re: Mizzou vs Louisiana Tech

Nate Edwards on LA Tech:

"At the risk of breaking character and jinxing the hell out of our favorite football team...I think Missouri is going to beat the piss out of Louisiana Tech. The Bulldogs have been bad for quite some time, lost a lot in the portal, will be running new schemes on both sides of the ball and doing so under a new coaching staff with a head coach who’s never been anything but a coordinator. Missouri has better athletes, a more experienced and established staff, and they’re playing at home with a crowd that should be absolutely juiced for this game. If this is a struggle you will be justified in being concerned...but crazy things happen in college football constantly."

Thats a stark contrast to Gabe. I like it.

I've wondered why some are saying La Tech could give us problems. They won 3 games last year and have complete turnover on staff. Who knows.

quote:

---

I've wondered why some are saying La Tech could give us problems. They won 3 games last year and have complete turnover on staff.

---

Well, the reason I think there could be issues:

#1: Experienced QB under a coach he has played for in the past.

#2: A coach who has experience with the air raid offense. Played under Leach at TT.

#3: The last time our defense faced an air raid offense, we got absolutely man handled.

That being said, there is a lot to say about new schemes with new players being implemented. I will be absolutely thrilled if we handle La Tech the way Vandy handled Hawaii.

quote:

---

Same. I think everyone has a right to think we may have issues considering we had one of the worst defenses in all of college football last year. Until we know that has been properly fixed, doubts will and should remain.

---

La Tech is SIGNIFICANTLY better than Hawaii. Hawaii very well might go 0-12. I don’t think people realize how bad their program was gutted this off-season. 55 new players and these aren’t guys who were highly contested recruits or transfers.

quote:

---

Anyone worried?

---

Always worried, but not because of something Gabe said. He knows not what the frick he’s talking about

quote:

---

Last year has nothing to do with anything.

---

well considering the lack of new faces at every position, yes it does have a little something to do with it.

quote:

---

I guess you could say that if you wanted to ignore the NFL LB and DE we brought in or the highest graded defender on a top 5 defense we added at DT. Or the fact that the main catalyst for last year’s turnaround starts at MLB from day one. Or that Manuel doesn’t have to play out of position anymore which means KAD replaces the true freshman that was playing at corner last year. Or the P5 experienced depth we added on the DL.

Or the new coordinator.

Other than that, very similar lol

---

I'll put you down as on the record to call for Drink's firing if the D gives up more than 10 pts to La Tech.

Thanks.

lack of new faces?

Norwood at DB(2nd string)
Charleston at Safety (starting)
Jernigan at DT (starting)
Kristian Williams at DT (2nd string)
Josh Landry at DT( 2nd string)
Ian Matthews at DT (2nd string)
Hopper at LB (starting)
Coleman at DE (2nd string but will get a ton of snaps)

we added 3 starters and 5 2nd strings.

quote:

---

so 3 new faces on defense. Not enough to build an argument for substantial improvement.

The only argument for that at this point is the new DC. Which again, has not been seen to be an improvement on the field yet. Hopefully Baker takes back to top 30 defense this year.

---

Jeez man, you sound like a few of the Arkansas posters on the rant..

over a quarter of the starters are new faces. But honestly, that's not the biggest thing from last years defense we needed improve on. Here are my biggest issues from 2021 on defense, and you tell me if its any different.

Scheme/coaching - new
LB's - improved
DL size - improved
DL depth - improved

All of those are either different, or improved.

The DC alone could/should cause a drastic improvement. We were so inept on that side of the ball last year.