Missouri talent level

#26
#26
Jake said:
Speed kills.
Click to expand...

While I want to agree with you I recall us playing Nebraska several years ago... we were Super Fast and Nebraska was Big... Nebraska beat us silly.

I do not have the formula as to what works.... so I put it all on the Coaching.

Go Vols! :rock:
 
#27
#27
OrangeInKy said:
Very True. However, Oklahoma is known for losing games they shouldn't lose. They would also choke to Ok State a time or 2 when they were great. They also got rolled by Texas a few weeks back. They call him "big game Bob' for a reason
Click to expand...

Also true :hi:
 
#29
#29
jimallvol said:
We should have an edge on talent going in to Saturday but what has really helped Mizzou this yr is damn good QB play. Not to be putting Worley down but I feel that we would be a lot better team if we had a good QB.
Click to expand...

And the better QB is still hurt, leaving a RS Fr that threw for only 40% against USCe
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
keckjm said:
At some point we can't use talent as an excuse as to why we keep losing. Bama wouldn't have beat us like they did if we didn't play scared, and our coaches didn't get the "oh my it's Bama" disease in their heads. Teams like Bama remind me of Tiger Woods in his prime. Every time he started to make a push everyone would fold and he'd end up winning every time. Once people realized the guy is just a man he lost that mental edge on people, and now if has to play perfect to win tournaments. Bama and other great teams are just a team, and CBJ tried to send that message home calling Bama the red team. Unfortunately, Jancek didn't receive the message and our defense played so passive we got killed over and over again early on.
Click to expand...

We have beaten everyone were expected to beat, beat one we were not, and took one into overtime, when we were expected to lose to them by a lot.


What's the issue?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#33
#33
keckjm said:
At some point we can't use talent as an excuse as to why we keep losing. Bama wouldn't have beat us like they did if we didn't play scared, and our coaches didn't get the "oh my it's Bama" disease in their heads. Teams like Bama remind me of Tiger Woods in his prime. Every time he started to make a push everyone would fold and he'd end up winning every time. Once people realized the guy is just a man he lost that mental edge on people, and now he has to play perfect to win tournaments. Bama and other great teams are just a team, and CBJ tried to send that message home calling Bama the red team. Unfortunately, Jancek didn't receive the message and our defense played so passive we got killed over and over again early on.
Click to expand...
Good point, BUT
Mizzou, Auburn, Vandy, KY
I just don't see the INTIMIDATION Factor entering anywhere else.
 
#34
#34
Mizzou's best asset is, imo, their coaching. More with less. Their advantages over us are program stability and home field. Josey is out, Franklin is questionable. Gaines is back. We do have, even with our attrition, a talent advantage. They have arguably an experience advantage as it relates to schemes and certain skill positions. Their run defense is good; their pass defense from a yardage perspective is last in the league. They make up for giving up passing yards by leading the league in interceptions. If we are going to win this game it is going to, imo, come down to desire. Execution is oftentimes a product of determination. Whichever team wants it the most is likely to come away with the win. Most think Mizzou will put up a helluva fight. I do. They're fighting for the East title; we're fighting for a bowl and this game is not necessary for that. I hope our guys don't see it that way.
 
#35
#35
Living up here, I get MU coverage every day in the paper and on sports talk.

Missouri is a well coached team and has an "established" program. They play a lot of upper classmen.

As for talent, a three star junior or senior who has 3-5 years of lifting, learning, growing and PLAYING is often going to do a whole lot more to help a team win than a frosh who has a lot of stars because he's big and/or fast. "Talent" is a much discussed and frustrating topic. It means much less than some believe it does. It's like a stick of dynamite. It's useless until lit and if you don't place it where and how it should be placed, it won't achieve the desired results.

I think CBJ will bring a team into Columbia that is ready to play and our boys will give them a good scrap. I do think we have a real chance to win. But, anyone who thinks we have some kind of advantage over Mizzou or believes we are markedly better football team than they are is mistaken.

