Started By
Message
Based on last night’s in-game commentary about Drinkwitz, he’s looking elsewhere…
Posted on 11/16/25 at 11:37 am
Posted on 11/16/25 at 11:37 am
Toward the end of last night’s game, the announcer said he had spoken to Drink about all of the interest from other schools.
Drink told him he has enough personal money. He is looking for more corporate buy-in and feels like it’s missing in Missouri.
He has every right to shop himself, but I’m tired of his constant whining. Mizzou has been good for and to him.
Let him walk.
Drink told him he has enough personal money. He is looking for more corporate buy-in and feels like it’s missing in Missouri.
He has every right to shop himself, but I’m tired of his constant whining. Mizzou has been good for and to him.
Let him walk.
This post was edited on 11/16/25 at 11:38 am
18
Posted on 11/16/25 at 11:39 am to QBUMizzou
Looks like you will get your wish
Posted on 11/16/25 at 11:41 am to QBUMizzou
quote:
Drink told him he has enough personal money. He is looking for more corporate buy-in and feels like it’s missing in Missouri.
Any school that meets Drinkwitz’s expectations here will be ultimately disappointed in his abilities as a coach.
If the conversation that he had with the media guy is accurately represented here.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 11:52 am to QBUMizzou
Good. Maybe he should look in the mirror and correct his shite in game management.
It takes two to tango. It ain’t called the Show Me State for nothing.
It takes two to tango. It ain’t called the Show Me State for nothing.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:02 pm to McMillan
quote:
Good. Maybe he should look in the mirror and correct his shite in game management.
Yep. He expects excellence out of everyone but himself.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:07 pm to QBUMizzou
Coaches have always been hired mercenaries, so I don't know why everyone suddenly feels like they are owed something. If you don't want a coach to leave out of loyalty then give them a lifetime contract until they are 67 or 70 years old or whatever and then you can expect loyalty. But no, we are going to fire their asses as soon as they don't meet our standards, well welcome to the other side of the coin.
The players transferring without having to sit for a year bothers me much more than the coaches job hopping.
The players transferring without having to sit for a year bothers me much more than the coaches job hopping.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:11 pm to bigDgator
quote:
The players transferring without having to sit for a year bothers me much more than the coaches job hopping.
Easy fix. Give the players 1 mulligan where they can transfer and not sit out. Any further transfers and they have to sit.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:16 pm to cjohn
quote:
Easy fix. Give the players 1 mulligan where they can transfer and not sit out. Any further transfers and they have to sit.
I thought the transfer rule was fine the way they had it.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:27 pm to bigDgator
quote:
Coaches have always been hired mercenaries, so I don't know why everyone suddenly feels like they are owed something. If you don't want a coach to leave out of loyalty then give them a lifetime contract until they are 67 or 70 years old or whatever and then you can expect loyalty. But no, we are going to fire their asses as soon as they don't meet our standards, well welcome to the other side of the coin.
This is an interesting thought.
UGA paid Kirby Smart 3.75 million a year (over 6 years) when they first hired him. Now they are paying him 13 million dollars a year.
If UGA had offered him 6 million a year for 20 years... he's likely have said yes. That 120 million would be less than the dollars on his current 10 year, 13 million dollar deal (130 million) for twice the time.
Interesting idea... risky but potentially huge upside if the hire is right.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:30 pm to QBUMizzou
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:36 pm to DawginSC
quote:
If UGA had offered him 6 million a year for 20 years... he's likely have said yes. That 120 million would be less than the dollars on his current 10 year, 13 million dollar deal (130 million) for twice the time.
As long as coach buyouts are 1-4 million dollars, there is no benefit to a school trying to lock in a long term contract. If he flames out the school is burned. If he’s good the salary will increase. If coach buyouts were closer to the contract remaining value, things would be a lot more interesting.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:43 pm to the808bass
I heard the tail end of the comment, where the announcer was talking about all the corporate logos you see elsewhere but not at Mizzou so it seems that was basically correct
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:51 pm to QBUMizzou
Eli Drinkwitz is the Auburn of head coaches. He’s everyone’s second option.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 12:55 pm to QBUMizzou
It seems you might get your wish but that is not a good look for Mizzou. Drink is not as bad of a coach as you think, he recruits the best we've ever had, builds enthusiasm the best, his players play hard for him and don't get into trouble.
