First off, by saying that our defense looked good against Virginia Tech and Mizzou has a far superior offense to Va Tech, you are discrediting yourself. All the statements you have made have been talking about how we can't say anything about Nebraska because we don't know yet. But who has Mizzou played?
I'm not sold that Missouri has a FAR superior offense to Va Tech. They may have last year, but that's just what it is, LAST year. This year they have struggled against two of their cupcake (27-20 comeback against BGSU and 31-21 win at Nevada). Now you know as well as I do that the score in that Nevada game is looking a lot better than the game did. Nevada, an average defensive team, absolutely SHUT down your running game and also was able to run all over Mizzou between the tackles. But, as I've stated, I don't believe they are far superior to VT, just different styles, Tech runs a smashmouth on the ground, while Mizzou prefers the air.
But by saying that Nebraska isn't tested, you are saying exactly the same about Missouri. But simply by looking at the games they have played, Nebraska has handled business against the cupcakes MUCH better than has Mizzou. And don't discredit the ACC, Virginia Tech puts a solid team on the field EVERY year and looks good against non-conference power houses as well as their own conference.
VT's offense is ranked 77th in the country. Mizzou's 16th. It may be early, but expect that to hold up. And to be honest, if you can't see the difference in their offensive capabilities, even against disparate competition, then it doesn't lend credence to your opinion. Blaine Gabbert may be green, but I'll be shocked if he's still around his senior year. Tyrod Taylor is an athletic wonder but he's a "quarterback" if you know what I mean.
As for Mizzou playing nobody, again, I posted numbers above showing our nonconference wins were against better competition, and gave evidence that they're better than even those rankings. We have played somebody alright. Going into the season, most people predicted Illinois and Nevada as losses, and Bowling Green as a threat. They're not as good as Nebraska of course, but then again we were clearly superior to any of those teams.
Nebraska on the other hand, has not beaten a team ranked higher than 85th. Ouch with a capital O. Do you really think running up the score on the Northwestern Saskatchewan School for the Blind means you've proven something? That's like saying Mizzou has a great offense because we beat Furman.
No, Mizzou has a great offense because we have a QB with a cannon arm, good accuracy, and hasn't thrown an interception all year. Eventually that will change, possibly against NU, but that's an accomplishment. He's top 10 in both yardage (despite the 2nd fewest attempts of the top 10) and QB rating. The only other sophomores remotely close to him in accomplishment (Mallet and Harris) have received Heisman buzz.
And it turns out that the backups to all those NFL receivers we lost are pretty darn good. Among the best in the conference even. And we have the highest yardage running back in the conference returning (2nd team all conference) and 2 pretty talented backups. The offensive line is schizophrenic, opening huge holes one week and none the next, but we haven't need the run to win.
So yeah, we've got a good offense. If the running game gets consistent, expect it to be a top 5 offense. Even without it, we're top 25 easily.
And as far as "only" averaging 32 points a game against D-IA competition, you miss the point completely. We have DOMINATED all of our competition except Bowling Green. I'm not sure what those people are saying about the Nevada game being closer than the score. I never felt the outcome was in doubt the whole second half, and I'm a nervous kind of guy. Even when they were on the 4 yard line and fumbled, I never thought the game was in doubt. We were CLEARLY the superior team. Not only did we got up 31-13 late in the game, but we outgained them by about 200 yards before their final drive against our prevent defense. Same with Bowling Green. We started slow, but absolutely dominated with a capital D the second half. Really the last 40 minutes. I personally don't care if we won by 20 or by 40. There's no question we were by far the better team in every game.
And I'll note nobody is bringing up Illinois. If they've given up on the year, it's largely because we sucked the wind out of their sails. That was a team considered by many to be a Rose Bowl contender, and they still could get a bowl game. You want to talk about domination, that game was over before the 4th quarter.