stands coming into the game? Playing its best? Less so?

Jesse Newell:
1. If Sharp is 100-percent healthy, then the two are about equal. The question to answer, though, is whether Sharp is healthy or not.

KU coach Mark Mangino has admitted that Sharp hasn't shown the same burst since Sharp's calf injury suffered in Week 3, and the numbers reflect that. In Sharp's carries before the injury he had 42 carries for 240 yards (5.7 average). In his carries since the injury, he has 53 carries for 168 yards (3.2 average). Obviously, KU playing tougher competition in the Big 12 also should be factored in, but that's still a steep drop-off.

I think Opurum was the better of the two backs recently, and where KU will miss him most is in third-and-short situations. He became a Marcus Allen of sorts for them over the past few weeks, as nearly every third-and-one, he came in to move the pile forward two yards for a first down. That kind of player is especially valuable against Missouri, as you have already talked about the importance of KU sustaining drives in the first half to tire MU's defense in the second half. The Jayhawks used that gameplan in 2008, and it certainly paid dividends for them late.

The simple fact is this, though: This year, KU has never committed to the run. I don't know why it is, but KU usually abandons its running game early whether it's working or not. If MU's defense shuts down KU's runs early, most likely KU will abandon the running game completely just a few possessions in.

2. I think you're right on with your assessment. Consider this as well: In KU's loss to MU in 2007, the Tigers held the ball for 37 minutes, 25 seconds. In KU's win last year, the Jayhawks held the ball 34 minutes exactly. The MU game notes also show that since 2005, when the Tigers have the ball 31 minutes or longer in a game, they are 14-0.

I think KU's only chance of winning this game will be to try to control the football to wear out MU's defense. KU hasn't been able to do much to stop MU's offense in the last two years (other than forcing turnovers), so limiting possessions might not be a bad idea, either. KU's biggest disadvantage to playing this strategy is what I listed above: Not only has KU been ineffective running the football lately, the Jayhawks also have shown no interest in committing themselves to try to run the football.

The short answer to your question is this: Yes, I would expect lots of dinking and dunking to happen in this year's game as well. When those MU corners start to roll up a bit, though, look for KU to start to take some shots down the field, especially with big-play specialist Dezmon Briscoe.

3. KU's defense as a whole peaked about three weeks ago when it put together solid performances against Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Kansas State. Some of the scores don't reflect it, mostly because KU's offense went through a stretch of 10 turnovers in 10 quarters and started giving away points to the opposition. The defense has fallen hard back to earth in the last two weeks with horrible efforts against Nebraska (bad offense) and Texas (good offense).

The KU secondary merry-go-round has been interesting to say the least. Just when I thought KU had something good going for it a few weeks ago, the carousel started up again and more players were moved in and out of the mix.

I'd say at this point, the secondary is actually playing some of its worst football of the year. NU has just three passes of 35 or more yards in their first five Big 12 games, and KU allowed four, 35-plus yard passes from Zac Lee to Niles Paul alone. KU's corners couldn't do much of anything right against UT last week, either, as a huge cushion allowed some big gains underneath, while the Longhorns also hit the Jayhawks deep for 68- and 38-yard TD passes. Anthony Davis, in his return to the lineup, has been burnt deep consistently, and Chris Harris, though he's had a nice year, was playing way too far off receivers last week. Darrell Stuckey has had a good — but not great — year, and KU's corners aren't particularly tall, either. I'd say it's a pretty good time for MU's pass-happy offense to be taking on the KU secondary.

Here are a few questions for you.

1. I haven't been able to watch Danario Alexander much in the last few weeks. What has been the main reason for his unbelievable success in the last month? KU's corners aren't the tallest, but they've also given up their share of big plays. Alexander seems to have a rare blend of size and speed, so would you say KU should be more concerned with him going above the corners in jump-ball situations or beating KU's corners down the field?

2. Derrick Washington should be able to play against KU after suffering a concussion. Is this significant for MU? Or do you believe the Tigers will mostly stick to their passing game against the Jayhawks?

3. Again, I haven't seen much of the Tigers lately, so what is the scouting report on Blaine Gabbert? What are his greatest strengths? What have other defenses done to slow him down? In what situations is he least effective?

4. I expect KU to pass quite a bit in this game, so can you evaluate how MU's pass defense has performed lately? Who are a couple MU defensive players that have emerged as of late?

Bill C.:
1. The thing about Danario is, he's been so good over the past few weeks that he has ended up replacing both Jeremy Maclin AND Chase Coffman. He can beat defenders on the long routes, and he can take a swing pass 70 yards. His yards after catch have been staggering. His 63-yard TD against Iowa State came on about a 2-yard sideline route. His 80-yarder against K-State was on about a 10-yard route. Meanwhile, his 54-yarder against K-State was caught at the 5. I try to avoid hyperbole, but he has started to look more and more like Randy Moss in recent weeks, with great all-around ability and ridiculously long strides. Knowing what he has fought through (a broken wrist early in 2007, followed by a torn-up knee in the Big 12 title game, which required three surgeries and about 18 months of recovery time to get back to 100%), it has been extremely heart-warming to see him come this far. And if he can duplicate what he did against KU in 2007, he could send KU home a loser.

2. Derrick Washington is easily MU's most physical back. He really hasn't shown the top-end speed that he showed in the first half of last season, but if it's 3rd-and-2, I'd much rather D-Wash be getting the handoff instead of De'Vion Moore or Kendial Lawrence, both of whom are relatively capable speed backs but aren't bangers. As I mentioned in the preview, Tony Temple's success against KU in 2007 was a very underrated facet of MU's win, and since MU's running game was all but nonexistent for three quarters in last year's game, having Washington is certainly a good thing. KU's D-line has been statistically unimpressive, and if MU can run the ball well, they up their chances of winning considerably.

