START YOUR POWERMIZZOU.COM PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION TODAY!
Each week, PowerMizzou.com publisher Gabe DeArmond answers questions from Tiger fans in the mailbag. This format allows for a more expansive answer than a message board post. If you missed this week's mailbag, keep an eye out next week or send your question to Gabe at powermizzou@gmail.com. On to this week's entries.
rmotigers asks: How many true freshmen played Saturday? Which was the most impressive?
GD: The official participation report listed Damarea Crockett, Dimetrios Mason, DeMarkus Acy, Christian Holmes, Tucker McCann, Cale Garrett and TreVour Simms. I believe Acy, Holmes and Simms were only on special teams. I guess the most impressive would be Mason because Crockett fumbled and McCann struggled.
mutigerscott asks: With the Big 12 talking openly talking about expansion, is there any possibility that the SEC will do the same? If so, in your opinion what schools make sense to bring into the SEC.
GD: Not for the foreseeable future. The Big 12 is talking about expansion because it pretty much has to. The SEC doesn't have to. Look at the schools on the Big 12's list. Would you want the SEC to add any of them? There's nobody out there to add to a Power Five league right now that makes that league better. The next big shakeup comes in 2025 when the Big 12's current grant of rights is set to expire. If that actually happens, then those schools are up for grabs and Texas and Oklahoma are going to be awfully attractive to someone.
efil4zregit asks: Have you perceived any frustration or potential lack of "buy in" (generally hate that term, but anyways) by the DL with regards to the defensive scheme employed by BO/DC?
GD: No, not really. I mean, we'll see down the road, but I think you've got a pretty young team learning a pretty new system and there are going to be some growing pains (on both sides of the ball). The only thing that seemed a little strange to me was Charles Harris telling everyone that Jackie Shipp is changing some things up. They're things none of us ever would have known if they hadn't been mentioned. Maybe it's as simple as a kid answering a question honestly. Maybe it's something he doesn't like so he's putting it out there. I don't know. But given the success of--and love for--the former defensive line coach, it's a position that's going to get all kinds of scrutiny and, right or wrong, if it doesn't live up to what it's been the past few years, we know the storyline (at least with the fanbase) is going to be that Shipp isn't as good as the guy he replaced. But, no, overall I haven't had any reason to believe the players don't buy in. They all say they love playing for DeMontie Cross.
RIP_GP_MIZ asks: Taking into account we've only seen one game and that Lock looked solid. Gut feeling, do you think we see more Zanders in the passing game going forward?
GD: Yes because you have to. If you're going to play Marvin Zanders, you have to let him throw the ball. Because putting him out there with a flashing neon sign that says "Hey, the quarterback is going to run here" isn't going to do anybody any good. I think we see some trickeration and wrinkles this week against Eastern Michigan. Pinkel always used these games to "get something on film." With UGA coming to town next week, a double pass or a formation with both quarterbacks makes Kirby Smart spend a few minutes in practice getting ready for another possibility. So I think we see some nuances with Zanders this Saturday.
mufootball1 asks: Hopefully, Mizzou will sign some highly rated WR recruits in the 2017 and 2018 classes (Daron Davis, Jeff Thomas, Kamryn Babb, etc.). Lock's time will be limited, if any, with 2017 and 2018 recruits. Are there any highly rated QBs that Mizzou has a chance to sign to get the ball to these WRs?
GD: They won't sign a highly rated QB in 2017, I'm nearly certain. But in 2018 the possibility certainly exists. As I type this answer at 5:54 a.m., our search function doesn't appear to be working, so I can't list them right now. I know there was a 2018 QB from Texas that camped with the Tigers and a 2018 QB from California that visited. Both spoke very highly of Josh Heupel. To this point, I don't think there is necessarily an elite level QB in the state, so they'll probably have to go outside of Missouri to land one, but you can bet QB is going to be a position they'll target in the class. And don't forget that Micah Wilson is on the roster and likely to redshirt this year. So the hopeful progression is Lock through 2018 or 2019 (I'm not saying he's leaving early, but that would certainly mean he played really well for two years and would be a good thing) and Wilson having two or three years after that.
doya asks: In your opinion why the poor quarterback play in the SEC, with a few exceptions.
GD: These things go in cycles. First of all, let's admit it's one week. Josh Dobbs is better than he showed. Jacob Eason is expected to be a star down the road. There are high hopes for Lock. Alabama started a redshirt freshman. There are a lot of young quarterbacks in the league who we don't know what they'll be. So I think it's far too early to say the QB's aren't any good and the league is down. But if that's the case, I'd be willing to bet it won't be the case in a year or two. Just kind of a confluence of circumstances where a bunch of teams are starting new guys, or guys without much experience right now. The SEC has never quite been the QB driven league that some others have been anyway. If you go through the list of LSU and Alabama quarterbacks that have won the league, it's not a who's who list or anything.
doya asks: Why do you think we are seeing so many teams around the country using true freshman quarterbacks?
