The NEW MU v. NU Thread

[DRAINO]

 

 

One question I have for Nebraska fans is this: MU had its way with Nebraska in Lincoln last season with a 6 touchdown differential for a Tiger victory. MU lost some talent, but so did Nebraska. The excitement around Nebraska football is welcomed, as it was a shame what Callahan did to your great program in just three short years.

 

How do you think Nebraska has closed a 6 touchdown deficit in just one year, and do you think playing in Columbia gives the Tigers a boost heading into this early showdown on October 8th?

 

Are you kidding me? I think it is pretty obvious how we have closed a 6 touchdown deficit.. You lost your three biggest threats on offense Daniels, Coffman and Maclin.

Our defense looks much improved from last year and Mu, as Nu, is breaking in a new Qb...

The only advantage I can give to NU is that our new Qb has faced a tough D.. although he played poorly he has atleast seen a tough D and responded well this week agains the Cajuns

Columbia does give them an advantage; however, going on the trend of thursday night, the bigger question may be who is favored, It seems the underdog has won almost all the games on ESPNs Thursday night game

 

Directed to Tiger in SC --> As to some of your other posts, I think it goes without saying you were flat out wrong about VT and Illinois.. VT beat a very solid Miami team

[Husker_x]

For me the game gets pretty simple. Nebraska has the better defense, the better offensive line, and a better running game––all statistically verifiable.

 

Missouri has the better receiving corps, probably a better quarterback (though we'll find out more as the season progresses).

 

If Nebraska dominates on the lines, we will win. Our 2008 redshirt experiment is now paying us back with interest in terms of speed and athleticism. Missouri hasn't played a Nebraska team this fast and athletic for years. So far in their schedule they've had one scare against Bowling Green and another 'closer-than-expected' bout with Nevada (who was blanked by Notre Dame 35-0).

 

The plain reality of Mizzou's situation is that Gabbert is going to get pressured––by four, by six, corners and safeties, linebackers and towel boys. If he can handle that, the offense will be productive and we'll have ourselves a shootout. If he can't, though, uh oh.

[3rd and long]

Six touchdowns are made up this way.

 

MU loses Maclin, Daniels, Coffman--that's got to be worth at least a couple ofTD's.

 

NU still has a dominant front four, the DB's are a year more experienced, the LB's who redshirted last year can run, and the entire defense is now comfortable playing in this system. They are at least two TD's better than last year.

 

NU has a legimate running game this year, the line is reminescent of the Husker OL's of old, and Helu is rapidly turning into a true feature back. We don't have to rely on Ganz throwing for 300 yards this year. Two TD's more effective offensively. Now to keep that two TD improvement, we HAVE to be able to put the ball in the endzone, five field goals most likely will not be enough.

 

I don't think anyone would argue the fact that Missouri overall(and especially at the skill positions) as to be down at least a little bit from last year, while Nebraska's talent is overall improved.

[HuskerGBR]

I'm sure everyone is wondering what happened to the three topics discussing MU v. NU. Don't worry, they're alive and well. We moved 'em to the Woodshed. Not only were they getting repetitive, they were starting to get a little heated, so this is your chance to cut loose. Plus, we've picked up a few fans from other teams that seem to want to talk smack rather than discuss the merits of the game itself. Nothing wrong with that and we appreciate fans of opposing teams - but it seems that each attempt by anyone to actually discuss each team's strong and weak points quickly dissolves into a pissing match.

 

I hope I haven't contributed too much to that. Unfortunately any time there's a big early season game, there's very little to base things on, so it degenerates into whose opponents suck worse.

 

Strengths vs Weaknesses

 

After re-watching the Nevada game, I'm a little more worried. I've been putting a lot of stock in our players abilities rather than their play. Size, speed and strength don't really matter if you get stood up on the LOS. We've got a lot of work to do. I do think we're talented enough that we might be able to win even playing as badly on the line as we did last week; after all it's not uncommon for us to beat teams despite losing the LOS. But it's going to be harder. That said, I also wouldn't be surprised if we came out and played much better. That could be just a homer opinion, but it's not uncommon the last few years for Mizzou to play horribly on the LOS one week and great the next.

