Started By
Message

re: Massey Ratings projecting Mizzou to lose 1.

Posted on 9/9/14 at 11:35 am to
Posted by Alumn11
St. Louis, MO
Member since Oct 2013
194 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 11:35 am to
Yes but I like to consume a great amount of alcohol at the tailgate.
Posted by roadGator
Member since Feb 2009
140098 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 11:36 am to
Well, you have created quite the problem for yourself them through piss poor planning. Good luck.
Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
17973 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 11:49 am to
That works great if you can option or run out of the spread with your QB. Mizzou was 2nd in the SEC in rushing D before that Auburn game.
Posted by Prettyboy Floyd
Pensacola, Florida
Member since Dec 2013
15659 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 12:27 pm to
quote:

That works great if you can option or run out of the spread with your QB. Mizzou was 2nd in the SEC in rushing D before that Auburn game.


As you seen with Clemson. We don't need a running QB to have an effective running game. This year it won't be a 4th string slow fumble prone starting running back. Good luck stopping us.
Posted by bayou2003
Mah-zur-ree (417)
Member since Oct 2003
17646 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 12:29 pm to
As of right now I have Mizzou 3rd in East behind UGA and UF. Run defense concerns me. Hope I'm wrong.
Posted by roadGator
Member since Feb 2009
140098 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 12:32 pm to
I thought you guys were stacked on the DL. What happened?
Posted by PintobeansnCornbread
Member since Jan 2014
319 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 12:59 pm to
Another ankle injury will
Posted by Alumn11
St. Louis, MO
Member since Oct 2013
194 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 1:02 pm to
We are stacked at DL... Linebackers on the other hand have been.......bad.
Posted by Sarcastro
Member since May 2012
1373 posts
Posted on 9/9/14 at 1:23 pm to
We've had three big runs against us in two games.

Against SDSU it was their very first offensive play of the game. It was a freak play where a poor snap ricocheted off the QB's shoulder and right to the RB. The RB then proceeded to run 75 yards down the other side of the field for a TD while our defense ran around looking for the fumbled football. The rest of the game SDSU had 31 carries for 44 yards, which is more like what a decent team should have against a FCS school.

The two long runs by Toledo are more problematic. In both cases, Toledo spread us out so there were only our DL and a linebacker or two in the box, and then ran straight up the gut for long gains. One was a 38 yard TD and the other was a 45 yard run to the 1 yard line. Both times it looked like the we had two LBs hit the wrong gaps and left a hole right up the middle. It looked to me like our LBs were over pursuing, but DC Steck said they were designed run blitzes.

The 38 yard run was when the game was still fairly close in the first half. The second run was when we were up 37-7 in the second half, and wouldn't have been all that concerning if it wasn't exactly the same run that had already happened once that game. We also decided to line up in a nickle or dime to start the second half with a three man DL and our defense got shredded until we went back to four down linemen.
This post was edited on 9/9/14 at 1:24 pm
Posted by TigerBornTigerBred
Member since Mar 2014
1340 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 6:40 pm to
quote:

As you seen with Clemson. We don't need a running QB to have an effective running game. This year it won't be a 4th string slow fumble prone starting running back. Good luck stopping us.



You are probably right but shouldn't you guys worry about the Cocks first?
Page 1 2
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter