So I've always kind of said our job is to bring you guys down when you're too high and to bring you up when you're too low. In that light, some things I've been kicking around after reading the board the last 20 hours or so.
Let me say first of all, I get why you're pissed and I get those who think the end is upon us and it's time to cut bait. Last night was garbage. We're two weeks into the season and Missouri hasn't played anything approaching a complete game. Week one was great on offense, garbage on defense and blah on special teams. Week two was decent on defense, bad on offense and more garbage than garbage on special teams. So I get it.
Those who are convinced it's time to cut bait, feel free to vent, but understand there is a zero percent chance it happens during the season. At the absolute bare minimum, this is how things are for the next 12 weeks. So you can continue to be angry and post the frustration, but nothing is changing.
I do not think anything is at all likely to change after the season (as far as firing the head coach). It is not impossible. If Mizzou actually has a worse record than last year, I sure wouldn't want to be Barry Odom. If they win six, he's absolutely 100% safe and coming back next year. Between there, I'd say he's probably coming back, but I wouldn't bet my life savings on it. In other words, I fully expect he's back without hesitation barring the train going completely off the tracks.
And honestly, for reasons why, you don't need to look anywhere beyond Columbia, Missouri. Each program is different. The coach at Texas or Ohio State is treated differently than the one at Mizzou or Iowa and that one is treated differently than the one at Texas San-Antonio or Northern Iowa.
But there are two shining examples of why you don't cut bait on a guy after two seasons AT MISSOURI that most of us have seen with our own eyes.
At halftime of the 2005 Independence Bowl, most wanted Gary Pinkel out. Or at least most that posted on here. Frankly, quite a few wanted him out a year earlier after 2004. He'd lost the locker room and some control of the program. His players, frankly, didn't love him. Things were pretty ugly. He'd had a bowl team, but honestly it was built on a lot of Larry Smith's players. He had this superstar quarterback, but didn't seem to be able to put nearly enough around him. He was approximately a .500 coach (in a division and league, I might point out, that was inferior to the one in which Missouri now plays).
Honestly, with years to look back and conversations I've had, I don't think Pinkel was ever in danger of losing his job even if they don't come back against South Carolina in that game (I think some jobs would have been lost, but Gary's wouldn't have been one). Mike Alden has said over the years that the lesson that had been learned, and the one Gary stressed, was that if you just change coaches every four years, you're never going to establish a damn thing. That's more true at Mizzou than a lot of places. There simply aren't the built in advantages you have some places. You can walk into Ohio State or Oklahoma or LSU and be really good really fast. It takes a little longer here. Sorry, but it's true. So if a guy doesn't win big in Norman in three years, you probably know he isn't the right guy. If a guy doesn't win in Columbia in three years, it's harder to make that determination, in my opinion. Not impossible, but harder.
Anyway, Alden stuck with him because Missouri had already seen from 1983-1994 that if you just go changing coaches out every time they have two or three losing seasons in a row, you make everybody start over and the process here takes three or four years and then you've fired the next guy. Lather, rinse, repeat. So he stuck with Pinkel. And he was rewarded.
Now, look, I'm not saying that Odom is Pinkel. Gary had a track record that Odom doesn't have. I get that. This isn't saying "just give him two more years and he'll get it going." I have no idea. He might not. But barring a complete and utter disaster, I think he's going to get two more years (the rest of this one and next).
Is there the possibility that this happens and they go 4-8 this year and 5-7 next and 14 months from now a bunch of people are saying "See, I told you we should have fired him last year, now we're just another year behind?" Sure there is. You're blind if you don't acknowledge it as possible. But I think that you have to find out.
I know many are saying "This is just like Kim Anderson. We should have fired him after year two." And I agree they should have. I've always thought Missouri waited a year too long. I knew after year two that Anderson wasn't going to win here. Is it possible we know that after year two with Odom? I think it's possible, but far less likely. Football is a longer process. But if they're 3-9 and 0-8 and still making the same mistakes every week, then yeah, you might have a pretty good idea. But again, there are ten games left to play before anyone can even begin to attempt to make that determination.
One other comp to basketball: People are saying "Well is there a home run like Cuonzo we can hire out there?" You're asking the wrong question. Is the top player in the country in 2018 or 2019 sitting out there with ties to Missouri and he's going to come play here if you hire anyone other than the guy who's coaching here? That's the question you need to ask. Because that's what happened in basketball. And I don't want this to come off as a shot at Cuonzo Martin. It isn't. But take Michael (and Jontay) Porter out of what has happened in hoops and people are happy with the direction of the program, but nowhere near where they are today. Does Martin deserve credit for landing Porter? Some. But that all started two months earlier as Jim Sterk has said on the record and I think there were other coaches who could have gotten it done too. So what I'm saying is if you can show me the guy you can hire who is going to get Mizzou football a top five recruiting class in 2018 or 2019 and prove to me it will only happen if you fire Barry Odom, I'll listen to that line of thinking. Otherwise I think it's off base.
In conclusion, I'm not going to change anyone's mind. Frankly I think at least half the people who read this will quit somewhere in the middle and respond angrily about how dumb I am without getting through the message. I'm just putting some things out there for the "everybody has to be fired before we play Purdue crowd to consider." And, at the same time, if you're 100% convinced that everything is going in the right direction and all it's going to take is another year or two, well, God bless you because you have an incredibly positive outlook on life. You might end up right...but there's no way you can sit here today and know it. And that goes for both sides in my opinion.
