I got things to say. So here we go.
1. Karissa Schweizer won her 6th national title by winning the 5K at the NCAA Outdoor Track & Field Championships on Saturday night. This came on the heels of a third place finish in the 10K, which is not known as Schweizer's best race. She had the lead for a while, but in the last couple of laps, she faltered and some girl from kansas ran away from her. Let's take a moment to appreciate how ridiculous it is to finish third in the country in a race that isn't your specialty and for it to be considered a disappointment. She's a once in a generation athlete at Mizzou...and maybe better than that. Hopefully we'll get to see her in the Olympics down the road. Most of you know the story of Karissa and her grandfather by now. If you don't, or even if you do, read this.
Tangentially related
I'd think they could find a way to name this after Ms. Schweizer.
2. This weekend was eye opening in recruiting. Missouri got commitments from wide receiver Charitauskie Dove and running back Anthony Watkins. While the Tigers were hosting double digit official and unofficial visitors, some of the best talent in the state was busy playing 7 on 7 on campus. Mizzou offered three guys from Kirkwood, which brought the in-state offer total to 17 in 2019 and 11 already in 2020. Over the weekend, I ran down the biggest in-state offer years for the Tigers since 2002. Mizzou has offered 16 or more in-state players six times prior to this year. In five of those six years, the Tigers signed at least half of the offered players. I find this approach interesting because with all the talk of the in-state struggles the last 2-3 years (and it's been legitimate talk because the struggles have been real), I've thought Missouri could take one of two approaches:
*De-emphasize the state, make sure a kid really, really earns an offer, go all out for fewer kids in the state and just worry about getting the best players no matter where they come from.
*Re-emphasize the state, offer a ton of kids, maybe even send out some offers where there is equal or slightly better talent out of state, but make it clear you are making Missouri high school football players the number one priority in your recruiting efforts.
Missouri went with number two. I don't really have a feel at this point for which approach would be better, but the Tigers are now all in with approach number two. If it works, it could lead to a major uptick in in-state recruiting and then we'll really find out how good Missouri high school football talent is over the next few years. But you also have to keep in mind the idea that there are two ways it could backfire:
*The majority of these kids continue to go out of state and in the process it costs Mizzou some of those equal or slightly better players from out of state.
*Missouri gets a good amount of these kids, but they don't turn into great players in Columbia and the "Missouri kids don't do well at Mizzou" narrative gains momentum (for the record, I think this would be dumb because how good a college player you are doesn't have a single thing to do with where you played high school ball, but make no mistake, this narrative absolutely will be out there if this happens).
The bottom line is, I think Missouri almost has to go route number two. History tells us that--with a very few exceptions--the only way Mizzou is signing an elite prospect is if he's from the state or the area. You're not getting a five-star if he's not from Missouri. You're usually not getting a four-star if he's not from Missouri (or very close by). So if you get a bunch of Missouri players, maybe that increases your chances when the state does have the four- and five-star level talent. Either way, it will be interesting to see how it plays out, and it very likely will determine Barry Odom's long-term future at Missouri (or if he even has one).
3. Speaking of recruiting, the only reason I ever root for Missouri to sign guys is because of their name. I was disappointed a couple years ago when Bumper Pool went to Arkansas, because of course I want to get to know a guy named Bumper Pool and cover him. Now, I wish I covered North Carolina.
Side note, how is this kid not going to Oregon?
4. I had a chance to talk to Cuonzo Martin for about half an hour last week. I was in Cuonzo's office for a one on one for a story I'm working on that should run over the weekend. After the interview was over, we talked about various things for another ten minutes or so. In what I do, you always maintain a healthy dose of skepticism. You don't want to put the guys you cover on a pedastal. But I've got to tell you, I walked out of that interview thinking more than I already did, "This dude gets it." He's incredibly impressive. I remember when I came back to Columbia in 2003, Gary Pinkel was entering his third season and someone in the athletic department told me "If this guy can't win here, we might as well shut down the program." It feels almost that way with Cuonzo. If he's not the guy that can get Missouri back in the national spotlight and put them where they were when I was growing up or even better, maybe it's just not going to get done. After that meeting, I exchanged a couple messages with an athletic department employee about Cuonzo, telling them how impressive I thought he was in our talk. The response: "Totally agree. He's a special man." Obviously, he'll ultimately be judged by the results on the court. I just have a hard time seeing how they won't be awfully positive.