GD: I don't know which teams those are off hand, but I'll trust you that a lot of teams are doing it. If that's the case, I'd assume it's because the coaches at those schools think the freshman is the best guy they have. And some coaches who might think the freshman is a half-step below are likely thinking "Let's get them out there now. They might take a couple lumps early, but in a couple months and the next couple of years, we're going to have a much better team because they've already played."
mizzou1971 asks: No Nate Strong sighting Saturday...is he fourth string? Also, do you know if Daniel Parker's de-commit was related to the WVU game?
GD: Because the depth chart only goes to two, I can't promise Strong is fourth-string, but I believe that's the case. And if so, he ought to get some carries this weekend in what should be a much easier game. But you're not going to play many fourth-stringers in a game you're losing by multiple scores and trying to come back.
As far as Parker, he hasn't commented (we asked, he declined) on the specifics of why he decommitted, but it really wasn't a surprise. The kid made a quick decision 18 months before his signing day. When we talked to his high school coach, he even said the kid was going to have options and I got the distinct impression that Parker's recruitment was far from over. I think Missouri will be in the mix all the way, but I think it's as simple as a kid making a decision before he was probably ready to. In 13 years of covering recruiting, I can only remember one player who I heard made his decision largely based on one game (Adrian Peterson went to OU over Texas after watching the Sooners hammer the Longhorns one year and said that game was a big factor). It's almost never that simple.
lotigerfan asks: Barry Odom said he would not interfere to much with the play calls on defense, how bad do you think he wanted interfere on Saturday?
GD: If they were doing something he strongly disagreed with, I'm sure he would have. I know fans hate hearing this (because I kind of hate it too), but the problem is most often with the execution, not the play call. Coaches call plays they think are going to work. There's no chance that Cross called a defense and Odom thought "Well, this has no chance," but let them run it anyway. More likely, someone just didn't do his job (or multiple someones) on the play. Now, if you consistently see someone not doing his job, or a scheme that players have trouble executing, it's your job as a coach to change. But I'm not going to make a judgment that Missouri can't run Cross's defense (or even any single part of it) after one game. And like Michael Scherer said, even on a bad day, they held a pretty darn good offense (and even though Mizzou fans won't admit it, WVU does have a pretty good offense) to 26 points, which isn't hideous.
tkbmu asks: Curious how it works for you when a key person changes roles (head coach, AD). How much turnover is there in your sources? How long does it take to figure out the "new" inner circle and get a reliable source inside? How often are you given information vs having to ask for it?
GD: It depends on who the guy leaving was, who replaces him and who is still here. Some changes require longer to build sources than others. I've been involved with changes where it took a while and I've covered changes where sources actually improved almost immediately. It's completely a case by case basis. And there are some people that have been in the "inner circle" as you say no matter who has been in place.
tkbmu asks: Sorry if you have answered this in your week 1 recap, but based on what you saw on the field this weekend. It was a loss like you called but it wasn't that close. Our offense moved the ball, but only through sheer # plays called and not through efficiency. Do you feel better or worse about your 7-5 call? Would you change it if you could?
GD: Saturday didn't really surprise me. I picked them to lose by ten and if they'd scored late, they would have. I expected the game to be a little more competitive, but Missouri got hammered on both sides of the ball in the third quarter. I wouldn't change what I said before the season. I picked them 7-5 with a loss at West Virginia and I'll stick with that. Nothing I saw over the weekend would change my picks I made two weeks ago. Missouri's schedule is heavily front-loaded. They could well go 2-4 in the first six and 4-2 or 5-1 in the last six.
pbtigerfan asks: I don't recall hearing the old staff recruiting after an early game. Is this new, and if so, do you know if this is a HCBO call or did it come from AJ?
GD: I don't specifically remember it happening, but I'm not going to say it didn't. I would think at some point in the last 15 years, Pinkel did what Odom did on Saturday night. And I would assume it's a Barry Odom call. I don't think the recruiting coordinator is telling the head coach what to do in most cases.
mufootball1 asks: After the opening week of the season, do you see any team in the SEC that has a reasonable chance of beating Alabama? Do you think it hurts the SEC for Alabama to be this dominant or is it good for the SEC as long as Alabama continues to win national championships?
GD: I picked Bama to win the league before the season and I wouldn't change that after week one. But I'm not going to crown them just yet. They have a tough schedule. Their SEC road games are Ole Miss, Arkansas, LSU and Tennessee. They could legitimately lose any of them (Arkansas tends to pull off at least one big surprise pretty regularly). So, the Tide could certainly lose a game.
As far as your second question, I don't know if it hurts the SEC. But the reason the league got the reputation for being so strong was that Alabama, Auburn, Florida and LSU all won national titles. It wasn't one team carrying the mantle by itself like Big 12 hoops has been for the last 15 years. The reason the SEC is considered the best conference in the country is its depth, not having one team at the top all the time. But even if the Tide keeps rolling, if you've got two or three other teams in the top 10 or 15, I think the reputation is going to be just fine.
