Yeah..its usually they love us or hate us. It will always be up to the defense to show up..and for that jackass Shannon Woods to GTFO of our backfield. He's just trash, every time I see that idiot run on a 3rd and 2, he gets about -3 yards. He needs to stick to drug dealing.
Last year, Missouri won the Big 12 North, beat two BCS teams, beat Texas Tech and annihilated an Arkansas team who the national champions couldn't even stop in their final game of the year. I don't think that's anything to be ashamed of. I didn't realize Texas 2008 = OU 2007. Do you not realize how college football works? Every team has a weak non-conference schedule, outside of a one good game and usually one mediocre opponent. So tell me, how many teams go 17-2 in a stretch like that? Missouri's schedule strength was in the top 20-25 of every computer poll I can find after last season. I'm not arguing that Missouri is a powerhouse, but to dismiss them based on one game or act like winning that many games is easy based on the schedule is one of the most absurd things I've ever heard in my life. If it was, why isn't everyone doing it? LOL! You've got to be kidding me. You dismiss Missouri being 17-2 before the OSU game, on account of weak scheduling (even though they beat two BCS teams in there), yet you throw out statistics like that without any context. Let's take a look at who UT beat after the OU game in the last five years: 2007: Iowa State (3-9) 2006: Baylor (4-8) 2005: Colorado (7-6) 2004: Missouri (5-6) 2003: Iowa State (2-10) Wow, I'm blown away. Missouri shouldn't even show up.
Wasn't that win with Bradford getting hurt? I remember when Colt got hurt and it basically cost us wins against K-State and A&M in 2006 (he played, but wasn't the same). But you're right, 24 is probably a reasonable ranking. Still, Cat shouldn't exactly be using that for bragging rights. Mizzou has a high powered offense, so a win over Tech and their D isn't exactly amazing. Was UT 20 points worse than K-State in that season? Probably not, but they were in that game. And I wouldn't call that a fluke game either. Texas had it coming. Horrible passing defense and we were turnover prone. That raised a huge red flag to all UT fans after that game. We definitely didn't treat it like a fluke and moved on. Losing that game foreshadowed our final two losses. I'm using that same logic with Mizzou losing at home to a team you'd think an elite team would take care of. In Texas Tech's last 22 games, how many times have they scored 30 or more points? Probably most of those games as well, against some good teams as well I imagine. That doesn't really tell me anything as far as whether or not this Mizzou could hang with UT. I still think it's debatable if they have the best offense in the country. Can we see them play a decent Big 12 defensive team first? I noticed they couldn't even get 20 on OU last year in the Big 12 championship game. We've already mentioned the OK State game. Again, it should at least raise a red flag. Sure their mistakes were self-inflicted, but it doesn't mean they should be ignored. How do we know this isn't an isolated incident? Could be a trend. What's going to happen when they play against UT's defense? We shall see. And we DID score 45 points against OU. So what if Shipley got tackled at the 1 yard line and Cody Johnson ran it in. Then would that TD have been considered legit to you? Special teams play a big role in games, and that was one of OU's prime weaknesses. Didn't Maclin score a few TDs on special teams this year? Transitive property in sports is lame. But the K-State game showed everyone that UT was a flawed over-ranked team at the time... definitely not elite. The OSU game doesn't definitely prove that Mizzou isn't elite, but you can't argue that it invites some concern into the notion that they are great. No doubt. It was a great accomplishment for a football program that doesn't have much to be proud of in their recent history. Does that put them on the map with the great teams? I'd have to say that winning the Big 12 North doesn't do that yet. They need another big win, and beating the current #1 ranked team is it. We know that Mizzou should've been the true BCS team last year, not Kansas, and Illinois didn't belong in a BCS game. We saw that in the Rose Bowl. I'm not surprised you beat Tech since you have a high powered offense, and well... they're Texas Tech. That's their MO of recent. Arkansas beating LSU said much more about LSU than Arkansas being a good team. They were a middle of a pack team in the SEC and finished 8-5. Winning that game showed Mizzou was a solid team, but that's about it IMO. Geez, it's not like I'm calling them mediocre or something. They were able to go 17-2 because they have a great offense in a conference that doesn't exactly excel in defense. Combining that with their schedule, it's not too hard to see a team like that having such a great record. Hell, if I'm not mistaken, couldn't they have gotten to the national championship game if the Big 12 didn't have a championship game? So why are you ignoring the first five years? It's a pattern that can't be discounted. It shows that regardless of what happens in the OU game, Mack Brown has his team focused and prepared for the next game. Hey, we agree!
I think the first half will be telling. It's imperative that Texas take a lead into halftime. As a starter, Chase Daniel is 0-8 when Missouri trails at any point in the second half. Also, Will Muschamp seems to excel at second half defensive adjustments.
All's I know is, I will be having steak and and beer tonight and flipping between the Horns and Rays kicking ass and probably losing terribly at Monopoly at the same time.
yeah..me my 8 year old are headed to the new Beck's prime Sportatorium with a friend so we can catch both of them at the same time. Should be awesome!
http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?categoryId=2564308&videoId=3650146 lee corso picks texas!