 

What I'd really like to know from NU is: what's the bread and butter of your running game? Misdirection, power-game up the middle, sweeps, all of the above? The key matchup seems to be your running game up the middle versus our d-line. We've played very good perimeter run defense so far, but we could be in trouble if you get leverage out there, but I don't expect that to happen. If you run, it's likely going to be straight up the gut.

 

The other way around, I'd look at your ability to pressure the QB with 4 linemen and drop the rest into coverage, especially if you can effectively defend the run in this configuration. Do that, and you'll need only 20 or 30 to win. If Mizzou runs on you, I think the game's over, but I don't expect to have a successful rushing day.

 

We do a lot of zone read running plays...the best thing about Helu is even when there isn't much to work with he finds a hole and gets positive yards. We also do runs out of the singleback...watch for a toss in this game. We don't use the toss very often, but when we do it looks really good. Everyone is down field blocking and it usually goes for pretty good yardage.

 

I am interested to see how we attack your defense with the run too. Missouri has some speed and it could prove difficult to run to the outside.

 

I am also interested in how our defense does against the run. We have been in a lot of Nickel formation, but have still managed to do pretty good against the run. I personally think it will come down to how well we defend against the pass and this game will show me how good we really are. There are a lot of pass heavy offenses in the Big XII and I don't think we have really been tested in this category yet.

[xkbubo]

I'm going to be laughing during and after the game. My stomach is probably going to hurt like hell the next day.

 

Some people are just silly, especially some MO fans.

 

Anyways, what does it take to obtain the pass to woodstock? er, I mean the Woodshed

[Tiger of the Corn]

I'm going to be laughing during and after the game. My stomach is probably going to hurt like hell the next day.

 

Some people are just silly, especially some MO fans.

 

Anyways, what does it take to obtain the pass to woodstock? er, I mean the Woodshed

 

LOL...another post captured.

I'm going to be busy on the 9th.

[DocNice]

For me the game gets pretty simple. Nebraska has the better defense, the better offensive line, and a better running game––all statistically verifiable.

 

Missouri has the better receiving corps, probably a better quarterback (though we'll find out more as the season progresses).

 

If Nebraska dominates on the lines, we will win. Our 2008 redshirt experiment is now paying us back with interest in terms of speed and athleticism. Missouri hasn't played a Nebraska team this fast and athletic for years. So far in their schedule they've had one scare against Bowling Green and another 'closer-than-expected' bout with Nevada (who was blanked by Notre Dame 35-0).

 

The plain reality of Mizzou's situation is that Gabbert is going to get pressured––by four, by six, corners and safeties, linebackers and towel boys. If he can handle that, the offense will be productive and we'll have ourselves a shootout. If he can't, though, uh oh.

 

Where did all these reasonable people come from? Well, maybe I'm not sold on this post. I was laughing a little bit at the statistically verifiable remark, but I almost spit out my gum at the "find out who has a better QB over the season" remark. Lee is probably better than the VT game, but you'll know what I mean when you see Gabbert play.

[Husker_x]

For me the game gets pretty simple. Nebraska has the better defense, the better offensive line, and a better running game––all statistically verifiable.

 

Missouri has the better receiving corps, probably a better quarterback (though we'll find out more as the season progresses).

 

If Nebraska dominates on the lines, we will win. Our 2008 redshirt experiment is now paying us back with interest in terms of speed and athleticism. Missouri hasn't played a Nebraska team this fast and athletic for years. So far in their schedule they've had one scare against Bowling Green and another 'closer-than-expected' bout with Nevada (who was blanked by Notre Dame 35-0).

 

The plain reality of Mizzou's situation is that Gabbert is going to get pressured––by four, by six, corners and safeties, linebackers and towel boys. If he can handle that, the offense will be productive and we'll have ourselves a shootout. If he can't, though, uh oh.

 

Where did all these reasonable people come from? Well, maybe I'm not sold on this post. I was laughing a little bit at the statistically verifiable remark, but I almost spit out my gum at the "find out who has a better QB over the season" remark. Lee is probably better than the VT game, but you'll know what I mean when you see Gabbert play.

 

Five second rule. Your Big Red gum is still good.

 

Lee is better than his Virginia Tech performance. His receivers were dropping balls left and right and failing to get open against a very salty pass defense. We did have five redzone appearances, however.

