Started By
Message
re: Challenging the notion about talent gap & our inevitable fate to fall short
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:45 pm to Jagd Tiger
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:45 pm to Jagd Tiger
I think the point is that Mizzou did recruit and develop players well enough to match up in a one game situation vs an elite team, which is far from the narrative Bernie chose.
I'm aware all teams lose players, even key players and keep rolling.
But the combination of guys we lost/could-have-had really change the entire dynamics of the team, recognizing what could have been and how that could have changed our fate in the SECCG is simply a mental exercise.
I'll ask this -- if Bama loses Cooper are they the same team? I vote no.
Say we had DGB, Josey, and Abbington -- we could lose one of our key running backs and still roll on. We could much better sustain ourselves when guys like Darius White go down ect.
I'm aware all teams lose players, even key players and keep rolling.
But the combination of guys we lost/could-have-had really change the entire dynamics of the team, recognizing what could have been and how that could have changed our fate in the SECCG is simply a mental exercise.
I'll ask this -- if Bama loses Cooper are they the same team? I vote no.
Say we had DGB, Josey, and Abbington -- we could lose one of our key running backs and still roll on. We could much better sustain ourselves when guys like Darius White go down ect.
2
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:48 pm to miz_zombie
A non Big 6 team hasn't won the SEC in like infinity years. Football programs really have a DNA and ours doesn't include winning championship games yet, it's changing and hopefully it will get there, it's just not there yet.
I really believe we could have had everyone possible on the team and we'd have still had little chance of winning that game.
Then again, I also believe we lost because I wore the Mizzou polo I got the week before the Indiana game too, so take it for what it's worth.
I really believe we could have had everyone possible on the team and we'd have still had little chance of winning that game.
Then again, I also believe we lost because I wore the Mizzou polo I got the week before the Indiana game too, so take it for what it's worth.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:53 pm to Mizzeaux
Has the polo found it's way into the fireplace yet? Haha.
If not, I've heard if you reverse wash (dryer first, washer second, then air-dry during a full moon) you can undo any evil voodoo on a shirt. Give it a try!
If not, I've heard if you reverse wash (dryer first, washer second, then air-dry during a full moon) you can undo any evil voodoo on a shirt. Give it a try!
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:55 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
I really believe we could have had everyone possible on the team and we'd have still had little chance of winning that game.
we're at least two top 20 recruiting classes away from what we would need to match up well, but to be that close for us is really somewhat amazing.
it's good to hear Bernie is enough of a Capt Obvious to realize we aren't in Bama's wheel house yet, I'm a little surprised he knows even that much about Mizzou football.
Cardinals... Bernie yes... Tigers Bernie... no
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:58 pm to miz_zombie
The talent gap that existed this year was on the offensive line. Bama and others were able to exploit it regularly. Mizzou's tackles struggled mightily in pass protection and weren't quite physical enough to move quality defenders.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 9:01 pm to miz_zombie
there is definitely a gap between MU and the elite programs in the nation and there may not be anything that MIZZOU can do about that to be honest. Our starting 22 is probably on par with just about anyone, but, IMO, the difference lies in the depth of talent after the starters and to some extent with the talent levels of our coordinators. MU has to start getting better O-line talent as well to make that jump to the elite level. just my .02
Posted on 12/11/14 at 9:05 pm to miz_zombie
quote:
But the combination of guys we lost/could-have-had really change the entire dynamics of the team, recognizing what could have been and how that could have changed our fate in the SECCG is simply a mental exercise.
Bama lost Kenyan Drake in the Ole Miss game. They still have Yeldon and Henry. They had Coker backing up Blake Sims. I'm not sure we beat that team even if Cooper had spontaneously combusted on the sideline and Yeldon fell over with an ACL injury.
We have good top level talent. We don't have tier 2 top level talent. Heck. No one else in the nation has it like Bama does. And that's the problem with coming to the SEC. Youre going to have to be a top 10 team in the country (probably a top 5 team) to win the conference.
We will have some good teams. We have only had one "elite" team in my lifetime. And they lost to Oklahoma twice.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 9:15 pm to the808bass
quote:
Bama lost Kenyan Drake in the Ole Miss game.
They also kicked 2 players over one indecent, not sure if more got kicked, but then we know Sabans penchant for "processing" players as well.
It will be interesting if a perennial #20 recruiting team like Oregon meets a perennial #1 recruiting Bama, from a talent gap standpoint that is.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 10:11 pm to wubilli
quote:
The talent gap that existed this year was on the offensive line. Bama and others were able to exploit it regularly. Mizzou's tackles struggled mightily in pass protection and weren't quite physical enough to move quality defenders.