3. Gabbert's pocket presence is still a work in progress, but he has shown massive improvement in the recent weeks. And for the season, taking the sprained ankle into account (he was not even half the QB against NU, OSU, and Texas), his numbers have potentially been as or more impressive than Chase Daniel's were in 2006. I think KU's best strategy against him will be to confuse him. Mix coverages, mix how many you rush, etc. He has improved by leaps and bounds since the Bowling Green game, when BGSU dropped seven into coverage and he started rushing his throws, feeling a pass rush when there was none, but that's still his biggest weakness. He's got the prettiest deep ball you'll ever see, and if KU's secondary suffers lapses, they'll pay.

4. MU's secondary is extremely matchup- and injury-dependent. They handle bigger, more physical WRs pretty well (the first two quarters against OSU's Hubert Anyiam aside), but they are vulnerable to pure speed. Baylor's Kendall Wright and David Gettis are only decent in terms of route-running and hands, but they are burners, and they burned Mizzou both short and deep. Iowa State had some early luck with the dink-and-dunk passes (Mizzou's defensive philosophy has always been to give large cushions to WRs and allow the short pass, but avoid getting burned deep), but the success only lasted a while because their WRs weren't fast enough to burn Mizzou deep when the Tigers adjusted. This is why Dez Briscoe scares me much more than Kerry Meier does, despite what Meier did at the end of last year's game. Briscoe can get behind them.

Regarding injuries, Mizzou's two biggest breakdowns of the season, in the fourth quarter against Nebraska and the second half against Baylor, both happened when Carl Gettis was injured and on the bench. Gettis is not quite the all-conference caliber CB we thought we had a couple of years ago, but he is by far Mizzou's most steady DB, and with him on the field, Mizzou's secondary is much less vulnerable to breakdowns. Plus, safety Jasper Simmons was injured against Baylor too, which didn't help, as he's been by far Mizzou's best safety. Mizzou's secondary isn't great, and the Briscoe-Meier combo still scares the daylights out of me, but as with most teams, if they are full-strength, they are much, much better.

My turn!

1. You've outlined how KU might not even make a bowl if they win on Saturday ... with that in mind, where do you think they're head is at heading into the game? Or maybe here's the better question: I expect to see KU's A-game on display ... but what exactly is their A-game? Top 15 caliber? Top 25?

2. From what you do know about Mizzou, what scares you the most compared to what you know about KU's strengths and weaknesses?

Jesse Newell:
1. I think KU's players believe that if they win Saturday, they will go to a bowl game. With that mind-set, I would expect to see KU's four senior captains (Reesing, Sharp, Meier, Stuckey) literally playing for their careers (and also remember, this is most likely Dezmon Briscoe's last game, too). Those guys have been a part of the greatest stretch in KU football's history, and I think they know that their previous reputation might be hurt a bit if they can't get to six wins and a bowl game this season. Whether they like Mangino or not, I would expect these guys to be playing for themselves on Saturday. I'm with you: I don't see this as a game where KU's players come out uninspired or unmotivated.

You pose a good question about how good KU's "A" game is. I will say this: KU has been a bit unfortunate in that when its offense has played well, its defense has stunk, and when its defense has played well, its offense has stunk. If KU put its best two units together this season, I would say that a top-20 team wouldn't be a stretch, but once again, that hasn't happened in the last nine games, so I'm certainly not expecting it now.

Todd Reesing went through a tough spell mid-season, but he actually looked pretty good last week against Texas. KU's defense looked solid three weeks ago, but it hasn't played well in the Jayhawks' two games since. For the third straight year, I'd expect a high-scoring game. Even if the Jayhawks have an "A" game defensively, they still probably will struggle to keep the Tigers under four touchdowns.

2. This one's easy: Danario Alexander's ability to break off big plays.

The last three weeks, KU's defense has allowed 17 plays of 20-plus yard plays to opponents. The last two weeks, KU has given up seven, 20-yard-or-more passing plays to opponents.

As I mentioned before, both NU and UT made a habit of picking on KU's cornerbacks the last two weeks. KU's cornerbacks have been routinely beaten deep, but they've also struggled when taller receivers have simply gone over the top of them to bring in receptions. Looks like Alexander can do either. Unless KU's defense tries something exotic to shut down Alexander, I'd say he's a lock for 100 yards and has a decent shot at another 200-yard receiving game.

One more ...

1. I've heard a lot of people say KU has more to play for in this game. However, how would MU's view of its season change if the Tigers were to lose to KU? How would the MU fans' perception of the season change?

Bill C.:
I'm probably not the best Mizzou fan to ask about that, as I try to never let one game impact how I view the season as a whole. Last year's loss to KU was really annoying, but Mizzou still won ten games and the North division, so it didn't really impact me much beyond the annoyance at the moment.

This season, I had three main goals for Mizzou: win the North again, go to a bowl, and with so much youth playing key roles (there have been between 25 and 35 freshmen and sophs on the two-deep all season), the final goal was to simply not mess up the program's trajectory for 2010 and 2011. The first goal went out of the window with the fourth quarter collapse (sans Carl Gettis) in the monsoon against Nebraska, but the other two goals have been accomplished no matter what happens at Arrowhead.

That said, I fully accept that I'm not the typical Mizzou fan. I saw last night on other message boards where some fans think this is easily the biggest game in the series in quite a while (no memory of 2007 apparently) and they would take a loss to Illinois next year for a win over KU this year...which, to me, is absolutely, positively insane.

I guess what matters most, however, is that the players and coaches very much remember last year and have brought it up multiple times. KU has more to play for, but I do think Mizzou shows up ready to roll.

My final question: I have a friend from Independence who constantly mourns the fact that Paul Rudd went to KU because "he seems like such a perfect Mizzou guy". Discuss.

(Subquestion: what Mizzou alum would have made the best KU alum?)

Jesse Newell:
I just hope Paul being a KU alum doesn't ruin the hilarious parts he has in movies. KU also can claim Mandy Patinkin! (My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die!)

Subquestion: As a KU alum, I would have to say that ridiculously good-looking men attend KU, thus making Brad Pitt the obvious choice (I'm not sure he graduated, but I'm still counting him anyways).