MU may not have been playing in the SEC, but they were playing Texas, Nebraska, OU, OSU, Kansas State. They were playing "real" football for sure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
Orange_Crush said:
We have beaten everyone were expected to beat, beat one we were not, and took one into overtime, when we were expected to lose to them by a lot.


What's the issue?
Click to expand...

The issue is we should never find it acceptable to lose to Bama and Oregon like we have. TN should never be in a position where we lose by 30+ points. Our defense folds when we aren't in Neyland, and a lot of that has to do with the change in play calling on the road. We have nothing to lose right now, so why wouldn't we go all out on away games. I'm talking fake punts, onside kicks, blitzing in uniques ways, and running trick plays. We have nothing to lose, yet our defensive play calling last Saturday made it seamed we were just trying to stop Bama from making big plays. Jancek needs to stay true to form and not alter his game plan just because we are playing a great team. Our defense is a risk taking defense that wants to generate turnovers by applying pressure to the QB and disguising cover schemes in zone and man coverages. I just want to see us bring the pressure on road games from now on, just as we did against SC and GA at home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#37
#37
Titan&Volfan4life said:
I still believe that coaching matters alot more than the * levels placed on a kid coming out of high school.

There's alot more 2* and 3* players in the NFL than there are 4* and 5* players.

We haven't coached them up right for several years now but we finally have real coaches working to get us back to having well coached players and it's still going to take several more years of good recruiting and good coaching to get us back up to elite status.

I'll use logic which is normally banned here on VN and simply say this...

We beat USCe and they beat Mizzou so it will be really tough but we should get the WIN over Mizzou this week.

Taking logic out then we all know that anything can happen on any given Gameday.

Our kids will want to show the world that they're better than what everyone saw against alaBummer so I believe bUTch and our boys will be focused and highly motivated and we'll match hit for hit all day long!

#BrickbyBrick...VFL...GBO!!!
Click to expand...

No no. *All logic is banned here. : P
 
#39
#39
There are a lot of 3* or less players in the NFL... but they aren't coming off one team. They're coming from lower divisions, mid-majors, and randomly from FBS schools. "Stars" aren't a perfect predictor but most of the guys given 4/5* become very good CFB players. Specific to one player or another recruit ratings are less meaningful. Specific to general talent levels on a team they are very meaningful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#41
#41
Titan&Volfan4life said:
I still believe that coaching matters alot more than the * levels placed on a kid coming out of high school.

There's alot more 2* and 3* players in the NFL than there are 4* and 5* players. . . .
Click to expand...

This is true, but it isn't simply coaching.

Recruitment ratings are based on what those rating are able to observe. But, they are hardly comprehensive. They hardly consider work ethic of the individual, capacity for mental and physical development, etc. Not to mention the fact that 18 year old males naturally physically mature a LOT between the age of 18-22. How is a recruitment rating service supposed to know how much more a kid is going to grow while in college?

Also, there is no way to predict how an individual is going to respond to a radical change of environment. HS to college (and obviously college to pro) is certainly a radical change.

And of course, the most talented football players are not necessarily the best football players.
 
#42
#42
Titan&Volfan4life said:
I still believe that coaching matters alot more than the * levels placed on a kid coming out of high school.

There's alot more 2* and 3* players in the NFL than there are 4* and 5* players.

We haven't coached them up right for several years now but we finally have real coaches working to get us back to having well coached players and it's still going to take several more years of good recruiting and good coaching to get us back up to elite status.

I'll use logic which is normally banned here on VN and simply say this...

We beat USCe and they beat Mizzou so it will be really tough but we should get the WIN over Mizzou this week.

Taking logic out then we all know that anything can happen on any given Gameday.

Our kids will want to show the world that they're better than what everyone saw against alaBummer so I believe bUTch and our boys will be focused and highly motivated and we'll match hit for hit all day long!

#BrickbyBrick...VFL...GBO!!!
Click to expand...

Any statistics to back up the statement in bold above? If it were true, it would only be because there are a lot more 2 and 3 stars than 4 and 5 stars (i.e., there are only so many 4 and 5 star athletes that NFL teams can draft).
 
