2012 - 2013 SEC football

[pash]

.

[shinatoo]

MU: I kind of expected a loss.

Arkansas: Come on. That was pathetic.

[AllThingsKC]

Other than the very end, that game went exactly as I expected. The final scores looks really bad as the game was much closer than that. But, with Mizzou's injuries (and Pinkel's terrible coaching), I don't see another "W" on the schedule.

Arkansas was just looking ahead to Alabama next week.

OH...and Arrowhead is going to FULL of UGA fans.

[kcmetro]

Other than the very end, that game went exactly as I expected. The final scores looks really bad as the game was much closer than that. But, with Mizzou's injuries (and Pinkel's terrible coaching), I don't see another "W" on the schedule.

You're joking, right?

[pstokely]

Other than the very end, that game went exactly as I expected. The final scores looks really bad as the game was much closer than that. But, with Mizzou's injuries (and Pinkel's terrible coaching), I don't see another "W" on the schedule.

Arkansas was just looking ahead to Alabama next week.

OH...and Arrowhead is going to FULL of UGA fans.

nah, Atlanta isn't a pro sports town, full of yankee transplants

[AllThingsKC]

You're joking, right?

Well, I don't see a "guaranteed W." I thought we would beat ASU, UCF, Vandy, UK, and SYR. But if Pinkel has anymore trick plays up his sleeves and if anymore of our starters get injured, I'm not so sure.

[shinatoo]

http://shop.georgiadogs.com/COLLEGE_Geo ... 0001048176

Keep it classy SEC.

[AllThingsKC]

Meh. That's the same thing they said in the Big 12.

[Highlander]

Other than the very end, that game went exactly as I expected. The final scores looks really bad as the game was much closer than that. But, with Mizzou's injuries (and Pinkel's terrible coaching), I don't see another "W" on the schedule.

Arkansas was just looking ahead to Alabama next week.

OH...and Arrowhead is going to FULL of UGA fans.

Oh please ATKC. The score was NOT indicative of the game (I think Mizzou even had more total yards). UGA isn't that good - poor execution and silly mistakes killed Mizzou, they weren't even close to being dominated. UGA is the best in a weak division, Mizzou will be OK. I think we saw from the Arkansas game that the SEC is a bit (to say the least) overrated. That Arkansas score actually brought a big smile to my face.

[AllThingsKC]

[quote="Highlander"][quote="AllThingsKC"]Other than the very end, that game went exactly as I expected. The final scores looks really bad as the game was much closer than that. But, with Mizzou's injuries (and Pinkel's terrible coaching), I don't see another "W" on the schedule.

Arkansas was just looking ahead to Alabama next week.

OH...and Arrowhead is going to FULL of UGA fans.[/quote]

Oh please ATKC. The score was NOT indicative of the game (I think Mizzou even had more total yards). UGA isn't that good - poor execution and silly mistakes killed Mizzou, they weren't even close to being dominated. UGA is the best in a weak division, Mizzou will be OK. I think we saw from the Arkansas game that the SEC is a bit (to say the least) overrated. That Arkansas score actually brought a big smile to my face.[/quote]

I don't mean to take away anything from Mizzou. I agree with everything you said. My concern is Mizzou's injuries and Pinkel's questionable play calling at times. Those are things I cannot predict and thus, I am less sure about this season.

I also enjoyed the Arkansas score.

But yes, Mizzou did well against UGA and leads in most of the categories. But, I wonder if that would have been the case if UGA didn't have 4 starters out. That was the other thing that concerned me. But overall, I am pleased what what I saw.

[phxcat]

Who did Missouri lose to injury? Missouri will beat Kentucky (W). I had hopes for Vandy (W) under Franklin, but they just lost to Northwestern. Florida (L- on the road) barely beat A&M (probably L on the road, W if it were at home), which would be fighting for a bowl birth if they were still in the Big XII. Tennessee (L- on the road) may be on their way back up, and I think they will be one of the better teams in the division in a few years. South Carolina (L) is good, maybe the best of the bunch, but they would probably be behind OU, K-State, and probably WVU in the Big XII this season. As a K-State fan, looking at that line-up (obviously excluding SEC West Alabama (L), which is on a different level) I think K-State, also has to get through OU, this year would be looking at a relatively easy path to the conference championship game, and, as we saw in '03, from there, who knows?

There will be a lot of beatable teams this year, but the ones that MU competes with evenly are all on the road this year, which will probably make them look worse than they are when all is said and done, though I could see them taking one of those games. Where I think the move to the SEC will hurt them is in the long run is in two ares. Recruiting (Yes, I know they got a few Texans this time around, but you need a few more data points to really make a comparison) will be more difficult. Local kids have easy road games to make with both KU, K-State, ISU, OU and OSU within game day driving distance. Arkansas is the only only Missouri opponent to make the cut. Again, yes, Missouri will get local kids. Some grew up Missouri fans, and right now the SEC is the shiny new toy for some in the current class. Also, as has already been discussed quite a bit, they will become non-entities in Texas, putting them on the same level as other non-Big XII schools. They have inroads right now, but those will begin to dry up, and will have to be re-built when Pinkle leaves. They are hoping to tap into the Southeast, but the current SEC and ACC schools already have the relations built. They will start out behind FSU, UF, UGA, USC, Clemson, UA and AU, UT and probably V-Tech, Miami, Arkansas, Ole Miss and MSU. As an outsider (yes, Missouri was a slave states, but they were also a Union state- one of only two in the conference- and does Kentucky really count?) it will be that much more difficult to recruit in the relatively insular Southeast.

