I’ve been around for 15+ years, rarely post, and yet tonight I feel compelled. Part of Drinks “charm” is that he seems to be bright. He’s a guy who may not have the Jimmys and Joes but will beat you with strategy.
The proof shows this common thought (one I adopted as well) is unequivocally false.
Tonight he kicked a 22, and a 25 yard fg in first q.. with a lead, and didn’t try to score a td. Success on either of those attempts, just one, would’ve sealed the game. Last drive by Army would’ve been irrelevant. Conversely, Drink had to burn a TO at midfield and came out of the TO running Downing off tackle for a loss and turnover on downs. What is going on? What sort of logic is being applied in these three situations? (Could mention throwing on the Chism td, on 2nd down with the clock stopped as well, but I’m not trying to even discuss best case scenarios)
Mizzou out gained their opponents by nearly 50% Ran more plays than most any Army opponent ran all season.. and lost.
The proof shows this common thought (one I adopted as well) is unequivocally false.
Tonight he kicked a 22, and a 25 yard fg in first q.. with a lead, and didn’t try to score a td. Success on either of those attempts, just one, would’ve sealed the game. Last drive by Army would’ve been irrelevant. Conversely, Drink had to burn a TO at midfield and came out of the TO running Downing off tackle for a loss and turnover on downs. What is going on? What sort of logic is being applied in these three situations? (Could mention throwing on the Chism td, on 2nd down with the clock stopped as well, but I’m not trying to even discuss best case scenarios)
Mizzou out gained their opponents by nearly 50% Ran more plays than most any Army opponent ran all season.. and lost.