1. Karissa Schweizer won her 6th national title by winning the 5K at the NCAA Outdoor Track & Field Championships on Saturday night. This came on the heels of a third place finish in the 10K, which is not known as Schweizer's best race. She had the lead for a while, but in the last couple of laps, she faltered and some girl from kansas ran away from her. Let's take a moment to appreciate how ridiculous it is to finish third in the country in a race that isn't your specialty and for it to be considered a disappointment. She's a once in a generation athlete at Mizzou...and maybe better than that. Hopefully we'll get to see her in the Olympics down the road. Most of you know the story of Karissa and her grandfather by now. If you don't, or even if you do, read this.
Tangentially related
I'd think they could find a way to name this after Ms. Schweizer.
2. This weekend was eye opening in recruiting. Missouri got commitments from wide receiver Charitauskie Dove and running back Anthony Watkins. While the Tigers were hosting double digit official and unofficial visitors, some of the best talent in the state was busy playing 7 on 7 on campus. Mizzou offered three guys from Kirkwood, which brought the in-state offer total to 17 in 2019 and 11 already in 2020. Over the weekend, I ran down the biggest in-state offer years for the Tigers since 2002. Mizzou has offered 16 or more in-state players six times prior to this year. In five of those six years, the Tigers signed at least half of the offered players. I find this approach interesting because with all the talk of the in-state struggles the last 2-3 years (and it's been legitimate talk because the struggles have been real), I've thought Missouri could take one of two approaches:
*De-emphasize the state, make sure a kid really, really earns an offer, go all out for fewer kids in the state and just worry about getting the best players no matter where they come from.
*Re-emphasize the state, offer a ton of kids, maybe even send out some offers where there is equal or slightly better talent out of state, but make it clear you are making Missouri high school football players the number one priority in your recruiting efforts.
Missouri went with number two. I don't really have a feel at this point for which approach would be better, but the Tigers are now all in with approach number two. If it works, it could lead to a major uptick in in-state recruiting and then we'll really find out how good Missouri high school football talent is over the next few years. But you also have to keep in mind the idea that there are two ways it could backfire:
*The majority of these kids continue to go out of state and in the process it costs Mizzou some of those equal or slightly better players from out of state.
*Missouri gets a good amount of these kids, but they don't turn into great players in Columbia and the "Missouri kids don't do well at Mizzou" narrative gains momentum (for the record, I think this would be dumb because how good a college player you are doesn't have a single thing to do with where you played high school ball, but make no mistake, this narrative absolutely will be out there if this happens).
The bottom line is, I think Missouri almost has to go route number two. History tells us that--with a very few exceptions--the only way Mizzou is signing an elite prospect is if he's from the state or the area. You're not getting a five-star if he's not from Missouri. You're usually not getting a four-star if he's not from Missouri (or very close by). So if you get a bunch of Missouri players, maybe that increases your chances when the state does have the four- and five-star level talent. Either way, it will be interesting to see how it plays out, and it very likely will determine Barry Odom's long-term future at Missouri (or if he even has one).
3. Speaking of recruiting, the only reason I ever root for Missouri to sign guys is because of their name. I was disappointed a couple years ago when Bumper Pool went to Arkansas, because of course I want to get to know a guy named Bumper Pool and cover him. Now, I wish I covered North Carolina.
Side note, how is this kid not going to Oregon?
4. I had a chance to talk to Cuonzo Martin for about half an hour last week. I was in Cuonzo's office for a one on one for a story I'm working on that should run over the weekend. After the interview was over, we talked about various things for another ten minutes or so. In what I do, you always maintain a healthy dose of skepticism. You don't want to put the guys you cover on a pedastal. But I've got to tell you, I walked out of that interview thinking more than I already did, "This dude gets it." He's incredibly impressive. I remember when I came back to Columbia in 2003, Gary Pinkel was entering his third season and someone in the athletic department told me "If this guy can't win here, we might as well shut down the program." It feels almost that way with Cuonzo. If he's not the guy that can get Missouri back in the national spotlight and put them where they were when I was growing up or even better, maybe it's just not going to get done. After that meeting, I exchanged a couple messages with an athletic department employee about Cuonzo, telling them how impressive I thought he was in our talk. The response: "Totally agree. He's a special man." Obviously, he'll ultimately be judged by the results on the court. I just have a hard time seeing how they won't be awfully positive.
![[banana]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1682178.gif "banana [banana]")