 

You want to talk reasonable, start with this: Missouri hasn't played a single team which provides you with enough information to gauge how good your quarterback is. At least with Virginia Tech, we get an idea (though it was his first road game in one of the toughest venues in the sport). I have an inkling that Gabbert will develop into a fantastic quarterback. I question his ability to handle pressure based on some of the early snaps in the Illinois game. I also think he's going to find out what a real pass rush feels like. How he handles it may be all the difference.

 

But don't sleep on Lee, my friend. He's got a big-time arm which has made several beautiful, tough passes, and he has made very few bad decisions so far this season, and that includes Virginia Tech.

[knapplc]

Where did all these reasonable people come from? Well, maybe I'm not sold on this post. I was laughing a little bit at the statistically verifiable remark, but I almost spit out my gum at the "find out who has a better QB over the season" remark. Lee is probably better than the VT game, but you'll know what I mean when you see Gabbert play.

You do realize that we own televisions in Nebraska, yes? You do realize that most of us watched the Illinois game, the Bowling Green game and the Nevada game, yes? If you don't, you may want to adjust your thinking.

 

I know you're looking at the teams you've faced through Tiger-colored glasses. That's understandable, especially after the way you've throttled us four of the last six years, and the last two running. But you do not know football as well as you think if you looked at your games against Illinois and Nevada and thought your team looked good. You saw two opponents more detrimental to their own aims than most anything Missouri could have devised, yet despite this, the Tigers looked barely adequate to the task.

 

This isn't Bill Callahan's Husker team. This isn't even Bo Pelini's 2008 hangover from the Callahan Era team. This is a very different Husker team than you've faced the last few years. On the other side of the ball, this isn't the same Tigers team we've faced the last few years with your brace of crazy-good tight ends, a future NFL QB and Maclin, who for my money was better than any WR in the league the last several years (and yes, I'm talking to YOU, Michael Crabtree). Maybe you'll get what we've been saying next Thursday if you don't grasp that now.

 

The beauty of college football is that graduation mandates change every few years. Graduation and recruiting have had their way with Nebraska and Missouri, as has Pelini's better coaching, and this will be a very different game than you've seen the last two years, I guarantee it. The Tigers may still win (I doubt this, but it's very possible), but it will not be like 2007 and 2008. Not even close.

[DocNice]

Where did all these reasonable people come from? Well, maybe I'm not sold on this post. I was laughing a little bit at the statistically verifiable remark, but I almost spit out my gum at the "find out who has a better QB over the season" remark. Lee is probably better than the VT game, but you'll know what I mean when you see Gabbert play.

You do realize that we own televisions in Nebraska, yes? You do realize that most of us watched the Illinois game, the Bowling Green game and the Nevada game, yes? If you don't, you may want to adjust your thinking.

 

I know you're looking at the teams you've faced through Tiger-colored glasses. That's understandable, especially after the way you've throttled us four of the last six years, and the last two running. But you do not know football as well as you think if you looked at your games against Illinois and Nevada and thought your team looked good. You saw two opponents more detrimental to their own aims than most anything Missouri could have devised, yet despite this, the Tigers looked barely adequate to the task.

 

This isn't Bill Callahan's Husker team. This isn't even Bo Pelini's 2008 hangover from the Callahan Era team. This is a very different Husker team than you've faced the last few years. On the other side of the ball, this isn't the same Tigers team we've faced the last few years with your brace of crazy-good tight ends, a future NFL QB and Maclin, who for my money was better than any WR in the league the last several years (and yes, I'm talking to YOU, Michael Crabtree). Maybe you'll get what we've been saying next Thursday if you don't grasp that now.

 

The beauty of college football is that graduation mandates change every few years. Graduation and recruiting have had their way with Nebraska and Missouri, as has Pelini's better coaching, and this will be a very different game than you've seen the last two years, I guarantee it. The Tigers may still win (I doubt this, but it's very possible), but it will not be like 2007 and 2008. Not even close.

 

I think the problem you're having, and perhaps much of the rest of the country, is that you think Mizzou was just Daniel, Maclin, Coffman etc. Hey, Maclin is an otherworldly talent, and Coffman's as good a college tight end as you'll ever see. Daniel set such high marks it's hard to imagine even Gabbert breaking them.