Bill C.:
I must say, one of the most entertaining parts of the MU-KU Gameday in 2007 was the "Famous Alums" section...they had Don Johnson versus Brad Pitt, I believe...but hey, you've got Jason Sudeikis repping KU every Saturday night, so that's something...and yeah, Rudd must be all sorts of funny if we enjoy him despite his, um, obvious flaws...

The Border War: Beyond the Box Score Preview

Bill C. — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:00:14 -0000

You expected some other way to start out this post?

Every Border War win feels a little bit more triumphant than other wins, but this year packs a bit of extra meaning. Missouri has a chance to end both Todd Reesing's career and Mark Mangino's tenure in Lawrence with a single victory; meanwhile, Reesing and Mangino have a chance to extend their lives with an upset win in what is potentially their last game together.

I'll say this out front: I try to tune extracurricular detail out of these previews. I said last week that I don't necessarily believe in a positive Senior Day effect, and just the same, I doubt there is any net gain or loss to things like Kansas fighting for Mark Mangino's life in Lawrence. Extra emotion can go either way in the end, but let's just say this: I expect both Missouri and Kansas to bring their respective A-games to Arrowhead; and really, it shouldn't be any other way.

Offense

Kansas: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Offensive Preview

While the 2009 KU offense really could improve a bit more in 2009, it's a red flag to me that all of their improvement in 2008 came on Passing Downs. They were actually worse on Standard Downs but overachieved in passing situations (which, if you watched last year's MU-KU game, shouldn't surprise you). As I've mentioned before, disproportionate achievement on Passing Downs doesn't seem totally sustainable from year to year, and while a lot of that Passing Downs success was due to both Todd Reesing and the chemistry that Reesing has with Kerry Meier and Dezmon Briscoe, they still may have been a little too successful, unsustainably so.

Lord knows that with their schedule, they better be at least as good in those situations because...well, they're going to face a lot of those situations.

Once again, KU is a strong Passing Downs team, but they have only been a good overall offense instead of a great overall offense. And with their defense struggling for much of the season, good hasn't really cut it.

Kansas Offense vs Missouri Defense
Category	KU Offense	MU Defense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	115.0 (30)	104.1 (48)
Close Success Rate+ (Rk)	112.4 (23)	100.0 (62)
Close PPP+ (Rk)	121.3 (37)	110.1 (46)

Rushing S&P+	109.2 (41)	111.2 (39)
Passing S&P+	116.9 (30)	98.2 (62)

Standard Downs S&P+	118.4 (24)	112.7 (31)
Passing Downs S&P+	131.4 (17)	95.0 (75)

Red Zone S&P+	127.8 (17)	110.5 (44)

Q1 S&P+	106.1 (65)	90.2 (85)
Q2 S&P+	121.4 (24)	121.6 (29)
Q3 S&P+	144.4 (4)	106.9 (47)
Q4 S&P+	128.3 (11)	115.3 (28)

1st Down S&P+	125.8 (12)	108.0 (44)
2nd Down S&P+	122.7 (29)	99.4 (62)
3rd Down S&P+	117.6 (34)	113.7 (38)

Line Yards+	104.6 (53)	103.7 (46)
Close Sack Rate+	91.9 (69)	90.8 (73)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	107.3 (59) / 85.5 (81)	102.5 (57) / 116.4 (39)

As you'll see, both offenses have significant advantages in this one, so the game could come down to which individual playmakers step up the most. Danario Alexander and Sean Weatherspoon, or Dezmon Briscoe, Kerry Meier and Darrell Stuckey? Blaine Gabbert or Todd Reesing?

When KU Has the Ball...
KU Rushing	Advantage: Push
KU Passing	Advantage: KU
Best Time for KU:	Q1, Q3
Best Time for Missouri:	Q2

Mizzou Advantages:

Passing Downs Sack Rate+

And for KU...

Close SR+, PPP+, S&P+
Passing S&P+
Standard, Passing Downs S&P+
Red Zone S&P+
Q1, Q3, Q4 S&P+
1st, 2nd Down S&P+

No matter what happens in this game, Missouri will once again end up with a more successful regular season than Kansas. This has been the norm with Gary Pinkel against Mark Mangino. That said, it's pretty easy to see that KU has a number of matchup advantages to work with, and if Todd Reesing is dialed in and playing well, this game is a complete tossup shootout.

Mizzou's path to success, however, comes on Passing Downs. They must successfully blitz on those downs; if they do, KU's other advantages can be negated pretty quickly.

Quarterback

While he completed 66% of his passes at 7.8 yards per pass against OU and Mizzou, Reesing proved his all-or-nothing tendencies by completing just 54% at 5.4 yards per pass against Texas and Texas Tech (with a 3-3 TD-INT ratio) at home. In the end, most would love to have a "gamer" like Reesing leading your team, but his confidence in his abilities to make plays ends up being, at times, his biggest flaw. He posted a QB rating right at 149 each of the last two years, but he also took 56 sacks in that time, and his interceptions rose to 13 in 2008, not a bad figure per say, but not as in control as the seven he threw in 2007. That's why Kansas only finished 25th in Passing S&P+ and not higher--we remember the great plays, but we forget the sacks he's taken and the occasional atrocious throws he's made.

Todd Reesing: 276-for-441 passing (62.6%), 3,118 yards (7.1 per pass), 18 TD, 9 INT

As a whole, Reesing has certainly put up solid numbers this year; however, after QB ratings in the 148-150 range both of his first two years as a starter, his has fallen to just 131.4 this year, and he has been every bit as all-or-nothing as in years past. Against Iowa State, he went 37-for-49 for 442 yards, 4 TDs, and 1 INT; he followed that up with another 401 yards against Colorado. Then, against Oklahoma and Texas Tech, he went a combined 42-for-77 (54.5%) for 405 yards (5.3 yards per pass), 1 TD, 3 INTs, and a sub-100 QB rating. We should all expect to see his best performance tomorrow, but anything less than his best might not get the job done.

