Mizzou position breakdown

[DocNice]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

 

[carlfense]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Ummm . . . last I checked (as Missouri fans have been quick to remind us after WE played VaTech) the number that really matters is the scoreboard. And Virginia Tech LED IN THE FOURTH. It's a simple concept. If you lead in the fourth . . . you can probably say that you almost won. Your yardages stats make you look ridiculous and desperate for an excuse to tear down VaTech.

Bowling Green > VaTech

 

[NU41SB]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Ummm . . . last I checked (as Missouri fans have been quick to remind us after WE played VaTech) the number that really matters is the scoreboard. And Virginia Tech LED IN THE FOURTH. It's a simple concept. If you lead in the fourth . . . you can probably say that you almost won. Your yardages stats make you look ridiculous and desperate for an excuse to tear down VaTech.

Bowling Green > VaTech

:yeah Ouch I'm thinking that this is Missouri fans :facepalm: "They weren't suppose to catch that"

 

[DocNice]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Ummm . . . last I checked (as Missouri fans have been quick to remind us after WE played VaTech) the number that really matters is the scoreboard. And Virginia Tech LED IN THE FOURTH. It's a simple concept. If you lead in the fourth . . . you can probably say that you almost won. Your yardages stats make you look ridiculous and desperate for an excuse to tear down VaTech.

Bowling Green > VaTech

How can stats be ridiculous and desperate? It's simply the truth. The game, which VT lost by double digits by the way, was nowhere near as close as the score, and that's the unvarnished truth. VT did not almost win. They weren't just two gutsy drives away from pulling this one off. They were obliterated in the play from scrimmage and were lucky to finish within 10. Now, I don't know about you, but even if you think Alabama has the best defense in the country, that 155 yards is the resume of a championship caliber team. Do you? If Oklahoma finished with 155 yards vs Florida last year, would you still consider them a legit top 5 team?

 

[NU41SB]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Ummm . . . last I checked (as Missouri fans have been quick to remind us after WE played VaTech) the number that really matters is the scoreboard. And Virginia Tech LED IN THE FOURTH. It's a simple concept. If you lead in the fourth . . . you can probably say that you almost won. Your yardages stats make you look ridiculous and desperate for an excuse to tear down VaTech.

Bowling Green > VaTech

How can stats be ridiculous and desperate? It's simply the truth. The game, which VT lost by double digits by the way, was nowhere near as close as the score, and that's the unvarnished truth. VT did not almost win. They weren't just two gutsy drives away from pulling this one off. They were obliterated in the play from scrimmage and were lucky to finish within 10. Now, I don't know about you, but even if you think Alabama has the best defense in the country, that 155 yards is the resume of a championship caliber team. Do you? If Oklahoma finished with 155 yards vs Florida last year, would you still consider them a legit top 5 team?

I think what he was getting at, and of course I could be wrong, is that Tiger fans have simply stated that it doesn't matter that we beat VT in all aspects of the game except the scoreboard. So, in beating us with less statistical advantages, in your eyes they are overrated. Now, had VT pulled out that win, with less statistical advantages to Alabama, would VT still be overrated? Would Alabama be overrated? I'm simply confused.

 

[carlfense]

Remember what I said? VT is overrated and Illinois and Nevada are clearly going to have great seasons this year - even though their combined record is 1-6. Nevermind that. The reason they haven't won yet is because they played such great teams.

I mean, it's not like VT went against a highly rated Alabama team and almost won against them despite not being too productive on offense. And it's not like VT absolutely destroyed a highly rated, highly talented Miami team.

You Missou fans are ridiculous. I mean, come on. The teams you are touting as "solid" teams have a combined record of 1-6. That is poor and I can guarantee you that if the roles were reversed - Nebraska had Missou's schedule and Missou had Nebraska's schedule, with the same results - that you guys would be pointing out the same thing Nebraska fans are pointing out.

October 8th cannot come quickly enough.

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Ummm . . . last I checked (as Missouri fans have been quick to remind us after WE played VaTech) the number that really matters is the scoreboard. And Virginia Tech LED IN THE FOURTH. It's a simple concept. If you lead in the fourth . . . you can probably say that you almost won. Your yardages stats make you look ridiculous and desperate for an excuse to tear down VaTech.

Bowling Green > VaTech

How can stats be ridiculous and desperate? It's simply the truth. The game, which VT lost by double digits by the way, was nowhere near as close as the score, and that's the unvarnished truth. VT did not almost win. They weren't just two gutsy drives away from pulling this one off. They were obliterated in the play from scrimmage and were lucky to finish within 10. Now, I don't know about you, but even if you think Alabama has the best defense in the country, that 155 yards is the resume of a championship caliber team. Do you? If Oklahoma finished with 155 yards vs Florida last year, would you still consider them a legit top 5 team?

I think what he was getting at, and of course I could be wrong, is that Tiger fans have simply stated that it doesn't matter that we beat VT in all aspects of the game except the scoreboard. So, in beating us with less statistical advantages, in your eyes they are overrated. Now, had VT pulled out that win, with less statistical advantages to Alabama, would VT still be overrated? Would Alabama be overrated? I'm simply confused.

Yep. The statistics other than the scoreboard only seem to matter when they paint Nebraska in a bad light.

 

[NU41SB]

Just for the record, I don't think that VT is overrated. IMHO they are a legit top 10 team

 

[MizzouBob77]

This arguing over who's played whom in every thread is ridiculous. Really, it is. It's so early in the season, that stuff really doesn't matter. Plus, these are kids. Their performances can radically change from one game to the next. So, trying to decide the outcome of this game based on previous ones (especially early in the season) is ridiculous.

I mean... Last year you guys blew everyone out to begin the season, but lost a tight one at home against Tech. The Tigers on the other hand played a tight game against what turned out to be overrated Illinois game. Then, we blew out a couple of smaller schools, and we did not play well at all against Buffalo, but still won.

