Started By
Message
How would Missouri have fared if both new teams came in in '92?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:12 am
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:12 am
This is mostly for Missouri fans to provide input, since they know about their squad during that time better than the rest of us I imagine. I'm sure people will say I'm "butthurt" or whatever, but clearly I don't post a lot so it's not like I'm trying to stir up trouble. I notice that missouri fans crow a lot on here, and I'll admit it's with good reason. What they've done in 3 years in the east is certainly impressive, and I imagine has surpassed everyone's expectations including their own. This isn't to try to drag missouri down, it's moreso pondering on how things would have shaped up over a longer time period. Full disclosure; I don't really know much about missouri outside of 2007 and 2012-current, so I'm genuinely looking for solid feedback. Let's take a look at how the east shaped up during that time.
12-14: no change obviously
11: UGA 7-1, SC 6-2
10: SC 5-3, UF 4-4
09: UF 8-0
08: UF 7-1, UGA 6-2
07: UT 6-2, UGA 6-2
06: UF 7-1, UT 5-3
05: UGA 6-2
04: UT 7-1, UGA 6-2
03: UGA/UF/UT 6-2
02: UGA 7-1, UF 6-2
01: UT 7-1, UF 6-2
00: UF 7-1
99: UF 7-1, UT 6-2
98: UT 8-0, UF 7-1
97: UT 7-1, UF 6-2, UGA 6-2
96: UF 8-0, UT 7-1
95: UF 8-0 UT 7-1
94: UF 7-1
93: UF 7-1, UT 6-1-1
92: UF 6-2, UGA 6-2
Missouri fans, can you tell us a little about your teams in this time frame? Without knowing about missouri, just what I know about the strength of the SEC teams, I would guess that 92, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 08, and 09 would remain the same. A couple years like 03, 07, and 10 would probably have been up for grabs as those east champs weren't necessarily as strong. I know that missouri was a force in 07 so I'd guess yall win the east that year. But what about the rest?
Again, this isn't some way to "get" missouri...I'm genuinely curious on how yall think you'd have stacked up against the east had you been here since its inception.
12-14: no change obviously
11: UGA 7-1, SC 6-2
10: SC 5-3, UF 4-4
09: UF 8-0
08: UF 7-1, UGA 6-2
07: UT 6-2, UGA 6-2
06: UF 7-1, UT 5-3
05: UGA 6-2
04: UT 7-1, UGA 6-2
03: UGA/UF/UT 6-2
02: UGA 7-1, UF 6-2
01: UT 7-1, UF 6-2
00: UF 7-1
99: UF 7-1, UT 6-2
98: UT 8-0, UF 7-1
97: UT 7-1, UF 6-2, UGA 6-2
96: UF 8-0, UT 7-1
95: UF 8-0 UT 7-1
94: UF 7-1
93: UF 7-1, UT 6-1-1
92: UF 6-2, UGA 6-2
Missouri fans, can you tell us a little about your teams in this time frame? Without knowing about missouri, just what I know about the strength of the SEC teams, I would guess that 92, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 08, and 09 would remain the same. A couple years like 03, 07, and 10 would probably have been up for grabs as those east champs weren't necessarily as strong. I know that missouri was a force in 07 so I'd guess yall win the east that year. But what about the rest?
Again, this isn't some way to "get" missouri...I'm genuinely curious on how yall think you'd have stacked up against the east had you been here since its inception.
This post was edited on 3/12/15 at 9:14 am
7
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:14 am to MrTwoBits
Missouri was garbage in the 1990s.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:16 am to CapstoneGrad06
We were garbage in the 80s and early 90s due to a President who wanted to destroy the athletic department and focus solely on academics. She was a bitch.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:17 am to MrTwoBits
They were garbage until a few years into Pinkel's tenure. They might have won in 10, but not much other than that.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:17 am to mizzoukills
quote:
We were garbage in the 80s and early 90s
When did your program turn around? Pinkel has been there since early 2000s is that right?
Going back to the OP, would you as a mizzou fan say that the 90s probably would have seen no change? Also what are your thoughts on how missouri would stack up from 2000-2011?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:20 am to MrTwoBits
90's minus '98 were god awful. '98 probably would have eligible. Early 2000's were getting better, but was obviously a UF/UT/UGA stronghold. '06 was our turnaround, and it looks like the east minus UF might have been down. '07 would have crushed the east. '08 competitive, '09 was a down year. '10 was the year when we had an amazing 9 games, and pissed down our leg in a few. '11 wasnt anything special.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:24 am to MrTwoBits
quote:
Going back to the OP, would you as a mizzou fan say that the 90s probably would have seen no change? Also what are your thoughts on how missouri would stack up from 2000-2011?
Well I answered the 90s part. We would've been garbage.
From 2000 - 2011 we would've mirrored our record in the Big 12.
South Carolina was terrible until about 4 years ago. Kentucky has always been terrible. Vandy...terrible. That's 3 wins right there which would've put us with at least 7 wins per season considering our out-of-conference victories.
Then, in true Mizzou fashion we would upset at least one true "power team" from the East (Tennessee, Georgia, Florida) each year which would put us at 8 total victories each season.
Then on a good year (Chase Daniels as QB) coupled with at least one power team from the East having a slightly off year, we'd perhaps win the East or end the season with 10 or 11 victories.