Running Back

Jake Sharp is the least-scary good running back in the country. He was the main cog in a rushing attack that was 7th in the country in Success Rate+, he's scored 19 touchdowns, caught 44 passes, and put up a combined 1,143 yards from scrimmage the last two seasons, yet his lack of explosiveness got him ranked 198th among 269 eligible running backs in POE, the rushing performance measure I created for Football Outsiders. He's good for a couple of huge games a year, usually against bad defenses (he destroyed Kansas State for 181 yards and 4 TDs last year and went for 118 and 3 TDs against an OU defense adapting to the loss of Ryan Reynolds), but in all he's a steady but so-so runner. You could do worse than starting Jake Sharp, but you could certainly do better.

Toben Opurum: 133 carries, 554 yards (4.2 per carry), 9 TD, 13 receptions, 105 yards (8.1 per catch), 1 TD
Jake Sharp: 95 carries, 400 yards (4.2 per carry), 4 TD; 26 receptions, 188 yards (7.2 per catch), 3 TD
Rell Lewis: 10 carries, 60 yards

Toben Opurum is out with an injury, but I cannot really say I can tell any difference whatsoever between Opurum and Jake Sharp. Their numbers suggest that they are virtually the same running back. Opurum is a bit bigger, and Sharp is a bit faster, but in all, KU's running game probably will not get going that much on Saturday (knock on wood). Mizzou's rush defense has improved considerably throughout this season, and if they can stop Sharp and get to Reesing on passing downs, they should win. It's if they don't get to Reesing where the problems may start...

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

KU executed a risky but perfect gameplan against Mizzou in 2008. They continued to dink and dunk, stretching the field horizontally with Meier and Briscoe, relying on the KU defense to fend Mizzou's offense off for as long as possible. If Mizzou sustains some drives in the first half, then the Mizzou defense doesn't completely wear out in the fourth quarter, but alas, that's what happened. When all was said and done, Briscoe and Meier combined for 23 catches, 221 yards, and 3 TDs (two of which came in Q4), and an exhausted Mizzou secondary saw its communication fall apart down the stretch. Again, dink-and-dunk is always risky because it takes a lot of plays to sustain a drive and opens up more opportunities for mistakes. But if you can pull it off, it works brilliantly, and it worked against Mizzou in 2008.

WR Kerry Meier: 92 receptions, 931 yards (10.1 per catch), 6 TD
WR Dezmon Briscoe: 70 receptions, 1,095 yards (15.6 per catch), 7 TD
WR Jonathan Wilson: 35 receptions, 449 yards (12.8 per catch)
WR Bradley McDougald: 31 receptions, 285 yards (9.2 per catch)

TE Tim Biere: 12 receptions, 134 yards (11.2 per catch)

KU's Border War strategy last year was very effective; what's scary is, Mizzou has become even more vulnerable to that sort of strategy in 2009. If Mizzou is unable to corral the short pass, Reesing could very easily go over 400 yards. If Mizzou fans are having nightmares tonight, it is probably because of Meier and Briscoe.

Offensive Line

Todd Reesing is one of the best when it comes to improvising and creating on the fly, but that doesn't mean you want him doing it every play. For KU to win the North (which means either taking a game against Texas, Oklahoma, or Texas Tech, or running the table in the North), converted tight end Tanner Hawkinson will likely need to quickly become the real deal at left tackle, and Jeff Spikes (or whoever wins the RT job) will need to become pretty stable, pretty quickly. The ends in this conference are more athletic and experienced than in recent years, and...again, this team needs Reesing healthy and upright.

KU's offensive line has been distinctly average in 2009, improving slightly as the year has progressed. Mizzou's line, meanwhile, has also improved as the year has progressed, particularly in terms of line yards and passing down sack rates. If Mizzou can win this matchup by quite a bit, it could negate the passing advantage KU appears to have.

---

Defense

Kansas: 2009 Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

While the offense actually got better, the defense got measurably worse despite nine returning starters (sound familiar, Mizzou fans?). They lost a second-team All-American in James McClinton at defensive tackle--the only loss other than Aqib Talib--and it seems to have made a difference.

Kansas was a bit worse defending the pass, a lot worse at defending the run, and in particular they gave up a ton more big plays (PPP+). This year, they return their entire secondary and three of four starters on the defensive line (losing only end Russell Brorsen)...but lose all three starting linebackers. So the passing numbers improve and the rushing numbers regress, maybe?

I was half-right above. The rushing numbers have certainly regressed ... but then, so have the passing numbers. After some adjustments resulted in better defensive play in the middle of the season, KU's defense just has not been able to maintain a spark. They looked good at times against both Kansas State and Nebraska in recent weeks, but their breakdowns have been killers, as evidenced by the fact that they rank a ridiculous 93rd in PPP+. Mizzou's big-play ability, matched with KU's inability to stop the big play, represent Mizzou's single biggest advantage.

KU Defense vs Missouri Offense
Category	KU Defense	MU Offense
Close S&P+ (Rk)	92.3 (82)	117.2 (27)
Close Success Rate+	96.2 (76)	108.4 (37)
Close PPP+	87.4 (93)	133.1 (21)

Rushing S&P+	84.0 (107)	107.6 (47)
Passing S&P+	99.9 (57)	125.9 (17)

Standard Downs S&P+	93.4 (85)	114.6 (28)
Passing Downs S&P+	106.3 (50)	109.5 (53)

Red Zone S&P+	92.3 (87)	85.9 (104)

Q1 S&P+	106.0 (53)	118.1 (42)
Q2 S&P+	107.9 (54)	115.1 (44)
Q3 S&P+	86.2 (98)	122.8 (22)
Q4 S&P+	92.6 (79)	105.8 (55)

1st Down S&P+	94.2 (77)	120.2 (22)
2nd Down S&P+	97.0 (69)	108.5 (53)
3rd Down S&P+	102.1 (60)	110.1 (57)

Line Yards+	94.1 (84)	97.7 (77)
Close Sack Rate+	135.7 (16)	150.0 (28)
Standard Downs / Passing Downs Sack Rate+	141.6 (19) / 112.2 (48)	251.2 (10) / 113.6 (51)

When they are not forcing turnovers, this unit is simply not getting the job done.

