Where do we stand with Mizzou?

#52
#52
BigOrangeTrain said:
Why do people continue to state the idiotic statement about a QBs record as a starter?
Click to expand...
Because it can matter. Bryant is a good QB. He was also surrounded by national championship caliber players at every position. That ain't Mizzou. But his team did win a lot of games so he gets part of the credit like he would get part of the blame if they lost. QB's are disproportionately get both because their decisions have more influence over results than other players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33 and Big Al Orange
#53
#53
volfannbama said:
What does that even mean?
Click to expand...

In the 80s we got new school leadership and neglected facilities and recruiting. Kind of like what happened to Tennessee from 2010-2013 except with worse recruiting and facilities. Instead of playing Alabama every year, we had Nebraska
 
#54
#54
KCMOTIGERS said:
In the 80s we got new school leadership and neglected facilities and recruiting. Kind of like what happened to Tennessee from 2010-2013 except with worse recruiting and facilities. Instead of playing Alabama every year, we had Nebraska
Click to expand...
So what I hear you saying is "if you hadnt sucked for a decade, you wouldnt have sucked for a decade?"

And for not sucking that decade, that would put you on par with historically bottom tier sec teams?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titan05
#55
#55
sjt18 said:
Because it can matter. Bryant is a good QB. He was also surrounded by national championship caliber players at every position. That ain't Mizzou. But his team did win a lot of games so he gets part of the credit like he would get part of the blame if they lost. QB's are disproportionately get both because their decisions have more influence over results than other players.
Click to expand...

Its just such a dumb statement though. I disagree that QBs decisions have more influence. Winning takes the team. Again we can use the OL. Lets take Trevor Lawrence. Now if his OL was absolutely pathetic and. He was getting hammered every other play, do you think they win many games? What about the WRs and RBs that scored TDs? How about the defense that played lights out for the vast majority of the year?

Quoting a QBs record as a starter is ridiculous. Its putting way to much emphasis on a single player. Take away the OL, TE, WRs and the QB has nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfannbama
#56
#56
2-5 vs Missouri, with three bad losses. Kelly Bryant is not Drew Locke. As a matter of fact, he is just as dangerous, in a different way. He will run the read option very well, and has the legs to hurt you. He has a great arm, but doesn't have the pocket presence of Locke. But, he will break contain, and make plays down the field, or with his legs, in open field. He's a lot like Josh Dobbs. You must respect his ability to run the ball. Locke......not so much. So, it's a whole new ballgame versus Missouri, on the road, this season. Plus, it is late in the season, so all of the kinks will be worked out of the system. Barring injuries, their offense will be firing on all cylinders, when we face them.
 
#57
#57
volfannbama said:
So what I hear you saying is "if you hadnt sucked for a decade, you wouldnt have sucked for a decade?"

And for not sucking that decade, that would put you on par with historically bottom tier sec teams?
Click to expand...

Arkansas may be bottom tier as an SEC member, but that’s because they’ve only been here since 1992. If we’re ranking the SEC since 1992, it goes like:
Alabama, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, Missouri, A&M, Arkansas, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Kentucky, Vanderbilt

Arkansas and A&M played easier schedules in the SWC than Mizzou saw in the Big 8. That helped them rack up wins and titles.

I hear a lot of people say we’re about to become a bottom feeder based on history but HS recruits don’t remember those years. Mizzou and Tennessee have been on the same level (overall) their whole lives.

As to the OP, no, Tennessee fans shouldn’t “expect” to beat Missouri unless Tennessee becomes elite like Georgia, OSU, or Oklahoma. That’s where these teams stand
 
#58
#58
PEPPERJAX said:
The sad part is they hired Dooley and still beat us last year.
Click to expand...
dooley coukd have been shuffling gatorade last year and they still would have beat us because of locke. that dude had an arm on him.. reference they play where he threw the ball thru one our defender's ear hole for a score ..
 
#59
#59
KCMOTIGERS said:
Arkansas may be bottom tier as an SEC member, but that’s because they’ve only been here since 1992. If we’re ranking the SEC since 1992, it goes like:
Alabama, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, Missouri, A&M, Arkansas, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Kentucky, Vanderbilt

Arkansas and A&M played easier schedules in the SWC than Mizzou saw in the Big 8. That helped them rack up wins and titles.