You must understand that since Pinkel has been coaching at Mizzou, we've owned Texas A&M. There's a reason College Station is referred to as Faurot Field South. Therefore, assuming that Mizzou would have played A&M for the first 3 years just like we did when we came to the SEC in 2012...you can add another victory to each season.
Therefore, my hypothesis is solid and I stand by it 100 percent.
This post was edited on 3/12/15 at 10:30 am
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:24 am to 5thTiger
quote:
'98 probably would have eligible
The only reason I counted '98 as the same is because UT went undefeated and won the national title. Idk how strong missouri was in 98 but I just kind of assumed that UT would still win the division.
quote:
'06 was our turnaround, and it looks like the east minus UF might have been down.
I think that's fair. SC was still bad (this was early under spurrier), UGA was in a transition era, and UT was coming to the end of fulmer.
quote:
'07 would have crushed the east
I can see that. UF wasn't that good that year. UT won the east but never looked great. UGA ended up great (finished #2) but they had some head scratchers early, losing to SC and UT.
quote:
'08 competitive, '09 was a down year.
I feel pretty safe in saying UF would have still won both years, we were really, really good both years.
quote:
'10 was the year when we had an amazing 9 games, and pissed down our leg in a few.
Y'all probably take the east that year. SC was pretty much the only east team worth anything.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:33 am to MrTwoBits
Seeing how the East is always down, I think we would have won it 98% of the time during those years.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:34 am to Wtodd
quote:
Wtodd
After every single other reply in the thread was legitimate, why did you choose to be the first to deviate from that?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:37 am to MrTwoBits
quote:
After every single other reply in the thread was legitimate, why did you choose to be the first to deviate from that?
2 reasons - I think Killz summed up the 90s best and because I'm tired of the "blue bloods" whining on why they couldn't win the past 2 years.....the sun was in our eyes, we got sand in our vaginas, we were Richted up, blah blah blah.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:38 am to Wtodd
quote:
I'm tired of the "blue bloods" whining on why they couldn't win the past 2 years
Who's whining? I was very clear in the OP that missouri has done remarkably well in the SEC, and was just curious how they would've done if they were here when the divisions formed.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:43 am to MrTwoBits
quote:
Who's whining?
Seriously? You ain't new to the Rant.
quote:
was just curious how they would've done if they were here when the divisions formed.
Killz said it best for the 90s; we weren't good ('98 we were OK). '05 on we're decent except '12. '07 was our best team offensively; kind of like Auburn in 2013 except with the passing game...we were lethal except against OU and those racist bastards
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:46 am to Wtodd
They were actually pretty good in the first half if the 80s. The long walk in the desert didn't start until 84 or 85.
Larry Smith also fielded a couple decent teams in the late 90s. But not good enough to compete for SEC East.
I'd guess they would have won it in 07, had a Puncher's chance in 10,and little to no chance other years.
Larry Smith also fielded a couple decent teams in the late 90s. But not good enough to compete for SEC East.
I'd guess they would have won it in 07, had a Puncher's chance in 10,and little to no chance other years.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:48 am to MrTwoBits
MrTwoBits
I just explained it to you but you seem to be ignoring my incredible post.
Are you pushing for a narrative trap? Hmmmmm?
I just explained it to you but you seem to be ignoring my incredible post.
Are you pushing for a narrative trap? Hmmmmm?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:49 am to mizzoukills
more like from the mid 80s through all of the 90's.
also the run against A&M, is more recent, it didn't start until around 07
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:52 am to MrTwoBits
Mizzou football in the 1990s
1990: 4-7 (2-6)
1991: 3-7-1 (1-7)
1992: 3-8 (2-5)
1993: 3-7-1 (2-5)
1994: 3-8-1 (2-5)
1995: 3-8 (1-6)
1996: 5-6 (3-5)
1997: 7-5 (5-3), L - Holiday Bowl, ranked #23 in the AP Poll
1998: 8-4 (5-3), W - Insight.com Bowl, ranked #21 in the AP Poll
1999: 4-7 (2-6)
tl;dr version: Mizzou football was hot garbage in the 1990s and would have been the whipping boys of the SEC East, sans Vanderbilt.
1990: 4-7 (2-6)
1991: 3-7-1 (1-7)
1992: 3-8 (2-5)
1993: 3-7-1 (2-5)
1994: 3-8-1 (2-5)
1995: 3-8 (1-6)
1996: 5-6 (3-5)
1997: 7-5 (5-3), L - Holiday Bowl, ranked #23 in the AP Poll
1998: 8-4 (5-3), W - Insight.com Bowl, ranked #21 in the AP Poll
1999: 4-7 (2-6)
tl;dr version: Mizzou football was hot garbage in the 1990s and would have been the whipping boys of the SEC East, sans Vanderbilt.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:53 am to Jagd Tiger
quote:
also the run against A&M, is more recent, it didn't start until around 07
Uhhh...I said we've owned A&M since Pinkel's been coach. Did you miss that?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:54 am to Tornado Alley
quote:
Mizzou football was hot garbage in the 1990s and would have been the whipping boys of the SEC East, sans Vanderbilt.
But that has already been established multiple times by Mizzou fans.
Confused...
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:55 am to mizzoukills
The East was also peaking in the 90s with Phil & Steve doin work.
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News