When Missouri Has the Ball...
Missouri Rushing	Advantage: Mizzou
Missouri Passing	Advantage: Mizzou
Best Time for KU:	First Half
Best Time for Missouri:	Second Half

MU's advantages:

Close SR+, PPP+, S&P+
Rushing, Passing S&P+
Standard Downs S&P+
Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 S&P+
1st, 2nd, 3rd Down S&P+
Standard Downs Sack Rate+

KU's advantages:

Red Zone S&P+

As with Mizzou's defense, KU's defense has few advantages, but can use what they have to great benefit. If KU is able to hold Mizzou to three points instead of seven by shutting things down in the red zone, then they will find it a lot easier to outscore Mizzou.

Defensive Line

So if KU felt the absence of James McClinton more than any other in 2008, then it's up to either Jamal Greene (21 tackles, 7 TFL/sacks) to become a much more consistent force or Jeff City's own Richard Johnson (14 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks) to overtake him if KU's run defense is to improve. If not them, then who? Man-beast Darius Parish moved to OL. Somehow, someway, there needs to be a better push up the middle.

And on the outside too. Solid-not-spectacular end Jake Laptad (8.5 TFL/sacks) offers hope for a pass rush, but he'll need help. The lack of a pass rush was bad enough last year that LB James Holt moved to end toward the end of the year, and KU fans seem to have hope that 4-star JUCO transfer Quintin Woods will thrive pretty quickly. The other options (Jeff Wheeler, Maxwell Onyegbule, or some younger guy) don't seem ready or capable, so all eyes are on Woods. If Woods doesn't catch on, KU fans start getting worried.

DE Jake Laptad: 37.0 tackles, 12.0 TFL/sacks, 2 FF, 1 FR, 6 QBH
DE Max Onyegbule: 23.5 tackles, 10.0 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FR, 2 PBU, 5 QBH
DT Caleb Blakesley: 12.5 tackles, 3.0 TFL/sacks, 1 QBH
DT Richard Johnson: 12.0 tackles, 3.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FR, 2 QBH
DE Jeff Wheeler: 11.0 tackles, 6.5 TFL/sacks, 3 FF, 8 QBH

As with many highly-touted JUCO transfers (hello, Jocques Crawford ... and Andy Maples, for that matter), Quintin Woods came to Lawrence with much ado and produced almost nothing. He has a whopping four tackles for the season. Which means my prediction more or less came true -- Woods didn't catch on, and the KU defensive line was a liability, at least against the run. Rushing the passer, they've been pretty solid. Laptad (6.5 sacks), Wheeler (5.5) and Onyegbule (5.0) have all had their moments, and KU has been at its most successful getting pressure on the passer while not committing LBs to the blitz. They've been a sieve against the run, though.

Linebackers

While the RB situation isn't in wonderful shape right now, it's still no surprise that Angus Quigley was moved from RB to LB. There's clearly a major void in terms of proven playmakers, so really at this point Kansas just needs as many warm bodies as possible to throw out there and see what they've got. Never say never, but it's hard to see this unit gelling into a solid unit quickly. Whether they call it this or not, you do have to figure that with an experienced secondary, KU will be playing a lot of 4-2-5 or nickel coverage.

LB Drew Dudley: 64.0 tackles, 8.0 TFL/sacks, 4 QBH
LB Huldon Tharp: 44.5 tackles, 0.5 TFL/sacks, 2 PBU, 2 QBH
LB Arist Wright: 34.5 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 3 PBU, 2 QBH
LB Justin Springer: 18.5 tackles, 4.5 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 1 PBU, 2 QBH

True freshman Huldon Tharp has gotten some good press recently for racking up a large number of tackles in recent weeks; but that's all they are: tackles. He is not much of a disruptive force -- much more Luke Lambert than future Sean Weatherspoon. Drew Dudley, on the other hand, has been a pleasant surprise. With Angus Quigley failing to figure out the LB position in just one offseason (that is the norm, not the exception), Dudley, a junior, has stepped up and made a decent number of plays behind the line of scrimmage.

The LB corps has been solid in pass coverage, but their run support and blitzing have, as a whole, left something to be desired.

Secondary

As devoid of experience that the KU linebacker corps is, the secondary is the polar opposite. Five players with solid starting experience return, led by Mizzou killer Darrell Stuckey, who almost single-handedly fended off the Tiger offense for the entire first half last November at Arrowhead. ... Mark Mangino has some interesting ingredients, and he's not afraid to shuffle things around. Justin Thornton's been around forever (seems like just yesterday that he was getting decapitated by Tony Temple at Faurot Field), and while he's a proven commodity, he's also in Mangino's doghouse. If he doesn't end up starting (I assume he will, but...well, Mangino's got an angry side), then it looks like Anthony Davis will be the man opposite Daymond Patterson at CB. Both are sophomores. Meanwhile, junior safety Chris Harris was a star freshman in 2007 before losing his starting spot last year. He still managed the second-most successful tackles in the secondary in 2008, however, and I'm going to figure he'll still play a role opposite Phil Strozier and Stuckey.

CB Chris Harris: 67.0 tackles, 6.5 TFL/sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 7 PBU
S Darrell Stuckey: 66.5 tackles, 3.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 2 PBU, 1 QBH
S Justin Thornton: 58.0 tackles, 3.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 1 FR, 6 PBU
S Lubbock Smith: 32.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 PBU
CB Daymond Patterson: 27.5 tackles, 0.5 TFL/sacks, 1 INT, 5 PBU
CB D.J. Beshears: 16.0 tackles, 1 PBU
CB Anthony Davis: 14.0 tackles, 1.0 TFL/sacks, 1 PBU
S Ryan Murphy: 11.0 tackles, 2.0 TFL/sacks, 2 INT, 1 FR, 2 PBU, 2 QBH
S Phil Strozier: 11.0 tackles, 1 PBU, 1 QBH

It's been a strange year for the KU secondary. Relatively speaking, it has still somewhat been a strength of this defense, but 2009 has seen all sorts of personnel shuffling and slump busting. Career doghouse resident Chris Harris has turned out to be the star of the secondary (again), while Justin Thornton has, at times, taken Harris' place in the doghouse. Darrell Stuckey has certainly been good, but he hasn't quite lived up to my own expectations for him. Meanwhile, Lubbock Smith emerged as a potential leader in the secondary but has been hindered recently by injury. He is a game-time decision.