I hear a lot of people say we’re about to become a bottom feeder based on history but HS recruits don’t remember those years. Mizzou and Tennessee have been on the same level (overall) their whole lives.
Click to expand...
I would agree, just hate hearing the hypothetical " if we didnt suck for ten years....." Ive been a Tennessee fan since I knew what a football was and I hate hearing vols fans do it too.
 
#60
#60
volfannbama said:
I would agree, just hate hearing the hypothetical " if we didnt suck for ten years....." Ive been a Tennessee fan since I knew what a football was and I hate hearing vols fans do it too.
Click to expand...
I guess I worded that wrong. Wasn’t trying to use an excuse since previous failures can definitely have an affect on a program. Missouri was bad back then and all those losses absolutely count. We “could’ve/should’ve” done better but we didn’t and that’s all that matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueOrange, MemphisVol77 and volfannbama
#61
#61
leftygray said:
Living outside of Vol territory, I often have people ask me, "so how will Tennessee do this year?" I usually give the same response - "if we finally start winning the games that we are supposed to, I think any realistic fan will be happy."

What I mean by this is that if we can win the non-conference games, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and USCe- we would be 7-5 and I would be fine with it. Whenever I explain this to people, I never know what classification to put Mizzou in though.
Click to expand...

I sincerely do not mean this to be an attack on the Original Poster BUT I can't help but observe that that sentence in bold sounds exactly like what Vanderbilt fans say (after substituting Ole Miss or Mizzou for Vanderbilt in that sentence). 4 very weak OOC games and then hoping for 2 SEC wins is their ticket to a bowl game in Shreveport or Birmingham.
 
#62
#62
KCMOTIGERS said:
Missouri was bad back then and all those losses absolutely count. We “could’ve/should’ve” done better but we didn’t and that’s all that matters.
Click to expand...
yeah but ya'll were good back in the day making for exciting thanksgiving football and screwing the huskers when it came to NC's !
 
#64
#64
KCMOTIGERS said:
Arkansas may be bottom tier as an SEC member, but that’s because they’ve only been here since 1992. If we’re ranking the SEC since 1992, it goes like:
Alabama, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, Missouri, A&M, Arkansas, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Kentucky, Vanderbilt

Arkansas and A&M played easier schedules in the SWC than Mizzou saw in the Big 8. That helped them rack up wins and titles.

I hear a lot of people say we’re about to become a bottom feeder based on history but HS recruits don’t remember those years. Mizzou and Tennessee have been on the same level (overall) their whole lives.

As to the OP, no, Tennessee fans shouldn’t “expect” to beat Missouri unless Tennessee becomes elite like Georgia, OSU, or Oklahoma. That’s where these teams stand
Click to expand...
There is no reason TN can't consistently dominate Mizzou. The football programs are on two different planes. It just hapoens that Mizzou came into SECe when both TN and FL were down. USCe is a better program than Mizzou. This will be last year Mizzou MAY beat us. They hit the tranfer lottery with Kelly Bryant this year. Otherwise its they'd be a 4-5 win team.
 
#65
#65
Orange colored glasses obscure what is happening in college football for the past 25 years. Historical data is completely irrelevant now. It's like the NFL in the early years vs today. Money, money, money is everywhere and lots of colleges care about football programs now, and 25-30 years ago they were content having a program. During Fulmer's mid career is when the change started. The SEC has excellent coaches at most every school (SEC basketball is heading the same way). USCe is throwing money at football, both Miss schools, aTm, and yes Missouri. Even Vandy is a tuff out now a days. As was stated above, history doesn't win the VOLS any games. Just hard work to assembly the best admin, coaches, recruiting, facilities, and all working towards the same goal. Out working the other schools to hire the best. If you haven't noticed, lots of coaches avoid coming to the SEC
 
  • Like
Reactions: LittleVol, MemphisVol77, Mtnvol80 and 1 other person
#66
#66
leftygray said:
Living outside of Vol territory, I often have people ask me, "so how will Tennessee do this year?" I usually give the same response - "if we finally start winning the games that we are supposed to, I think any realistic fan will be happy."

What I mean by this is that if we can win the non-conference games, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and USCe- we would be 7-5 and I would be fine with it. Whenever I explain this to people, I never know what classification to put Mizzou in though.

