re: Add your reasons Mizzou is going to struggle this year and the near future

I think he meant similar as in "shameful lack of conference championships"

I can see the circle-jerk has gained momentum..........

There is emerging a bright line between the retard segment of the tFlagship and the reasonable guys.

The retard segment are typical Hogvillians, and are #Mizzousessed despite their squeals of protest. We are intimidating them by coming here, and they are pissing down their curly tails at the prospect we will do well.

The sane segment is pretty cool, has good info and I look forward to their interactions on SECr.

quote:

---

Ill make it real easy for you

Recruiting

2009

Arkansas

5 * - 1

4 * - 2

Missouri

5 * - 1

4 * - 3

2010

Arkansas

5* - 1

4 * - 2

Missouri

5 * - 0

4 * - 8

2011 (You won a Year!!!)

Arkansas

5* - 0

4* - 3

Missouri

5 * - 0

4 * - 1

2012

Arkansas

5 * - 0

4 * - 2

Missouri

5 * - 2

4 * - 2

Dont say you produce better recruits than we do. Thats just stupid.

---

I'm just curious: where are you getting these rankings from? According to what I'm seeing searching the major recruiting sites, I'm seeing a lot different than this:

Missouri

2009:
5* - 1 (Scout, Rivals)
4* - 2(Scout) 1 (Rivals)

2010:
5* - 0
4* - 6(Scout), 7 (Rivals)

2011:
5* - 1 (Scout)
4* 1 (Rivals, Scout, 24/7)

2012:
5* - 1 (Scout, Rivals, 24/7)
4* - 1 (Scout, Rivals), 2 (24/7)

Arkansas:

2009:
5* - 1(Scout, Rivals)
4* - 8 (Rivals), 5(Scout)

2010:
5* - 0
4* - 3(Rivals), 1(Scout), 2(24/7)

2011:
5* - 1(Scout)
4* - 4(Rivals), 6(Scout), 3(24/7)

2012:
5* - 0
4* 2(Yahoo), 4(Scout), 6(24/7)

Is manipulating the numbers to give Arkansas the worst combination possible while also flat-out lying about Missouri's part of your argument here?

Unless I'm looking at this wrong, 2009 was a push for 5*s because we both had 1 each that was agreed upon all sites. We then had 5 to 8 4*s compared to your 1 to 2.

In 2010, neither of us had any 5*s and you averaged 3 to 4 more 4*s than us, so you were ahead of us there.

2011 we each had a 5* from 1 of the sites, and you averaged 1 4* compared to us having 3 to 6.

In 2012, you had 1 5* compared to our 0, but only had 1 4* from 2 sites and 2 from another, compared to our 2 to 6.

I would hardly call all of that an advantage to Missouri and would, in fact, say that we have the advantage every year but 2010.

He's not talking about how many 4 and 5 stars we each signed but rather how many each state produced.

quote:

---

He's not talking about how many 4 and 5 stars we each signed but rather how many each state produced.

---

Ohhh gotcha. That's what I get for not reading the entire thread.

As much as I'd like to see Mizzou get run in the SEC, I think we are underestimating how well they will do against the middle of the pack/lower tier SEC schools (these will be different teams depending on the year). If you cannot cover their WR and TACKLE, you are likely to get scored on. Thus, they will get whipped by the good defenses, similar to how the Hogs have, but will put points up on the mediocre defenses.

Even with big fast linemen/DE, it is tough to get to a QB when he is so far from the LOS. That is why coverage and tackling skills will be the key.

with a state population twice as large and enrollment 50% larger, I can see why *some* Hog Lot are fearful of Mizzou's potential. They react by runing down what we've done and make the mistake of assuming the same level of performance into the future.

I hear references about Arkansas spending levels. If it is ahead it is about to be over taken - demographics can't be denied.

This move to the SEC is a sea change in the arc of the university. The commitment and goals have been raised at every level from the administraiton to the athletic department to the fan base. It is just a matter of time before the results follow, it won't be immediate but it will happen.

Oh, that's rich. If I didn't know better, I'd say Stone is sas's alter. It didn't take but one post to validate sas's claim.

Dunno if thats a "validation" per se... obviously most SEC fans are proud of the conference and feel that Mizzou will struggle to adjust leaving what is largely considered an inferior (albeit not by much... ranked 2nd I believe) conference. The biggest difference as stated by some of your own fan base is line play on both sides of the ball. Not many "high scoring offenses" have seen the level of success against SEC teams that they did in their own conference. I'm not stating that Mizzou will never compete in the SEC, but to imply that you'll come in this season guns blazing and take the conference by storm is simply setting yourself up for failure. Is it a possibility? Sure its also possible that I could get a blowjob from a famous celebrity this season but the odds are probably about the same. I expect Mizzou to be about middle tier in the east this year... with most of the risk toward the downside as no one really knows how UT or UF will look this year. Could be proven wrong but I doubt it based on all the information I've gathered so far.