In all, this is a crafty, experienced secondary, and I'm sure that, if given the opportunity, they will take advantage of any mistakes by Blaine Gabbert or any drops by Mizzou receivers. That said, they still aren't quite as scary as I thought they would be, and I'm a lot more confident in Mizzou's potential ability to win a shootout than I was a couple of months ago.

Special Teams

KU was decent in the kicking and punt return games, but kick returns produced eight yards fewer in 2008, and that really can make a pretty big difference. It might help explain how KU's Offensive S&P+ actually improved in 2008, yet KU scored 10 fewer points per game. Dez Briscoe was outstanding in limited opportunities, but it seems KU is making a concerted effort not to wear him out (Jeremy Maclin managed to do it all, ahem...just sayin'...), and early indications (according to Rock Chalk Talk) are that sophomore Isiah Barfield might take over the duties, at least to start.
If KU gets anything from the kick return game, this is a decent special teams unit, not as good as Nebraska's (NU really does seem to have the best special teams unit in the North at this point), but solid. Alonso Rojas leaves something to be desired punting, but this is an offensive conference--kicks matter a hair more than punts, right?

Punt Returns Rank: 83rd (Daymond Patterson: 20 returns, 8.2 avg)
Net Punting Rank: 73rd (Alonso Rojas: 48 punts, 41.4 avg)
Kickoff Returns Rank: 51st (Bradley McDougald: 20 returns, 19.2 avg; Dez Briscoe: 16 returns, 23.9 avg, 1 TD)
Opponents' Kickoff Returns Rank: 90th (Jacob Branstetter: 60 kickoffs, 8 touchbacks)

Field Goals: 80th (Jacob Branstetter: 12-for-18, long: 57)
PATs: 78th (Jacob Branstetter: 38-for-40)

In all, special teams are a giant "meh" unit. They are average to below average in both place-kicking and punting, and their return units are, Dez Briscoe aside, average as well. In all, Mizzou should be able to flip the field rather well with Jake Harry, and Mizzou's average return units might find at least some moderate success. But Briscoe is the key. To avoid overuse, Briscoe has not been the key return man this year, but he showed what he could do if given the opportunity with his effortless TD return last weekend in Austin. I get the sneaking suspicion that Briscoe will be the main return man tomorrow, and ... well, that scares the living daylights out of me. IF Mizzou doesn't give up serious field position and/or a touchdown in the kicking game tomorrow, they win the special teams battle. But with the way Mizzou has been covering on kickoffs, that's a huge if.

---

Three Keys to the Game

Passing Downs

KU's offense will likely be relatively efficient on Saturday, meaning Mizzou must make stops on passing downs when given the opportunity. They have a pass-rush advantage in those situations, but if they don't make the sack or force a poor throw from Reesing, their propensity for breakdowns makes them extremely vulnerable. If they're giving up the dink-and-dunk stuff and allowing big plays on Passing Downs, they probably cannot win.

Danario Alexander vs Dez Briscoe

Alexander has been the best receiver in the country over the last month, and if he performs to that level again, Mizzou could score at will. Primarily because of Domino, Mizzou's offense has a significant advantage over KU's defense in terms of The Big Play, and if KU successfully takes that away (lord knows they've got the talent and experience to do so), they take away the biggest weapon in the Mizzou arsenal. Meanwhile, the other scariest guy on the field is Briscoe. While Meier gives Mizzou fans nightmares after last year's heroics, Briscoe is still the more dangerous guy. The winner of the Alexander/Briscoe battle will go a long way in determining the winner of the game.

MU's Running Game

Most of the previews, this one included, has focused on these two teams' respective passing games, but if Mizzou's slowly improving run game can eat away chunks of yards and Mizzou is able to both overpower KU and beat them with the big play, then they can both run up points and dominate the flow of the game. Potentially the most underrated facet of the last two games at Arrowhead was MU's running game. In 2007, Tony Temple racked up 98 yards in 22 carries. In 2008, Derrick Washington ended up with a respectable 54 yards in 11 carries but averaged under four yards per carry for the first three quarters, when Mizzou's offense was struggling and the defense was unable to get off the field. If Mizzou is running well from the start, their passing game will open up like a Venus Flytrap.

Prediction

Gotta say, I do NOT like how well KU is capable of running the short passing game considering how vulnerable Mizzou has been to just that over the last few weeks. That is just not a matchup I like for Mizzou. However, Mizzou's own big-play ability might neutralize that a bit, and besides ... it's not like I let my own feelings get in the way of these predictions anyhow, right? The numbers say Mizzou by 4.7, so we'll go with Mizzou 31, Kansas 26. Nothing between a 17-point win for Mizzou and a 17-point win for Kansas would surprise me, but being that the last two games have both gone down to the wire, we can probably expect more of the same here.

Kansas: Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

Bill C. — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:00:11 -0000

Yesterday we looked at an offense that actually improved from 2007 to 2008. How about the defense? Was the biggest difference between 2007 and 2008 simply the schedule? Was the 2007 schedule really that easy (or the 2008 schedule that hard)?