 

That said, we didn't beat you just because of those players. If you didn't notice, we have one of the best receiving corps in the conference, even without Maclin. And our QB, even with occasional happy feet, is already one of the best in the country. Will he make mistakes? Of course, but we're not asking him to be perfect, only good enough to be the best in the North. We have the fastest defense we've ever had, good running backs, and a lot of nice things going for us even if our program never heard of the last 2 seasons. We are a good team.

 

If you want to dismiss us because you think our competition sucks, then have at it. But when you find out that we have talent all over the field and beat you way worse than VT did, don't say I didn't tell you. Can Nebraska beat Mizzou? Of course. You're a good team. But I really genuinely believe this. Missouri is better.

[kansas husker]

I'm going to be laughing during and after the game. My stomach is probably going to hurt like hell the next day.

 

Some people are just silly, especially some MO fans.

 

Anyways, what does it take to obtain the pass to woodstock? er, I mean the Woodshed

 

LOL...another post captured.

I'm going to be busy on the 9th.

 

Pm a mod

 

Can't wait till the 8th if u thought helt game helu was tired after the vt game he is going to need an oxygen mask after he runs for 200+ aginst mizzou

[knapplc]

I think the problem you're having, and perhaps much of the rest of the country, is that you think Mizzou was just Daniel, Maclin, Coffman etc. Hey, Maclin is an otherworldly talent, and Coffman's as good a college tight end as you'll ever see. Daniel set such high marks it's hard to imagine even Gabbert breaking them.

 

That said, we didn't beat you just because of those players. If you didn't notice, we have one of the best receiving corps in the conference, even without Maclin. And our QB, even with occasional happy feet, is already one of the best in the country. Will he make mistakes? Of course, but we're not asking him to be perfect, only good enough to be the best in the North. We have the fastest defense we've ever had, good running backs, and a lot of nice things going for us even if our program never heard of the last 2 seasons. We are a good team.

 

If you want to dismiss us because you think our competition sucks, then have at it. But when you find out that we have talent all over the field and beat you way worse than VT did, don't say I didn't tell you. Can Nebraska beat Mizzou? Of course. You're a good team. But I really genuinely believe this. Missouri is better.

I think the problem you're having is you're assuming that, aside from Daniel, Maclin, Coffman, etc, that your talent level was THAT MUCH better than ours. It wasn't. Those three guys were very good, and had a great game against Nebraska, while the Huskers very much underperformed. We know that Missouri wasn't overly loaded with talent because several other teams were able to beat you last year - just not us. The gap between Nebraska and Missouri was so slight last year by season's end that you didn't even win the North outright - you took the "title" on a tiebreaker. Do you recall which team tied you for the North title?

 

You're looking solely at our game last year, remembering how your guys marched up and down the field on us, and how hapless we looked. You're ignoring the light turning on for our defense as it did against Texas Tech, and you're ignoring the Kansas team we pretty much shut down, a Kansas team that beat you, I'll remind you in case you've forgotten.

 

And no, I'm not dismissing you simply because your competition sucks. I'm downgrading you because against that crappy competition, you've looked unimpressive. Down at halftime to Bowling Green. One score away from a bad Nevada team in the fourth quarter. Giving up 400 yards of offense to Furman. Nobody is going to deny that Missouri has talent. What we’re questioning is what that talent is doing on the field. Last year Nebraska had talent with Swift & Peterson & Helu & Lucky & Potter & Ganzy… where did that get us? Shellacked by Missouri and Oklahoma, because they weren’t producing on the field.

 

Talent alone will not win you ballgames. Without execution talent is meaningless. To date, Missouri is under-executing on the field.

[MizzouBob77]

I think the problem you're having, and perhaps much of the rest of the country, is that you think Mizzou was just Daniel, Maclin, Coffman etc. Hey, Maclin is an otherworldly talent, and Coffman's as good a college tight end as you'll ever see. Daniel set such high marks it's hard to imagine even Gabbert breaking them.

 

That said, we didn't beat you just because of those players. If you didn't notice, we have one of the best receiving corps in the conference, even without Maclin. And our QB, even with occasional happy feet, is already one of the best in the country. Will he make mistakes? Of course, but we're not asking him to be perfect, only good enough to be the best in the North. We have the fastest defense we've ever had, good running backs, and a lot of nice things going for us even if our program never heard of the last 2 seasons. We are a good team.

