Honestly, by the time I left the press box, I was trying to kind of make sure everything was posted and wasn't too concerned with the post-game analysis. So wanted to put a few more thoughts after reading the board and having time to digest what happened a little bit:
1. I am not in any way absolving coaches of any blame (and I'll have more on that in subsequent points) but some of the criticisms are a bit overboard IMO. I mean, Pinkel has been a damn good coach for a long time. He didn't just forget how to be one in the last eight months. The thought that he should be beyond a down year, should never have games like last night happen, etc, well, that's just not reality. Everybody has down years. EVERYBODY. LSU hasn't been elite the last few years. Michigan sure hasn't. Oregon is not very good this year. Tennessee has been mediocre or worse for a decade. Nebraska is likely to miss a bowl game. Every team in the country has down years. There are some programs where a down year might be 8 or 9 wins (Oklahoma, LSU, Alabama come to mind here). Missouri isn't quite there. But if you can win seven games (I'm including a bowl here) in a down year with all the youth the Tigers have, that's solid. And ultimately, that's how the coaching job will be determined in my opinion. If they can do that in a down year and then build on it for the next two, they've done okay.
The other criticisms I believe are, in my opinion, off base (or at least ill-informed) are those that call for position coaches to be fired. Maybe some position coaches (I've seen Washington, Hill and most often Ricker mentioned) are doing a poor job. But I don't know. And I don't really know how we can tell that with the small fraction of information we have. I'm not saying don't discuss it, but ultimately I don't think switching a position coach is going to make a significant difference in the performance of that position one year to the next (although Craig Kuligowski might be an exception to that).
2. That said, some of the play selection last night was baffling at best. Drew Lock was fortunate to finish that game with the ability to walk. If Russell Hansbrough was healthy enough to run for 26 yards on one play in the fourth quarter, why wasn't he healthy enough to be on the field in the second and third quarter? At one point Missouri had called 33 designed pass plays and 14 designed runs...with a freshman QB making his second start behind a porous offensive line with an inconsistent receiving corps against the best defense they will face all season. Didn't make much sense. The good thing is that Lock is a confident but grounded kid and in talking to him after the game, there's no way this game is going to destroy him and set him back in his development.
3. The offensive line is not very good this year. It's flat out scary going forward at this point in time. Nate Crawford and Alec Abeln are the only linemen slated to return next year that have seen the field for any significant amount of time. You guys have all talked about this, so I'm not breaking news here, but it's a point that absolutely is valid and needs to be looked at. I think this program has a ton of young talent and a chance to be really good in 2017...but offensive line is my biggest curiosity going forward and something they absolutely need to address if that's going to happen. Whether it's coaching, recruiting, development, as I said above, I don't really have enough of the info to know. Ultimately it's likely a combination of all three. But regardless, it's the biggest concern going into Lock's sophomore and junior years, when the team has a chance to be pretty damn good if they can get it figured out.
4. I knew this team was going to miss Marcus Murphy. I had no idea how much. The return games are just nonexistent so far this season. It's rare Missouri even gets to the 25 on a kickoff return.
5. Nothing you can do about it now, but Pete and I were talking after the game about this. I think if you look back at two players Mizzou missed on the recruiting trail, this offense looks a whole lot different. If the Tigers get Roderick Johnson and Ezekiel Elliott, they have at worst a decent offense and maybe a pretty damn good one. Like I said on Twitter, if my aunt had balls...and I know it doesn't matter. But I think it does illustrate how thin the line is between success and failure in sports. Because I firmly believe with just two kids (and Pete made the argument maybe with Johnson alone) this offense and this season look quite a bit different.
1. I am not in any way absolving coaches of any blame (and I'll have more on that in subsequent points) but some of the criticisms are a bit overboard IMO. I mean, Pinkel has been a damn good coach for a long time. He didn't just forget how to be one in the last eight months. The thought that he should be beyond a down year, should never have games like last night happen, etc, well, that's just not reality. Everybody has down years. EVERYBODY. LSU hasn't been elite the last few years. Michigan sure hasn't. Oregon is not very good this year. Tennessee has been mediocre or worse for a decade. Nebraska is likely to miss a bowl game. Every team in the country has down years. There are some programs where a down year might be 8 or 9 wins (Oklahoma, LSU, Alabama come to mind here). Missouri isn't quite there. But if you can win seven games (I'm including a bowl here) in a down year with all the youth the Tigers have, that's solid. And ultimately, that's how the coaching job will be determined in my opinion. If they can do that in a down year and then build on it for the next two, they've done okay.
The other criticisms I believe are, in my opinion, off base (or at least ill-informed) are those that call for position coaches to be fired. Maybe some position coaches (I've seen Washington, Hill and most often Ricker mentioned) are doing a poor job. But I don't know. And I don't really know how we can tell that with the small fraction of information we have. I'm not saying don't discuss it, but ultimately I don't think switching a position coach is going to make a significant difference in the performance of that position one year to the next (although Craig Kuligowski might be an exception to that).
2. That said, some of the play selection last night was baffling at best. Drew Lock was fortunate to finish that game with the ability to walk. If Russell Hansbrough was healthy enough to run for 26 yards on one play in the fourth quarter, why wasn't he healthy enough to be on the field in the second and third quarter? At one point Missouri had called 33 designed pass plays and 14 designed runs...with a freshman QB making his second start behind a porous offensive line with an inconsistent receiving corps against the best defense they will face all season. Didn't make much sense. The good thing is that Lock is a confident but grounded kid and in talking to him after the game, there's no way this game is going to destroy him and set him back in his development.
3. The offensive line is not very good this year. It's flat out scary going forward at this point in time. Nate Crawford and Alec Abeln are the only linemen slated to return next year that have seen the field for any significant amount of time. You guys have all talked about this, so I'm not breaking news here, but it's a point that absolutely is valid and needs to be looked at. I think this program has a ton of young talent and a chance to be really good in 2017...but offensive line is my biggest curiosity going forward and something they absolutely need to address if that's going to happen. Whether it's coaching, recruiting, development, as I said above, I don't really have enough of the info to know. Ultimately it's likely a combination of all three. But regardless, it's the biggest concern going into Lock's sophomore and junior years, when the team has a chance to be pretty damn good if they can get it figured out.
4. I knew this team was going to miss Marcus Murphy. I had no idea how much. The return games are just nonexistent so far this season. It's rare Missouri even gets to the 25 on a kickoff return.
5. Nothing you can do about it now, but Pete and I were talking after the game about this. I think if you look back at two players Mizzou missed on the recruiting trail, this offense looks a whole lot different. If the Tigers get Roderick Johnson and Ezekiel Elliott, they have at worst a decent offense and maybe a pretty damn good one. Like I said on Twitter, if my aunt had balls...and I know it doesn't matter. But I think it does illustrate how thin the line is between success and failure in sports. Because I firmly believe with just two kids (and Pete made the argument maybe with Johnson alone) this offense and this season look quite a bit different.