The second is that with fourteen teams and a relatively low chance to make it to the top, they will probably become lost in the mix and become overlooked. If the SEC goes to 16 (which is possible, I think, only because they were stupid enough to go to 14 in the first place), it will be that much worse. When the shine wears off of the new SEC logos, people will realize that nobody cares about UK, Vandy, Ole Miss, and MSU, and rarely give them any thought. A&M has a chance to avoid that because they are in Texas, but MU will largely get lost in the mix and become forgotten if they aren't able to win right away and that will make it even more difficult to recruit down the line.

[phxcat]

Actually, looking at the schedule, I think MU got a pretty raw deal to start out in the SEC. The two teams they should beat, UK and andy, are at home, as is the one that they would say that they should not beat (and, of course, drawing either Alabama or LSU is starting the season with an L). With the exception of Georgia, the teams that they they should be more competitive with they get on the road. Having lost to Georgia, the SEC has probably set them up to fail this first season and to miss out on a bowl game.

[Highlander]

but MU will largely get lost in the mix and become forgotten if they aren't able to win right away and that will make it even more difficult to recruit down the line.

This was my biggest concern about being in the SEC. Not that the SEC is that great, but there are so many teams (and maybe more soon) and each has staked out their recruiting claims in SE. Mizzou will never break into that and whether they can continue to recruit in Texas succesfully will be an issue. On the brighter side, Mizzou should be the best team in the SEC this year in basketball. Unfortunately, they have to play UK in Lexington but, otherwise, they should do better than just OK. Not that anyone in the SEC outside of Kentucky actually cares.

[shaffe]

My the Chicken Littles are out in full force. Missouri got beat by a team that is probably better than I personally gave them credit for, but there's still plenty of teams they are better than left on the schedule. Vandy, ASU, Syracuse, and Kentucky are all likely W's. Alabama and @USC can probably be penciled in as losses, which leaves road games at UCF, Florida, Tennessee, and aTm to decide the split between 5-7 and 9-3. I still think 8-5 or better is very well within reach which would be a just fine but not great first SEC season (8-5 that is).

[AllThingsKC]

Who did Missouri lose to injury?

Elvis Fisher got hurt and will most likely be out for several games. I know injuries happen all the time in football, but I was wondering if Mizzou was/is under-prepared for the hard-hitting SEC teams. If that is the case, I fear many more injuries. That is one reason why I look at the more winnable games and think, "Well, wait a minute..." On the other hand, maybe this is nothing more than some random injury, which would suggest Mizzou IS ready for the hard-hitting SEC teams. I just don't know which way to look at it yet. So, that area is a concern for me right now.

Vandy, ASU, Syracuse, and Kentucky are all likely W's. Alabama and @USC can probably be penciled in as losses, which leaves road games at UCF, Florida, Tennessee, and aTm to decide the split between 5-7 and 9-3.

This is what I thought too. But, I forgot "the Pinkel factor." Mizzou SHOULD HAVE beaten ASU last year. Will this year's game against ASU be another one that "Missouri should have won"? Even if we're winning, I don't trust Yost will the play calling, and I have to wonder if Pinkel is going to fake another punt on 4th and 11 in a 4-point game. Vandy, UK, SYR should be wins too, but as mentioned above, I'm worried about injuries by SEC teams.

So, random terrible play calling + the possibility of injuries = I'm not sure we can win the winnable games. Maybe my fears will be calmed after the ASU game. We'll see.

[KCMax]

Pinkel is by far the best coach Mizzou has ever had in their entire history. I can't believe the fans think he is costing them games. Ridiculous.

[AllThingsKC]

I don't think Pinkel is costing Mizzou games, other than MAYBE the ASU game last year, and that's a stretch. But, his play calling is odd at times, like the fake punt on 4th and 11 in the UGA game. That didn't cost Mizzou the game, but it changed the tone of the game and let Georgia take control. So, while I question his play calling sometimes, I don't think he's cost Mizzou many (if any) games.

[KCMax]

Pinkel’s comment questioned James Franklin's desire

That’s when Pinkel said during a TV interview that Franklin had taken himself out of the game. Franklin, Pinkel said, declined to take a pain-killing shot that would have allowed him to play.

After the game, Pinkel told reporters, “It was just too painful for him, and he didn’t want to play. (I) was hoping James could play, but he didn’t feel like he could do it.”

Pinkel then asserted he didn’t question his quarterback’s toughness.

[shinatoo]

Dear Coach Pinkle,

When you schedule an away game in a state that you want to recruit in, against a beatable team, it's probably a good idea to have your team; motivated, well coached, equipped with a solid game plan, and generally confident in their quarterback. It's NOT a good idea to look like a mid tier Conference USA program.

Sincerely,
The SEC

[shinatoo]

MU just double their game total rushing yards with a 9 yard run in the 4th quarter.


AAAAAGGGGGHHHHHH.