 

If you want to dismiss us because you think our competition sucks, then have at it. But when you find out that we have talent all over the field and beat you way worse than VT did, don't say I didn't tell you. Can Nebraska beat Mizzou? Of course. You're a good team. But I really genuinely believe this. Missouri is better.

I think the problem you're having is you're assuming that, aside from Daniel, Maclin, Coffman, etc, that your talent level was THAT MUCH better than ours. It wasn't. Those three guys were very good, and had a great game against Nebraska, while the Huskers very much underperformed. We know that Missouri wasn't overly loaded with talent because several other teams were able to beat you last year - just not us. The gap between Nebraska and Missouri was so slight last year by season's end that you didn't even win the North outright - you took the "title" on a tiebreaker. Do you recall which team tied you for the North title?

 

You're looking solely at our game last year, remembering how your guys marched up and down the field on us, and how hapless we looked. You're ignoring the light turning on for our defense as it did against Texas Tech, and you're ignoring the Kansas team we pretty much shut down, a Kansas team that beat you, I'll remind you in case you've forgotten.

 

And no, I'm not dismissing you simply because your competition sucks. I'm downgrading you because against that crappy competition, you've looked unimpressive. Down at halftime to Bowling Green. One score away from a bad Nevada team in the fourth quarter. Giving up 400 yards of offense to Furman. Nobody is going to deny that Missouri has talent. What we’re questioning is what that talent is doing on the field. Last year Nebraska had talent with Swift & Peterson & Helu & Lucky & Potter & Ganzy… where did that get us? Shellacked by Missouri and Oklahoma, because they weren’t producing on the field.

 

Talent alone will not win you ballgames. Without execution talent is meaningless. To date, Missouri is under-executing on the field.

 

Yes, absolutely, we are. But this is one of the youngest teams in college football, and they're 4-0, which is the best they could hope for. They got up for a rivalry game against UI. Then, they slept walked against a couple of teams for a bit in Nevada and Bowling Green, but they turned it on once they saw it wasn't going to be a cake walk. Furman doesn't count. All of our starters were out by the start of the second half. That being said, you can bet their ass that we'll be up for you guys. We always get up to play Nebraska. It will be a dog fight.

[Enhance]

Yes, absolutely, we are. But this is one of the youngest teams in college football, and they're 4-0, which is the best they could hope for. They got up for a rivalry game against UI. Then, they slept walked against a couple of teams for a bit in Nevada and Bowling Green, but they turned it on once they saw it wasn't going to be a cake walk. Furman doesn't count. All of our starters were out by the start of the second half. That being said, you can bet their ass that we'll be up for you guys. We always get up to play Nebraska. It will be a dog fight.

 

Then our game last week vs. ULL doesn't count, I guess? We had second teamers in for most of the third quarter, and all second and third teamers for the fourth. Still preserved a shut out. If ULL and Furman played, you're probably looking at a win by a touchdown or so either way.

 

MU will be ready, just as Nebraska will be ready. Hopefully, it's a good clean game and nobody says that Nebraska is "the dirtiest team I've ever played".

[knapplc]

Yes, absolutely, we are. But this is one of the youngest teams in college football, and they're 4-0, which is the best they could hope for. They got up for a rivalry game against UI. Then, they slept walked against a couple of teams for a bit in Nevada and Bowling Green, but they turned it on once they saw it wasn't going to be a cake walk. Furman doesn't count. All of our starters were out by the start of the second half. That being said, you can bet their ass that we'll be up for you guys. We always get up to play Nebraska. It will be a dog fight.

 

As an FYI - Nebraska has a younger team than Missouri. Here's a breakdown of each team's rosters:

 

Year	MU	NU
FR	  29	40
RFR	 23	40
SO	  25	22
RSO	  7	 0
JR	  17	26
RJR	  2	 0
SR	  13	14
TOTAL  116	142

 

 

56% of Nebraska's roster are Freshmen or Redshirt Freshmen, compared to 45% of Missouri's. We have only one more Senior on our roster than Missouri. So these are both pretty young teams, and yet only one of us is using our youth as an explanation for why we've played erratically this year. A point to ponder.