Defense

Overall Stats

S&P+: 111.9 (#30)
Success Rate+: 113.9 (#19)
PPP+: 109.7 (#45)

Standard Downs S&P+: 107.2 (#41)
Passing Downs S&P+: 113.5 (#35)

Redzone S&P+: 106.4 (#46)

Q1 S&P+: 108.9 (#40)
Q2 S&P+: 126.2 (#15)
Q3 S&P+: 100.0 (#54)
Q4 S&P+: 10.42 (#49)

1st Down S&P+: 108.0 (#43)
2nd Down S&P+: 109.7 (#38)
3rd Down S&P+: 112.3 (#40)

Rushing Stats

Rushing S&P+: 111.1 (#38)
Rushing SR+: 118.7 (#18)
Rushing PPP+: 102.0 (#61)

Standard Downs: 107.5 (#42)
Passing Downs: 95.7 (#68)

Redzone: 110.0 (#39)

Line Yards+: 109.2 (#31)

Passing Stats

Passing S&P+: 113.3 (#27)
Passing SR+: 110.8 (#21)
Passing PPP+: 116.0 (#26)

Standard Downs: 109.4 (#30)
Passing Downs: 119.5 (#24)

Redzone: 107.5 (#41)

Sack Rate+: 88.7 (#77)

So let's play the same game we played yesterday--the 2007 vs 2008 game.

S&P+: #12 in 2007, #30 in 2008
Success Rate+: #13 in 2007, #19 in 2008
PPP+: #14 in 2007, #45 in 2008
Rushing S&P+: #8 in 2007, #38 in 2008
Passing S&P+: #20 in 2007, #27 in 2008
Standard Downs S&P+: #12 in 2007, #41 in 2008
Passing Downs S&P+: #6 in 2007, #35 in 2008
Line Yards+: #12 in 2007, #31 in 2008

Ahh, so it wasn't just the schedule that made a four-game difference in the loss column. While the offense actually got better, the defense got measurably worse despite nine returning starters (sound familiar, Mizzou fans?). They lost a second-team All-American in James McClinton at defensive tackle--the only loss other than Aqib Talib--and it seems to have made a difference.

Kansas was a bit worse defending the pass, a lot worse at defending the run, and in particular they gave up a ton more big plays (PPP+). This year, they return their entire secondary and three of four starters on the defensive line (losing only end Russell Brorsen)...but lose all three starting linebackers. So the passing numbers improve and the rushing numbers regress, maybe?

Meanwhile, with so much returning experience in 2008 and a seemingly rock solid secondary, I can't really explain the significant regression in PPP+. KU allowed a ton more big plays, particularly in the running game, so we'll pin the blame mostly on the D-line and a linebacker corps that didn't achieve nearly as much as it should have with three solid players in Joe Mortensen, Mike Rivera, and James Holt. We'll also point out that Defensive Coordinator Bill Young left for Miami after 2007, and that might have made a bigger difference than anything else.

Defensive Line

2008 Unit Ranking: #49 in the nation (#5 in the Big 12)

Projected Depth Chart
DT Caleb Blakesley (6'5, 292, Sr.)
DE Jake Laptad (6'4, 258, Jr.)
DT Jamal Greene (6'4, 303, Jr.)
DE Jeff Wheeler (6'7, 260, Sr.)
DT Richard Johnson (6'2, 280, So.)
DE Quintin Woods (6'5, 230, Jr.)
DE Maxwell Onyegbule (6'5, 257, Sr.)
DT Darius Parish (6'4, 341, So.)

So if KU felt the absence of James McClinton more than any other in 2008, then it's up to either Jamal Greene (21 tackles, 7 TFL/sacks) to become a much more consistent force or Jeff City's own Richard Johnson (14 tackles, 2.5 TFL/sacks) to overtake him if KU's run defense is to improve. If not them, then who? Man-beast Darius Parish moved to OL. Somehow, someway, there needs to be a better push up the middle.

And on the outside too. Solid-not-spectacular end Jake Laptad (8.5 TFL/sacks) offers hope for a pass rush, but he'll need help. The lack of a pass rush was bad enough last year that LB James Holt moved to end toward the end of the year, and KU fans seem to have hope that 4-star JUCO transfer Quintin Woods will thrive pretty quickly. The other options (Jeff Wheeler, Maxwell Onyegbule, or some younger guy) don't seem ready or capable, so all eyes are on Woods. If Woods doesn't catch on, KU fans start getting worried.

Linebackers

2008 Unit Ranking: #57 in the nation (#9 in the Big 12)

Projected Depth Chart
Arist Wright (6'0, 226, Sr.)
Dakota Lewis (6'1, 209, Jr.)
Jake Schermer (6'2, 222, Sr.)
Angus Quigley (6'2, 226, Sr.)
Justin Springer (6'4, 242, Jr.)
Drew Dudley (6'2, 232, Jr.)
Steven Johnson (6'2, 225, So.)

When we say that KU lost all three starting linebackers from 2008, that's a smidge of an exaggeration. When Holt was moved around to generate a pass rush, Arist Wright stepped in. Still, though, Wright was only 10th on the team in tackles and managed only ten "successful" tackles (i.e. tackles that prevented a successful play) all year, two against the pass and eight against the run. The other three LBs with any experience at all combined for just 5.5 successful tackles (two against the pass, 3.5 against the run).

While the RB situation isn't in wonderful shape right now, it's still no surprise that Angus Quigley was moved from RB to LB. There's clearly a major void in terms of proven playmakers, so really at this point Kansas just needs as many warm bodies as possible to throw out there and see what they've got. Never say never, but it's hard to see this unit gelling into a solid unit quickly. Whether they call it this or not, you do have to figure that with an experienced secondary, KU will be playing a lot of 4-2-5 or nickel coverage.

Of course, Missouri doesn't play them for quite a while, so the team we're talking about now will change significantly, for better or worse, between now and then. Probably shouldn't spend a ton of time figuring everything out, eh?

Secondary

2008 Unit Ranking: #23 in the nation (#5 in the Big 12)

Projected Depth Chart
S Darrell Stuckey (6'1, 205, Sr.)
CB Justin Thornton (6'1, 213, Sr.)
S Phillip Strozier (6'0, 200, Jr.)
CB Daymond Patterson (5'9, 175, So.)
S Chris Harris (6'0, 185, Jr.)
CB Anthony Davis (6'0, 192, So.)
CB Corrigan Powell (5'10, 171, So.)
S Olaitan Oguntodu (6'0, 220, Jr.)

