Started By
Message
If you had mulligans, how many of the players would you take again?
Posted on 9/17/17 at 9:53 pm
Posted on 9/17/17 at 9:53 pm
Crockett
Simms
Adams
Howell
Pendleton
Beckner
Fatoney
Garrett - Though I'd hope he's not a starter
I truly think I'd take a risk with every other player that the player brought in instead would be better. Reese and Blanton might be able to be added to that list.
Who would you absolutely bring back and not take a chance with a mulligan? Anyone? And forget the obvious like BO. Just trying to get a gauge of what kind of talent might actually be on the team.
Simms
Adams
Howell
Pendleton
Beckner
Fatoney
Garrett - Though I'd hope he's not a starter
I truly think I'd take a risk with every other player that the player brought in instead would be better. Reese and Blanton might be able to be added to that list.
Who would you absolutely bring back and not take a chance with a mulligan? Anyone? And forget the obvious like BO. Just trying to get a gauge of what kind of talent might actually be on the team.
6
Posted on 9/17/17 at 10:32 pm to reedus23
No linebackers
Sherrils looked like he still cared if they won or lost when no one else on the defense did, so maybe him.
Sherrils looked like he still cared if they won or lost when no one else on the defense did, so maybe him.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 10:46 pm to reedus23
Well Crockett and the freshman all american for sure.
I like Garrett's effort I'd take him off the bench. and he's still young.
I like Garrett's effort I'd take him off the bench. and he's still young.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:54 am to reedus23
I think there's more than that. Remember the GP model for success. Redshirt year 1, special teams snaps year 2, part time player year 3, starter level player in years 4-5.
There's just not many players now that were allowed to go that route.
I would add Brandon and Whiteside to players I would keep. I also would like to see more of Byers, Turner, Williams, Anderson, Brooks, Miller and Bledsoe before writing them off.
On offense I would take Hall, Johnson, Floyd, Mason, Albert O and Rountree. Teach receivers to actually run routes and they could be really good.
There's just not many players now that were allowed to go that route.
I would add Brandon and Whiteside to players I would keep. I also would like to see more of Byers, Turner, Williams, Anderson, Brooks, Miller and Bledsoe before writing them off.
On offense I would take Hall, Johnson, Floyd, Mason, Albert O and Rountree. Teach receivers to actually run routes and they could be really good.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:44 pm to wubilli
Fair enough about freshmen. Give them a chance.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 6:49 am to reedus23
I'd rather get mulligans on the 11 5.7/5.8 rated players from the 2013-2015 classes that left before their eligibility expired.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 10:29 am to reedus23
The Mizzou "Second Stringers", no longer the Tigers.
Who is a difference makers on D? TBJ...okay. Then a handful of so-so's that should be second string at best. Then the remaining waste (LBs) that we took from lower divisions.
Besides TEs and Crockett, the rest of our O should be playing second string at best.
STs - Fatoney.
Coaches - take Elerbee...that is it. They're a bunch of second stringers that attract second stringers.
Who is a difference makers on D? TBJ...okay. Then a handful of so-so's that should be second string at best. Then the remaining waste (LBs) that we took from lower divisions.
Besides TEs and Crockett, the rest of our O should be playing second string at best.
STs - Fatoney.
Coaches - take Elerbee...that is it. They're a bunch of second stringers that attract second stringers.
This post was edited on 9/19/17 at 10:31 am
Posted on 9/19/17 at 10:59 am to reedus23
I can't believe that all our players are horrible athletes. We may not have any future NFL guys, but I think the main problem is that they don't know what the frick to do. Which stands to reason because their coaches don't know what the frick to do.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 1:08 pm to Literalist
quote:
I can't believe that all our players are horrible athletes. We may not have any future NFL guys, but I think the main problem is that they don't know what the frick to do. Which stands to reason because their coaches don't know what the frick to do.
Agreed, I think that is what is causing the problem for y'all right now. Players just seem lost out on the field. "A QB can either give the ball or keep it on a read option? Inconceivable!" Trust me, after the last two years of watching Arkansas play I know the look of a disorganized defense that doesn't have a clue of what is going on.
The defensive players aren't sure what they should be doing and the super hurry up offense y'all are running has a tendency to dump them back on the field right away without a chance to catch their breath or get coached up on the sideline.
On offense sometimes the push to go right now means that your players aren't in the right position or are trying to figure out exactly what it is they are supposed to do on the play.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 7:06 pm to navynuke
quote:
I'd rather get mulligans on the 11 5.7/5.8 rated players from the 2013-2015 classes that left before their eligibility expired.
That's a whole another issue.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 7:08 pm to Literalist
quote:
I can't believe that all our players are horrible athletes. We may not have any future NFL guys, but I think the main problem is that they don't know what the frick to do. Which stands to reason because their coaches don't know what the frick to do.
It's not just lack of talent that would make me prefer to take a flyer on others. In some cases it's having a low football IQ. Sometimes it's because they're quitters or have no fire. In some instances, it is due to lack of talent.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 7:27 pm to reedus23
Mizzou has had to take athletes and try to turn them into football players. Some years it works, some it doesn't.
I still believe attrition from the early SEC classes is partly responsible for this team, many guys are playing that wouldn't on most Mizzou teams of the last decade.
I still believe attrition from the early SEC classes is partly responsible for this team, many guys are playing that wouldn't on most Mizzou teams of the last decade.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 9:12 pm to reedus23
quote:
That's a whole another issue.
Not when your program is dependent on those guys being major contributors in years 3 and 4 on campus.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 11:44 pm to navynuke
I get that and don't disagree but who you would like to be able to go back in time and change the situation so that they would still be here in years 3 and 4 is different than which, of the current roster, would you keep if you had a do over. Maybe you are saying you would keep every single player on the roster along with keeping those that we lost with the assumption that the current guys would then be backups.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News