His biggest 'weakness' is he likes to play safe bland ball control offense, he doesn't like turnovers. He doesn't like over the middle because of the risk. It works well when the Oline can control the line of scrimmage, but you can't count on that against top 15 teams where you have to open it up to put more pressure on the D. He's also been limited by QB play this year even without the injuries. He's been limited by QB play and injuries most of his time here. I would like to see what he could do with a top15 type QB. He's taken some swings at some and come close, and Zollars (who likely goes where Drink goes) shows promise. I would think that's a tendency that could be worked on. It's not like he doesn't know how to do it.
If he leaves because of a felt lack of support that does not bode well for the program. We are likely to have to take a swing at another hopeful up and comer. We are not likely to improve, we are likely to step back
His biggest 'weakness' is he likes to play safe bland ball control offense, he doesn't like turnovers. He doesn't like over the middle because of the risk. It works well when the Oline can control the line of scrimmage, but you can't count on that against top 15 teams where you have to open it up to put more pressure on the D. He's also been limited by QB play this year even without the injuries. He's been limited by QB play and injuries most of his time here. I would like to see what he could do with a top15 type QB. He's taken some swings at some and come close, and Zollars (who likely goes where Drink goes) shows promise. I would think that's a tendency that could be worked on. It's not like he doesn't know how to do it.
If he leaves because of a felt lack of support that does not bode well for the program. We are likely to have to take a swing at another hopeful up and comer. We are not likely to improve, we are likely to step back
This post was edited on 11/16/25 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:06 pm to chkenhawk
quote:
It seems you might get your wish but that is not a good look for Mizzou. Drink is not as bad of a coach as you think, he recruits the best we've ever had, builds enthusiasm the best, his players play hard for him and don't get into trouble. His biggest 'weakness' is he likes to play safe bland ball control offense, he doesn't like turnovers. He doesn't like over the middle because of the risk. It works well when the Oline can control the line of scrimmage, but you can't count on that against top 15 teams where you have to open it up to put more pressure on the D. He's also been limited by QB play this year even without the injuries. I would think that's a philosophy that could be worked on. It's not like he doesn't know how to do it. If he leaves because of a felt lack of support that does not bode well for the program. We are likely to have to take a swing at another hopeful up and comer. We are not likely to improve, we are likely to step back
I didn’t say he’s a bad coach. I pointed out that he demands excellence of everyone but himself. His recent comments about the CFP are proof.
He also plays down to competition. As you pointed out, he’s super conservative. He completely turtled the Vandy game away.
A lack of corporate sponsors didn’t lose the Bama and Vandy games. Poor strategy did.
I don’t hate him. I don’t think he’s horrible.
I do think he needs to put up or shut up.
Mizzou has invested hundreds of millions in facilities. Donors have stepped up to fund NIL.
His whining is a self-serving deflection.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:18 pm to QBUMizzou
I recall MIZ making headlines one year ago for an absurd amount of NIL $, among tops in the country. This is on Drink.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:24 pm to QBUMizzou
I've been banging the drum that Drink is staying, but I will admit that little tidbit from the TV broadcast was pretty ominous...
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:26 pm to MIZ58
Corporate NIL picks up the tab on about 90% of Mizzous NIL. Drink was way out of line. Especially standing next to a 250 million dollar renovation mostly paid by Corporate support. For a state that has the Chiefs and Cardinals, he gets alot of support for not winning anything yet.
He's just selling himself to PSU who really needs an upgrade in their NIL approach.
He's just selling himself to PSU who really needs an upgrade in their NIL approach.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:27 pm to QBUMizzou
Not making a 12 team playoff isn't a big deal.
Posted on 11/16/25 at 1:36 pm to QBUMizzou
What year is Hardy because that might be what he's talking about?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News