#43
#43
OrangeInKy said:
There have only been 2 games UT could not have won this year: Oregon and Bama. I think there is some hope in that truth. Let's not let the Bama whipping cloud perspective. UT has a good chance to win. Pressure the qb and we win. Has any team Mizzou beaten had to play Oregon and Bama beforehand? I didn't look it up but I don't think so. That's pretty good preparation right there. It only gets easier from here imo. Not EASY, but EASIER.
Click to expand...

I would include Florida in that conversation also. Pound for pound they have had far better talent than us for close to a decade. It's obvious in the record and for some reason they play their best against us.
 
#44
#44
sjt18 said:
There are a lot of 3* or less players in the NFL... but they aren't coming off one team. They're coming from lower divisions, mid-majors, and randomly from FBS schools. "Stars" aren't a perfect predictor but most of the guys given 4/5* become very good CFB players. Specific to one player or another recruit ratings are less meaningful. Specific to general talent levels on a team they are very meaningful.
Click to expand...

This.
 
#45
#45
SlyStone said:
I would include Florida in that conversation also. Pound for pound they have had far better talent than us for close to a decade. It's obvious in the record and for some reason they play their best against us.
Click to expand...

If we just had a good QB against FL we would have one that game this year. FL gave us a gift and we wrapped it back up and gave it back to them.
 
#47
#47
Mizzou won't overwhelm UT with talent. They are lower third in the SEC in terms of raw talent- probably just ahead of UK and maybe Arkansas. They do have a very good system and their players execute it pretty well. If they win, it will be because of their system... not their talent.

USCe was the only good team Mizzou has played while healthy. Their OOC FBS opponents combine for a 11-11 record and are all mid-majors. UT by comparison has played 3 FBS OOC opponents with a combined 15-8 record including the #2 team in the country. UT played both UF and UGA when they were healthy or at least much healthier than when they played Mizzou.

UT could lose. There could be a dam break in the secondary making it look ugly. However I think the probability is that UT wins with a chance of it not being all that close.


Of course this assumes there is no big drop off at QB with Dobbs taking over.
 
#48
#48
CroKev said:
Any statistics to back up the statement in bold above? If it were true, it would only be because there are a lot more 2 and 3 stars than 4 and 5 stars (i.e., there are only so many 4 and 5 star athletes that NFL teams can draft).
Click to expand...

But there's enough.

There's only about 1,700 players in the NFL (53 roster x 32 teams = 1,696) and there are more than 10,000 players in FBS alone. (125 teams x 85 scholarships = 10,625)

So, if about 16 percent of the players on scholarship at FBS schools were/are rated 4 or 5 stars, there would be enough of them to fill all the roster spots.
 
Last edited:
#49
#49
sjt18 said:
There are a lot of 3* or less players in the NFL... but they aren't coming off one team. They're coming from lower divisions, mid-majors, and randomly from FBS schools. "Stars" aren't a perfect predictor but most of the guys given 4/5* become very good CFB players. Specific to one player or another recruit ratings are less meaningful. Specific to general talent levels on a team they are very meaningful.
Click to expand...

Spot on - lets see who has had the number 1 recruiting class in the country the last 3 years? Humm - looks like it was Alabama, followed by Alabama, and then ... Alabama. I don't see any correlation between their 4 and 5 star recruits and their results -- oh wait a minute...
 
#50
#50
Spartacavolus said:
Mizzou is fast and they play on some fast turf. We are not fast. That will be the difference.
Click to expand...

Mizzou isn't that fast. You guys keep saying it... and it still isn't true. They have one receiver who can really run. To the extent that they have speed they give up size and power to get it (Josey). They are neither fast in the secondary or at LB which is why they play alot of zone and cover 2... and "trick" D's to confuse opponents. But they DO know how to play those schemes which is why they "look" fast.

What speed you see from their DE's is specifically because they have sacrificed size for speed. I personally think Sam is in for a long day vs Tiny. Tiny has 80 lbs on him and is pretty quick himself.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top