Look at the 2015 Schedule

[jakez4ut]

Wow.. USC has a brutal schedule.

yep, and that, if for no other reason, would be reason 1 or 1 a as to why i wouldn't pick them to win the East.

on schedule alone, it probably does come down to MO, TN or UGA, in that order.

but UGA has Bama (in Athens) and AUB (on the plains) from the West. they're in Knoxville, and their annual JAX trip. they get MO and USC at home.

i can see UGA losing to both Bama and AUB. i can see MO losing to UGA and ARK. I can see TN losing to Bama and ARK. the TN/UGA and and TN/MO games are going to be HUGE for the standings in the East this year.

you almost root for USC to beat MO. GA and TN to beat USC. you root for Bama and AUB against GA. you root for ARK and GA against MO. and hope like hell we can beat both MO and GA. this is why i think, while it would be awesome, losing to OU early is not the end of the world. neither is losing to ARK early. both of those are bonus games if we were to win.

GA and MO. those are the must wins.

 

[Biopsyman]

We win a lot

 

[bigdaddy]

Not sold this team can meat Mizzou. They curb stomped us last year even with Dobbs. Don't know how but that team over achieves every year

 

[jakez4ut]

Not sold this team can meat Mizzou. They curb stomped us last year even with Dobbs. Don't know how but that team over achieves every year

well they won't have the same defensive front they did last year, so that's a start. MO is a big ? though. i think people will discount them again. until, again, they prove everyone wrong.

one thing i do expect. by the time we get to them on the schedule, that should be a huge game for the East Division. if we do our part along the way.

 

[TheMookieMonster]

Yeah, I have seen way too many people discount Mizzou. I get it, we are better this year but it's a dangerous thing to let excitement get to your head before a snap has been played. Mizzou has over-achieved each year they have been in the conference. They are also back-to-back SEC East champions both with teams that were way better than they looked on paper.

That game is also on the road. If it were at home this year, with this team, than maybe I see it as an easier win. But on the road at the end of the season (which is when Pinkel really hits his stride), it just makes it that much harder.

 

[jakez4ut]

if we are going to put ourselves in a position to compete for the East this year, then beating MO in November is a must.

a lot has to happen prior to that. but i for one do relish the opportunity to play that meaningful of a game, that late in the season.

 

[bigdaddy]

Curb stomp was a bit much on my part earlier. But I agree with you guys on Mizzou. Injuries and the like are bound to happen for both teams so it's impossible to tell at this point. I really hope this team is a special as most think but I'm an admitted half empty guy on our program right now. I'm on the boat of I'll believe it when I see it. The bowl game was a big plus but Iowa is not top SEC talent. Can't wait to see what we can do. First season in a long time I think we are in every game this season

 

[ntxVOL]

I am really tired of losing to Mizzou. They and SC have been the biggest benefactors of a weak east division, it's time to set things right and re-establish ourselves atop the east.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

So here's the problem with decoding Mizzou, and why so many of us are having such trouble with them.

Until they moved to the SEC, they were the "Georgia" of the Big 12 North. Often second fiddle to Nebraska, they would have a hot year or two, followed by a mediocre year or two. Could win the division, and sometimes did, but could never win the big one, the conference championship. So they were there, but never all that and a bag of chips.

Well, the SEC is a stronger conference, top to bottom, than the B12. At least, all the objective indicators over the past decade+ say that: bowl results, inter-conference regular season games, final Top 25 rankings, etc. Bob Stoops' protests notwithstanding.

So if Mizzou is a middling-good, but not championship level B12 team, and they're moving to a tougher conference, they should take at least one step down, right? And be something just under the true Georgia of the SEC.

That would, normally, put them at 4th or so in the SEC-East, on par roughly with USCe.

But that's not how it worked out. Mizzou actually stepped up their game when they arrived, and stepped ahead of Georgia. At the same time, Tennessee and Florida were dismally down, catapulting Mizzou from an expected 4th position to 1st (two of the three years).

And that's how we find ourselves here, wondering what in the heck is going on with Mizzou being so much stronger than expected.