Let me say first of all, I get why you're pissed and I get those who think the end is upon us and it's time to cut bait. Last night was garbage. We're two weeks into the season and Missouri hasn't played anything approaching a complete game. Week one was great on offense, garbage on defense and blah on special teams. Week two was decent on defense, bad on offense and more garbage than garbage on special teams. So I get it.
Those who are convinced it's time to cut bait, feel free to vent, but understand there is a zero percent chance it happens during the season. At the absolute bare minimum, this is how things are for the next 12 weeks. So you can continue to be angry and post the frustration, but nothing is changing.
I do not think anything is at all likely to change after the season (as far as firing the head coach). It is not impossible. If Mizzou actually has a worse record than last year, I sure wouldn't want to be Barry Odom. If they win six, he's absolutely 100% safe and coming back next year. Between there, I'd say he's probably coming back, but I wouldn't bet my life savings on it. In other words, I fully expect he's back without hesitation barring the train going completely off the tracks.
And honestly, for reasons why, you don't need to look anywhere beyond Columbia, Missouri. Each program is different. The coach at Texas or Ohio State is treated differently than the one at Mizzou or Iowa and that one is treated differently than the one at Texas San-Antonio or Northern Iowa.
But there are two shining examples of why you don't cut bait on a guy after two seasons AT MISSOURI that most of us have seen with our own eyes.
At halftime of the 2005 Independence Bowl, most wanted Gary Pinkel out. Or at least most that posted on here. Frankly, quite a few wanted him out a year earlier after 2004. He'd lost the locker room and some control of the program. His players, frankly, didn't love him. Things were pretty ugly. He'd had a bowl team, but honestly it was built on a lot of Larry Smith's players. He had this superstar quarterback, but didn't seem to be able to put nearly enough around him. He was approximately a .500 coach (in a division and league, I might point out, that was inferior to the one in which Missouri now plays).
Honestly, with years to look back and conversations I've had, I don't think Pinkel was ever in danger of losing his job even if they don't come back against South Carolina in that game (I think some jobs would have been lost, but Gary's wouldn't have been one). Mike Alden has said over the years that the lesson that had been learned, and the one Gary stressed, was that if you just change coaches every four years, you're never going to establish a damn thing. That's more true at Mizzou than a lot of places. There simply aren't the built in advantages you have some places. You can walk into Ohio State or Oklahoma or LSU and be really good really fast. It takes a little longer here. Sorry, but it's true. So if a guy doesn't win big in Norman in three years, you probably know he isn't the right guy. If a guy doesn't win in Columbia in three years, it's harder to make that determination, in my opinion. Not impossible, but harder.
Anyway, Alden stuck with him because Missouri had already seen from 1983-1994 that if you just go changing coaches out every time they have two or three losing seasons in a row, you make everybody start over and the process here takes three or four years and then you've fired the next guy. Lather, rinse, repeat. So he stuck with Pinkel. And he was rewarded.
Now, look, I'm not saying that Odom is Pinkel. Gary had a track record that Odom doesn't have. I get that. This isn't saying "just give him two more years and he'll get it going." I have no idea. He might not. But barring a complete and utter disaster, I think he's going to get two more years (the rest of this one and next).
Is there the possibility that this happens and they go 4-8 this year and 5-7 next and 14 months from now a bunch of people are saying "See, I told you we should have fired him last year, now we're just another year behind?" Sure there is. You're blind if you don't acknowledge it as possible. But I think that you have to find out.
I know many are saying "This is just like Kim Anderson. We should have fired him after year two." And I agree they should have. I've always thought Missouri waited a year too long. I knew after year two that Anderson wasn't going to win here. Is it possible we know that after year two with Odom? I think it's possible, but far less likely. Football is a longer process. But if they're 3-9 and 0-8 and still making the same mistakes every week, then yeah, you might have a pretty good idea. But again, there are ten games left to play before anyone can even begin to attempt to make that determination.
One other comp to basketball: People are saying "Well is there a home run like Cuonzo we can hire out there?" You're asking the wrong question. Is the top player in the country in 2018 or 2019 sitting out there with ties to Missouri and he's going to come play here if you hire anyone other than the guy who's coaching here? That's the question you need to ask. Because that's what happened in basketball. And I don't want this to come off as a shot at Cuonzo Martin. It isn't. But take Michael (and Jontay) Porter out of what has happened in hoops and people are happy with the direction of the program, but nowhere near where they are today. Does Martin deserve credit for landing Porter? Some. But that all started two months earlier as Jim Sterk has said on the record and I think there were other coaches who could have gotten it done too. So what I'm saying is if you can show me the guy you can hire who is going to get Mizzou football a top five recruiting class in 2018 or 2019 and prove to me it will only happen if you fire Barry Odom, I'll listen to that line of thinking. Otherwise I think it's off base.
In conclusion, I'm not going to change anyone's mind. Frankly I think at least half the people who read this will quit somewhere in the middle and respond angrily about how dumb I am without getting through the message. I'm just putting some things out there for the "everybody has to be fired before we play Purdue crowd to consider." And, at the same time, if you're 100% convinced that everything is going in the right direction and all it's going to take is another year or two, well, God bless you because you have an incredibly positive outlook on life. You might end up right...but there's no way you can sit here today and know it. And that goes for both sides in my opinion.