I started with the OP and kept waiting to see when this would get mentioned. And yes, this is where the talent gap was the most pronounced against Bama and where Missouri hasn't quite reached the top tier, SEC level yet.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 10:18 pm to miz_zombie
It would be nice to play the what if game but football games are not won on message boards. You have some very flawed logic because almost every team wish they could have a recruit that didn't qualify or one that was lost to injury.
Just look at our O-Line vs. Alabama D-Line in that game.
One thing I will say is that if we continue to recruit at the pace we are in Offensive Line personnel(we still need some high end talent on the ends) and can convince a Blue Chip player or 2 every year to be apart of a growing tradition of elite Defensive Lineman than we will be able to compete.
The trenches can get us there because they can help mask certain deficiencies at other levels.
Just look at our O-Line vs. Alabama D-Line in that game.
One thing I will say is that if we continue to recruit at the pace we are in Offensive Line personnel(we still need some high end talent on the ends) and can convince a Blue Chip player or 2 every year to be apart of a growing tradition of elite Defensive Lineman than we will be able to compete.
The trenches can get us there because they can help mask certain deficiencies at other levels.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 11:22 pm to miz_zombie
bama goes 2 deep with the same talent as our best players. It is what it is
and hi killz
and hi killz
This post was edited on 12/11/14 at 11:25 pm
Posted on 12/12/14 at 12:08 am to MIZ_COU
quote:
e fate to fall short
bama goes 2 deep with the same talent as our best players
You, as did most, took this as if I'm trying to compare the talent gap between Mizzou and Alabama (or any elite) and say it's not as big as perceived, which isn't the case.
I'll just chalk this up as a lesson learned. Thanks fellas.
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:58 am to MIZ_COU
quote:
and hi killz
lol..
Posted on 12/12/14 at 4:18 am to miz_zombie
quote:
You, as did most, took this as if I'm trying to compare the talent gap between Mizzou and Alabama (or any elite) and say it's not as big as perceived, which isn't the case.
I'll just chalk this up as a lesson learned. Thanks fellas.
Welcome, zombie. Don't take it personally.
I guess I missed your point, too. Unless it's that the talent gap is closing, which I agree with.
Posted on 12/12/14 at 8:03 am to Mizz-SEC
I think the point is that Mizzou can win despite the talent gap and probably also that the talent gap isn't as great or insurmountable as some would make out. I don't disagree on any given Saturday, but to sustain over the long haul, I do think the staff has to get a handful more of their first options as opposed to 3rd, 4th or 5th options.
Posted on 12/12/14 at 8:33 am to Jagd Tiger
quote:
It will be interesting if a perennial #20 recruiting team like Oregon meets a perennial #1 recruiting Bama, from a talent gap standpoint that is.
I hadn't watched a PAC game all year until their championship. It was amazing to watch after unconsciously being acclimated to SEC football. Oregon has ultra elite speed. But I don't see them being able to move anyone in the trenches. They looked light compared to Mizzou, let alone Bama. I think they might be able to score enough to keep it halfway interesting. But absent an act of God, I don't see them (Ducks) winning that game.
Posted on 12/12/14 at 8:46 am to Mizzeaux
quote:
Then again, I also believe we lost because I wore the Mizzou polo I got the week before the Indiana game too, so take it for what it's worth.
Posted on 12/12/14 at 12:00 pm to everytrueson
I can rest easy now, my joke a while back about Mizzou being zombies shambling to the East title has inspired a user name. 
Like a lot of folks have said in this thread it is that second and third string player level where the difference really starts to have an effect. For example, in the Mizzou v. Arkansas game this year, Arkansas, who just isn't as deep as Mizzou or just about anyone else in the conference, ran out of gas and Mizzou pulled away in the 4th. Against teams like Bama the team depth works against Mizzou because they can't just toss another five star player out there every down.
Unless you have solid depth then the wear and tear of a season can really hurt you down the stretch. Lose a few key players and the season you were looking forward to becomes a death march.
You would have to think the success the Tigers have had the last two years will help their recruiting though. People can babble all they want about the East being down and so on, but the fact of the matter is Mizzou won back to back titles and from what I have seen looks like a pretty strong candidate to threepeat and go back to Atlanta.
Like a lot of folks have said in this thread it is that second and third string player level where the difference really starts to have an effect. For example, in the Mizzou v. Arkansas game this year, Arkansas, who just isn't as deep as Mizzou or just about anyone else in the conference, ran out of gas and Mizzou pulled away in the 4th. Against teams like Bama the team depth works against Mizzou because they can't just toss another five star player out there every down.
Unless you have solid depth then the wear and tear of a season can really hurt you down the stretch. Lose a few key players and the season you were looking forward to becomes a death march.
You would have to think the success the Tigers have had the last two years will help their recruiting though. People can babble all they want about the East being down and so on, but the fact of the matter is Mizzou won back to back titles and from what I have seen looks like a pretty strong candidate to threepeat and go back to Atlanta.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News