Are they a team that our program should expect to beat? I want to say yes, but history does not seem to indicate that to be true. I don't think any fan expects us to beat UGA, Alabama, or Florida typically. If we happen to beat them, it's great. If we lose to them, it's kind of expected. I don't feel like Mizzou belongs in that category, but I also don't think they belong in the Vandy, UK, USC category.

Additionally, I just saw where one website predicted Mizzou to finish 11-1 this year. I don't know enough about them, but is this realistic? What should I be expecting going into this game? I really don't know what to think about UT - Mizzou at this point.
Click to expand...

Right now we don’t.
 
#68
#68
leftygray said:
Living outside of Vol territory, I often have people ask me, "so how will Tennessee do this year?" I usually give the same response - "if we finally start winning the games that we are supposed to, I think any realistic fan will be happy."

What I mean by this is that if we can win the non-conference games, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and USCe- we would be 7-5 and I would be fine with it. Whenever I explain this to people, I never know what classification to put Mizzou in though.

Are they a team that our program should expect to beat? I want to say yes, but history does not seem to indicate that to be true. I don't think any fan expects us to beat UGA, Alabama, or Florida typically. If we happen to beat them, it's great. If we lose to them, it's kind of expected. I don't feel like Mizzou belongs in that category, but I also don't think they belong in the Vandy, UK, USC category.

Additionally, I just saw where one website predicted Mizzou to finish 11-1 this year. I don't know enough about them, but is this realistic? What should I be expecting going into this game? I really don't know what to think about UT - Mizzou at this point.
Click to expand...
Historical yes we should be able to everybody on our schedule but I'm not expecting a win against the Bama or UGA this year (2020 and beyond we should be able to compete with them). To me UF is a swing game, honestly could go both ways. As far as Missouri goes I consider them along the lines of SC
 
#69
#69
pimo1 said:
that's exactly my thoughts. USCe is in a tier above Missou historically its just that UT and USCe are both on extended down cycles. In my lifetime South Carolina and Arkansas have kinda both been in that 60/40 zone. Where we beat them 6 times out of 10. Historically Vandy, UK, OleMIss, and Miss State have been more in the 80/20 range. Vandy and Kentucky are weird because even though we have almost always dominated them they also have almost always usually played their best games against us yearly. We have, because of geography, always been their natural SEC rivals.

I think honestly the way the world works now the playing field is more equal near the middle and bottom though the top has extended its lead. The difference between 3 and 14 is a lot closer than it used to be but the difference between 1/2 and the rest is bigger than ever. When the Saban dynasty is broken maybe that changes and its happening slowly. Teams are starting to close the gap with those elites. But its gonna come down to who is next.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of your post, that the landscape of college football has changed as most teams are now investing and putting effort into fielding winning programs. That reason alone has shrunk the gulf between the 3-14 range and has stretched out the gulf between the Ultra blue bloods and the rest the top 2 or 3 because The Ultra Blue Bloods with close proximity to a rich recruiting base have distanced themselves for the most part if they do things correctly of course there are exceptions of underachievers aka Texas,A&M and Florida of late.

The question is in this changed landscape will the lower tier of Blue Bloods(UT,NEB,etc) regain their Old forum?
 
#72
#72
There’s no way we should be losing to MO every year! Tennessee is a top 15 program historically and MO is not even a top 50! The world will be right when we are beating Vandy, MO, Kentucky, and SC EVERY year contending with GA and FL for the east for a spot in the SECCG and a spot in the national playoff. That’s when TENN will be back!
It’s unconscionable that we have been pummeled by MO the last two years!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sport3500
#73
#73
TheGrove68 said:
Babs Uehling gutted the program those years it was nuts....we tanked as a program hardly winning any games, if we would of invested or at least stayed on par out Winning % etc. would be a lot better.
Click to expand...
So it.sucked for a decade? Gotcha
Wouldnt that go for every program? I mean, if they didnt lose so much they would be a better program?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titan05
#74
#74
LA vol7 said:
There’s no way we should be losing to MO every year! Tennessee is a top 15 program historically and MO is not even a top 50! The world will be right when we are beating Vandy, MO, Kentucky, and SC EVERY year contending with GA and FL for the east for a spot in the SECCG and a spot in the national playoff. That’s when TENN will be back!
It’s unconscionable that we have been pummeled by MO the last two years!!
Click to expand...
We are 2-5 against them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titan05
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top