Live Chats

Do you see a way Mizzou could ever be a "player" in NCAA sports and I don't mean just football and men's basketball? Is it all just a question of money? As things stand and project, I do not see Mizzou ever being anything more than mediocre. Thanks, Dave.

Cook had 106 yards on 16 carries, the most rushing attempts by any Mizzou player. I guess the times he is sacked counts as a rushing attempt and negative yardage. Are his attempts scripted QB draw plays or is he ad libbing when he sees a big hole in front of him? They showed on repeplay from behind Cook in a shotgun position. After the ball was snapped the left side of the oline drove the dlineman to the left sideline and the right olinemen drove the dlineman to the right sideline creating the literal hole that you could drive a truck through. Cook needs to be a little more careful and learn how to slide when the defense is coming at him. It was too close for comfort for me a couple of times.

Do you think the QB for next year is on the roster now or do you think we will be portal shopping again?

Dave,
Do you think when OU and Texas join the SEC, OU will become the Nebraska of the SEC? They had some elite programs back in the day, but I don't really see any reason for them to compete for championships in the future. They both had the best resources in the Big 12, I expect Texas to have some good years due to the number of great recruits who want to play for their in-state program (plus huge resources) but I don't see OU ever winning championships in the SEC. I just don't see a lot of elite recruits still going to OU over Bama, LSU, Georgia etc. Previously they were the elite school in the big 12 but I think their best days are behind them. Do you think they will win an SEC championship (or division) in the first 10 years? Thoughts?

I'm not quite sure why so many people are getting so worked up over Drink's extension. It doesn't seem to affect the average fan, other than perhaps a couple dollars increase in next year's ticket or, possibly, as the great Mizzou Econ 51 professor, Walter Johnson taught us, "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative." But, even there, it doesn't seem like a huge deal so why all the fuss?

Cook graduates this year, if he is still the starter at the end of this year, is the expectation he will be back next year? I believe he has 2 years of eligibility. If he returns, is the staff planning on hitting the transfer portal for a different starting QB, or try and build guys up around him and help him improve - do they see him as the starter going forward?

How high on the new QB (Gabarri?) is the coaching staff? Is he expected to compete for the starting job?

When it comes to people calling for Drink's head because we're currently 4-6, it seems this really all comes down to the fact that he hasn't had a chance to recruit - then develop - a QB. That is, as you've often pointed out - the most important position in the game (perhaps any game) and I would argue that its importance is amplified in the SEC. It did take Drink a year to find/recruit what appears to be a QB with that potential but it will also take at least two years to get him to where he can be a difference maker (in a positive way - he might well be a negative difference-maker if thrown into the mix, now).

Would it have been nice to have had Horn in the first recruiting class? Sure, but that was asking a lot. And we still don't know if he's going to be a quality SEC QB - so many people in this chat group seem to be projecting success simply off his potential and high school play. But if Drink doesn't get this worked out by 2024, he - and this program - are in trouble.

Earlier in the chat you described Heupels offensive system and strategy pretty well. I have trouble describing Drinks offense. How would you summarize it?

You mentioned Hodge, Gomillion and Gholston are out of eligibility after this season. Does Juco count toward eligibility? I thought playing at a Juco was like redshirting.

Compare Drinkwitz with Pittman and Beamer. If you were to rank their performance during their whole tenure, how would you rank them relative to each other?

When does Drink drop the "Macon moves from end to under center" from the offense. It doesn't fool anyone, and it has wasted a yr of Macon's elgibility.

I guess I'm an outlier ... but I just don't get it. I believe you're reporting what is from the Mizzou perspective or what your take on it is (which is cool, cause you're way closer to it than any of us):

"He didn't have the enhanced staff salary pool before. Heading into this year he could have said he couldn't hire an offensive coordinator because there wasn't money to spend on one. Now that money is there." - I believe you've said (para-phrasing here) "Drink was brought in because of his offensive ability and that if he needs an OC, he wasn't the right guy for the job" ... so that doesn't hold

"He didn't have a new indoor practice facility when he took the job. He will in June. He can no longer say their facilities are behind." I can't fathom that's had a material impact on wins/losses, game management, etc.

"He also has an AD who didn't hire him - whose reputation and legacy doesn't hinge on the decision to hire a young head coach with one year of HC experience. The current set-up inherently increases the pressure." I agree. However, my point is that the pressure should have always been there from Day 1 upon his hiring ... If it wasn't from the administration, shame on them; if it wasn't intrinsically with HCED, shame on him.

I wanted a more seasoned, mature, experienced head coach, thought HCED was too much of a gamble ("can't this this up and coming start get away"), and I believe we've gotten exactly what we've hired.

Dave, am I wrong here? Many articles after the Tennessee game focused on the "collapse" of Mizzou's vaunted defense. Clearly, giving up 700+ yards is suboptimal, but I have to place the blame -- again -- on the offense's inability to move the ball, score points, and stay on the field. The way to stop Heupel's offense is to keep them on the sideline, while giving our D a breather. I thought Drink was supposed to be an offensive whiz kid, but I havne't seen it; he's running such as basic, predictable, and noncreative attack anyone could imagine. Our OL is questionable, but we pressure them by running so many smash-mouth, short yardage plays -- it's like waves crashing against a rocky shore. If we can't match the power of many of our conference members, don't we have to find our inner Andy Reid and respond in a more creative, intelligent (and self-scouted) manner?

Dave: Seems to me that the offensive scheme as you quoted from Drink fails because the passes to the perimeter just take too long to get there. The ball seems to arrive about the same time as the defender. Do you have any percentage info on how many of these perimeter screens gain 5 yards or more? Thanks!