November 12, 2009

2009 Tiger Mailbag: 35th Edition

Each Thursday, publisher Gabe DeArmond will answer questions from subscribers in our Tiger Mailbag. This feature will allow for longer, more in-depth answers than you may get on the message board on a daily basis. To have your question in next week's mailbag, send an email to Gabe at [email protected] On to this week's inquiries:

Mizzou-Eddie asks: How married to this offense is CGP and the staff? This isn't the offense they ran at Toledo, so they have changed since coming here, but is there any indication, from where you stand that they may even be considering a change, or are they gonna drive this one until the wheels fall off.

You know, that's a great question. They're going to stay with the spread I think. But I think they'll look at some changes in the offseason. Yost has taken heat, but he has already proven that he is capable of adapting. He has put in the two-back set, the under center toss sweep. He's made some changes. I think he'll make more in the offseason. The bottom line, to me, is that this was the offense Chase Daniel was born to run. It is not, in my opinion and in its current form, the one Blaine Gabbert was born to run.

wsfaulkner asks: In years past we heard that OC Christensen was stubborn and would stick with his belief in the pass to a detriment. We've heard this year that Yost is a little more flexible. But it would appear in recent games that Yost has stubborn is his play calling, i.e. staying with the pass when Gabbert couldn't plant, passing with 8 men in coverage, etc. Do you see this as Yost being a little inexperienced in play calling or is he just as stubborn in his play calling as his predecessor?

I'd lean more toward inexperience. I've heard from a few people that learning to call plays, to be that guy in charge, is something that fans think is easy but takes an adjustment period. And these are people that ought to know. I think he'll get better and the main reason I think he'll get better is that, unlike the guy before him, he doesn't think he has all the answers. However, one thing I'm interested in seeing is this: Yost learned from Christensen. And Christensen was very successful. So, if what he learned from Christensen continues to struggle, how quickly can Yost adapt? It bears watching.

JHuntski asks: How much flexibility with his lineup will CMA have this year? I he goes small, he can run Tiller, Taylor, English, Safford, and Ramsey but that line up may not get it done on the boards.

I guess what I'm really asking is of Bowers, Moore, Stone, and Underwood are any of them ready to give significant minutes?

Well, Missouri didn't exactly dominate the glass last year, so it's not like you're trying to replace David Robinson and Tim Duncan in there. But I think he can go with the group you talk about, and I think that's the starting five. Dixon, Denmon and Paul will all merit time in the backcourt for sure. Bowers is the sixth man on this team and he's ready to be a prime time player in my opinion. Moore will play more than he did last year, maybe similar minutes to what Safford did a year ago (maybe not quite that much). Underwood probably plays somewhere between what Moore and Bowers did a year ago. He'll be in there some for his defense, but he's not going to give you 10-12 minutes a game just yet. And Tyler Stone, well, he didn't get in the exhibition game until there were 11 minutes left in the second half. I think he's got a long climb ahead of him to get meaningful minutes.

redhawk81 asks: If Tony Mitchell commits elsewhere, do you expect the staff to save the scholarship for next year?

No, I think they'd use it in the spring. I also don't think you're going to have to worry about that scenario.

...More... To continue reading this article you must be a member. Sign Up Now!