To Mizzou's credit, and especially Pinkel's, they have slowly gotten stronger and stronger each year he has been the head coach. His first four years at MU, he won only 22 games (12 in conference). His next four years, he won 37 (20 in the B12). His last three, he won 26 (15 in B12). His first three in the SEC, he won 28 (16 in conference).

But where is Mizzou's top end? Are they at it, or are they still improving as a program?

And do the return to relevance of Tennessee (fingers crossed) and Florida (inevitable, eventually) doom Mizzou back to the (long expected) second tier? A second Georgia, alongside Georgia, often contending but never truly threatening for the conference championship?

Time will tell. One thing's for sure. We as a fan base need to get over the idea that Mizzou is sitting in the cheap seats with USCe and Kentucky. They've already proven they're beyond that. At least as long as Gary Pinkel is coach.


p.s. This write-up is just a little unfair to Georgia. The Bulldogs have won SEC championships. It's just that they haven't done it since 2005, and so are becoming viewed as a "always the bridesmaid, never the bride" sort of program, with Richt at the helm. Might not be entirely fair.

 

[What'sInYou]

Good post. ^^

But where is Mizzou's top end? Are they at it, or are they still improving as a program?

I almost think they have reached it and probably will decline this year. A lot of people think this I guess, I just think they don't have difference makers like Ray and Golden this year. Only thing that worries me is Maty Mauk and his maturity & ability to make plays.

 

[jakez4ut]

So here's the problem with decoding Mizzou, and why so many of us are having such trouble with them.

Until they moved to the SEC, they were the "Georgia" of the Big 12 North. Often second fiddle to Nebraska, they would have a hot year or two, followed by a mediocre year or two. Could win the division, and sometimes did, but could never win the big one, the conference championship. So they were there, but never all that and a bag of chips.

Well, the SEC is a stronger conference, top to bottom, than the B12. At least, all the objective indicators over the past decade+ say that: bowl results, inter-conference regular season games, final Top 25 rankings, etc. Bob Stoops' protests notwithstanding.

So if Mizzou is a middling-good, but not championship level B12 team, and they're moving to a tougher conference, they should take at least one step down, right? And be something just under the true Georgia of the SEC.

That would, normally, put them at 4th or so in the SEC-East, on par roughly with USCe.

But that's not how it worked out. Mizzou actually stepped up their game when they arrived, and stepped ahead of Georgia. At the same time, Tennessee and Florida were dismally down, catapulting Mizzou from an expected 4th position to 1st (two of the three years).

And that's how we find ourselves here, wondering what in the heck is going on with Mizzou being so much stronger than expected.

To Mizzou's credit, and especially Pinkel's, they have slowly gotten stronger and stronger each year he has been the head coach. His first four years at MU, he won only 22 games (12 in conference). His next four years, he won 37 (20 in the B12). His last three, he won 26 (15 in B12). His first three in the SEC, he won 28 (16 in conference).

But where is Mizzou's top end? Are they at it, or are they still improving as a program?

And do the return to relevance of Tennessee (fingers crossed) and Florida (inevitable, eventually) doom Mizzou back to the (long expected) second tier? A second Georgia, alongside Georgia, often contending but never truly threatening for the conference championship?

Time will tell. One thing's for sure. We as a fan base need to get over the idea that Mizzou is sitting in the cheap seats with USCe and Kentucky. They've already proven they're beyond that. At least as long as Gary Pinkel is coach.


p.s. This write-up is just a little unfair to Georgia. The Bulldogs have won SEC championships. It's just that they haven't done it since 2005, and so are becoming viewed as a "always the bridesmaid, never the bride" sort of program, with Richt at the helm. Might not be entirely fair.

well said, and i'd only add that they have not had too difficult a road, by SEC standards, to get there. with the already mentioned down FL and TN, and not having to play an LSU, AUB or Bama regularly from the West.

also throw in the fact GA has thrown up on themselves, costing themselves trips to ATL in the process, e.g. last year vs. FL (remember they destroyed MO last year). and losing to MO and Vandy in 2013.

MO has definitely been in the right place at the right time.

that all said, they won enough to put themselves in position to be there, and they took advantage when the opportunity presented.

in the end, though i still think MO has a fairly easy road this year as well, but i can see them losing 3 conf games this season--GA, TN, ARK, MSU are probably the pool of likely culprits.