As devoid of experience that the KU linebacker corps is, the secondary is the polar opposite. Five players with solid starting experience return, led by Mizzou killer Darrell Stuckey, who almost single-handedly fended off the Tiger offense for the entire first half last November at Arrowhead. He is an all-conference favorite heading into the season, and with good reason. In 2008, he put together 4.5 TFL, 5 INT, 7 passes broken-up, 2 FF, 1 FR. Plus, he managed a very healthy 23.5 successful tackles against the run, one of the highest run-support totals in the country (13th overall). He's a stud.

Beyond that, Mark Mangino has some interesting ingredients, and he's not afraid to shuffle things around. Justin Thornton's been around forever (seems like just yesterday that he was getting decapitated by Tony Temple at Faurot Field), and while he's a proven commodity, he's also in Mangino's doghouse. If he doesn't end up starting (I assume he will, but...well, Mangino's got an angry side), then it looks like Anthony Davis will be the man opposite Daymond Patterson at CB. Both are sophomores. Meanwhile, junior safety Chris Harris was a star freshman in 2007 before losing his starting spot last year. He still managed the second-most successful tackles in the secondary in 2008, however, and I'm going to figure he'll still play a role opposite Phil Strozier and Stuckey.

Special Teams

2008 Unit Ranking: #81 Net Punting, #26 Punt Returns, #118 Kickoff Returns

Projected Starters
K Jacob Branstetter (5'10, 182, Jr.) - 51-for-52 PAT, 9-for-12 FG (Long: 34)
P Alonso Rojas (6'3, 220, Jr.) - 58 Punts, 33.9 Net
KR Dezmon Briscoe (6'3, 200, Jr.) - 8 returns, 27.4 Avg
PR Daymond Patterson (5'9, 175, So.) - 22 Returns, 11.0 Avg, 1 TD

Rarely is there a more stark regression than what Kansas suffered in the kick return game last year. KU ranked 7th in the country in kick returns in 2007, then fell 111 spots to 118th in 2008. What made it strange was that, it was the same main return man (Marcus Herford) both years. KU was decent in the kicking and punt return games, but kick returns produced eight yards fewer in 2008, and that really can make a pretty big difference. It might help explain how KU's Offensive S&P+ actually improved in 2008, yet KU scored 10 fewer points per game. Dez Briscoe was outstanding in limited opportunities, but it seems KU is making a concerted effort not to wear him out (Jeremy Maclin managed to do it all, ahem...just sayin'...), and early indications (according to Rock Chalk Talk) are that sophomore Isiah Barfield might take over the duties, at least to start.

If KU gets anything from the kick return game, this is a decent special teams unit, not as good as Nebraska's (NU really does seem to have the best special teams unit in the North at this point), but solid. Alonso Rojas leaves something to be desired punting, but this is an offensive conference--kicks matter a hair more than punts, right?

Summary

After seeing a pretty solid across-the-board drop in 2008, it's hard to see where KU's baseline is with a potentially great secondary and serious question marks among the front seven. The linebacker corps returns almost no quality experience, and while experience isn't a problem on the defensive line, playmaking is. KU needs to be able to limit the big run plays and generate a pass rush if they're going to fully utilize the strong secondary, and it's not a given that they can do that. Everybody in the North has question marks, so while KU's no different in that regard...KU's no different in that regard. With a South schedule that screams 0-3, they really do need to be better than everybody else in the North if they want to win the division this year, and with the holes at offensive line and in the defensive front seven, it's hard to claim they are at this moment. I've been talking up KU all offseason (not in a "Hey, gosh, you're alright, KU!" kind of way, but in a "We better start accepting that they're probably going to win the North" kind of way), but the more I read and talk about them, the less sure of them I am.

---

Projections on Friday.

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.

RMN Wall of Excellence: Now open for voting!

RPT — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:00:09 -0000

With the nomination period now officially concluded, it's time to take the next step in crowning the members of the inaugural induction class to the Rock M Nation Wall of Excellence.

Voting is now open to all Rock M Nation readers by means of replying in the comments section of this thread. Members are asked to rank their Top 3 in each tier, with a first place vote garnering five points, a second place vote earning three points, and a third place vote earning one point. In Tier V, a single vote will suffice.

Three members from Tier I, and one member from each remaining tier (including the newly added "Administrator/Coaches Tier") will be honored during induction week, to be held the first week of February. Voting ends Friday, Jan. 30.

Happy voting, and spread the word!

Tier I (2004-2008)

- Brad Smith

- Brian Smith

- Chase Daniel

- Chase Coffman

- Jeremy Maclin

- Martin Rucker

- Tony Temple

- William Moore

(Ballots for Tiers II-V after the jump)

Tier II (1994-2003)

- Brock Olivo

- Corby Jones

- Demontie Cross

- Devin West

- Justin Gage

- Justin Smith

- Zack Abron

Tier III (1974-1993)

- Eric Wright

- James Wilder

- Jeff Handy

- John Clay

- Kellen Winslow

- Phil Bradley

Tier IV (1973 and older)

- Bob Steuber

- Bus Entsminger

- Danny LaRose

- Darold Jenkins

- Harry Ice

- Johnny Roland

- Mel Gray

- Roger Wehrli

- Paul Christman

Tier V (Administrators/Coaches)

- Dan Devine

- Don Faurot

Can't vote because you aren't a Rock M Nation member? Take no more than 45 seconds to sign up for a free account and enjoy easy membership across the entire SB Nation network.

SB Nation - Tony Temple

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

The Border War: Beyond the Box Score

Kansas(39)

Mizzou(41)

What to make of Mizzou's pass defense

Three Positives

Three Negatives

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

Morning Border War Links and Discussion

The Border War: 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

Kansas: Beyond the Box Score Preseason Defensive Preview

Defense

Defensive Line

Linebackers

Secondary

Special Teams

Summary

The Greatest Win - FINALIST #1

The Greatest Win in Mizzou History

Mizzou 2009, Part Two: Putting 2008 to bed

2008

S&P+ Offensive Rankings, 2007 vs 2008

S&P+ Defensive Rankings, 2007 vs 2008

Summary

RMN Wall of Excellence: Now open for voting!

Kansas
(39)

Mizzou
(41)