And what was the final of last year? An MU blow out. Now, I'm not saying that's what will happen this year. I think it will be a tight game, but using previous games this early in the season as a measuring tape is stupid.

Cough. Cough.

 

[caveman99]

We're not talking about production, we're talking about talent. DWash has already been voted 2nd team all conference. Considering he's the leading returning rusher and already acheived higher accolades and we both agree that your line is opening more holes, I think a push is quite defensible, yet I still gave you the slight advantage. Not sure what you're complaining about.

And I knew you wouldn't like the D-line comment. I based it on the fact that we have better ends and you have better tackles. If you think your ends are better than I'm giving credit for, then make that argument. If you think that the tackles are really the key to a line, or that Suh is just that dominant, then make that argument. But if your argument is "Suh good, him smash" then I'm not sold.

RB: if we're talking about talent and not production, then how can you say the O-line is better, but discount that when evaluating the RB?

TE: I don't know much about your TE's. We've taken a huge step back there, but still have some good options compared to most teams. Andrew Jones had 20 catches last year behind Chase Coffman.

Defensive line: Like I said, I'm open to arguments here. I think it comes down to how good your DE's are because I've already given you the DT advantage. Your info on sacks is compelling, but it seems that most of it is not coming from your DE's when looking at the stats, whereas most of Mizzou's are from the DE's. Mizzou also has more tackles for loss than NU and a higher percentage coming from the DEs. Of course, with a player like Suh, it's not enough to call it a slight advantage for Mizzou at DE to even out the whole d-line.

DB: we'll see. Have you played a good passing team yet? I still say this is advantage Mizzou, but at best it's a push.

I don't understand your use of the word talent to say D. Washington is better. Talent is equivalent to the level of production a player exhibits. POTENTIAL is what a player has until they develop and try to realize that potential. If they are a high potential player and realize that potential then they become a highly talented player. Some players exceed the potential ceilings that they were thought to have and become highly productive, i.e. talented, players. Some players don't realize their potential and thus aren't really talented, they just continue to have a lot of potential. In some cases players loose the ability to put out a high level of production and thus are not as talented at that time as other players are. Roy Helu is the #11 Rusher in the nation right now. D. Washington doesn't look like the same player he was prior to his injury last season, he earned that 2nd Team Conference Award primarily before he got hurt. The other thing that is skewed in your assertion that being 2nd Team all conference means D. Washington is better than Roy is that Roy actually had a better year in than D. Washington in yards per carry, Roy had 52 less carries than Washington. If Roy was given another 52 carries, assuming his YPC average held true, he would have rushed for 1133 yards and out rushed Washington by 100 yards. Having Roy Helu over D. Washington gives NU a big edge right now.

 

[captain obvious]

VT is overrated? They were beating Alabama for a while in the 4th & Alabama is one of the best teams in the country, maybe the best. I'm pretty sure Alabama would crush Missouri

Dude, Alabama outgained them 498 to 155. Let me repeat that, 155 yards of total offense. Almost all of VT's points came off turnovers and special teams. Don't make it sound like they hung with the Tide. VT is so clearly overrated. The only people that don't see that are the ones with something to lose by them not being top 10. I mean, they've got a nice rushing game and a decent defense, but this is a top 25 team, not top 6. They're only that high because voters can't figure out any top teams this year. Nobody is separating themselves.

Was this due to poor execution by Bama, or if VT was being their usual selves? VT's offense tends to have a short field to work with. The defense and special teams frequently put points on the board, too. I think that pointing to offensive yardage stats says as little about VT's performance in that game as it does about Mizzou's performance in the Bowling Green game. Those yardage totals can be incredibly deceiving.

 

[captain obvious]

This arguing over who's played whom in every thread is ridiculous. Really, it is. It's so early in the season, that stuff really doesn't matter. Plus, these are kids. Their performances can radically change from one game to the next. So, trying to decide the outcome of this game based on previous ones (especially early in the season) is ridiculous.

I mean... Last year you guys blew everyone out to begin the season, but lost a tight one at home against Tech. The Tigers on the other hand played a tight game against what turned out to be overrated Illinois game. Then, we blew out a couple of smaller schools, and we did not play well at all against Buffalo, but still won.

And what was the final of last year? An MU blow out. Now, I'm not saying that's what will happen this year. I think it will be a tight game, but using previous games this early in the season as a measuring tape is stupid.

Cough. Cough.

This man clearly has the swine flu. Mods, if I push "ignore," will I no longer be risking exposure?

 

[MizzouBob77]

Come now. I've not said anything that would require me being put on ignore. I just have a dissenting opinion.

 

[knapplc]

Was this due to poor execution by Bama, or if VT was being their usual selves? VT's offense tends to have a short field to work with. The defense and special teams frequently put points on the board, too. I think that pointing to offensive yardage stats says as little about VT's performance in that game as it does about Mizzou's performance in the Bowling Green game. Those yardage totals can be incredibly deceiving.

Exactly. Dogging on VT for having few offensive yards is like dogging on 90s-era Nebraska for having no passing yards. We dominated on the ground back then. VT dominates Special Teams now. Disregarding this part of their game, and its effect on any other game, is pretty foolish.

 

[captain obvious]

Come now. I've not said anything that would require me being put on ignore. I just have a dissenting opinion.

jus jokin dude

 

[Igetbored216]

498 vs 155. They didn't ALMOST win.

Funny, I don't remember total yardage determining who wins and loses. I always thought it was total points in the game, but maybe I'm wrong.

And maybe I'm crazy, but I could have sworn it was 27 to 24 midway through the fourth quarter. Hmmm, but the score doesn't matter...only total yardage. Nevermind.