A dozen questions, two dozen answers ahead of the 2020 season

We are eight days away from Missouri kicking off its 2020 season against Alabama. Even though we don't know as much as usual about the team after an unprecedented offseason — including which players will miss the season-opener due to COVID-19 quarantines — PowerMizzou's Gabe DeArmond and Mitchell Forde are ready to pass on some knowledge and offer up their predictions for the 10-game, SEC-only campaign. Here are a dozen questions and two dozen answers about Missouri's season.

Gabe: Who's going to play? It's going to be the question I'm interested in every single week. I think it will be a roster shuffle all season long with guys in and out of the lineup. Who's healthy for both teams is the biggest factor.

Mitchell: Yeah, I think that’s the obvious answer. But I will also be interested in seeing what kind of principles will be the foundation of this new offense. I don’t expect the offense to light it up against Alabama or anything, but we should get a feel for things like how often the team wants to run versus pass, how important a factor the quarterback run game could be, how willing Eli Drinkwitz is to take deep shots down the field in the passing game, stuff like that.

Gabe: I'll be very surprised if it's not Shawn Robinson. I think Missouri is going to be run heavy this year as long as it can avoid falling behind and going into desperation catch up mode. With ten games I think a reasonable hope is 1,800 yards passing and 500 rushing for Robinson. The biggest key to being good will simply be limiting the turnovers and mistakes.

Mitchell: I fully expect Robinson to start the opener, and barring injury or illness, I have a hard time seeing him playing so badly that he’s pulled before the midpoint of the season. I think you hope for a little bit more in the passing game than that, though. Last season, Missouri averaged about 223 yards per game through the air, and that was with the offense totally collapsing down the stretch. I think if Robinson could eclipse 2,000 yards passing, 500 rushing and account for twice as many total touchdowns (rushing and passing combined) as turnovers that would be a really solid year. The quarterback position as a whole should probably be around 2,500 yards passing.

Gabe: The answer due to COVID might be everyone on the roster. But I'm going to assume relatively normal health (which won't happen) and still guess that Missouri starts nine different linemen at some point this year. Only Mike Maietti at center starts every game.

Mitchell: The way Drinkwitz has been talking about the offensive line, they might start nine different linemen in the first three weeks. I think Maietti and Case Cook start as long as they’re healthy, but I think if the group struggles we could definitely see a rotation at the other three spots, even without COVID complications. I think we’ll see double-digit different starters during the course of the season. And that’s a huge concern — the biggest on the roster, in my opinion. It’s really hard to scheme around an overmatched offensive line, especially in the SEC where almost every opponent has a stout defensive line.

Gabe: Running back and I don't think it's close. Missouri has two proven SEC backs, a solid role player in Dawson Downing and a promising young guy in Elijah Young.

Mitchell: I think I would probably take running back as well, but just to be interesting I’m going to submit a vote for the safeties. You have two seniors who started every game last year (except for the one when Tyree Gillespie was suspended) both back at high safety. They know each other, they know the coaches and they know the scheme. I think Gillespie is a potential all-conference talent who could play himself into a second-day NFL Draft position with a big year. And then I think the third safety spot is in good hands with Martez Manuel and Stacy Brown. There may be some growing pains at first, but the coaches have talked highly of both of those two guys pretty much since the minute they arrived on campus. Depth is a little bit of a concern, but as long as Gillespie and Josh Bledsoe stay healthy, that should be a position of strength.

Gabe: I'm torn between QB, WR and DE. With the status of Damon Hazelton unknown, your projected leading receiver is a Division II transfer. I think Missouri has some potential at quarterback, but nothing proven. But ultimately, I land on defensive end. The other positions have guys that I haven't seen play enough yet to make a judgment. At defensive end, I've seen them play and there just isn't a difference maker.

Mitchell: I’m going with quarterback. I see your point about the defensive ends, but I do think it’s worth keeping in mind that the defense was still really solid with not much sack production from those guys last year. Even if that doesn’t improve, which it might not, at least you have some confidence that the experienced guys there aren’t going to completely blow a lot of assignments. I just don’t have any confidence in these quarterbacks yet, and I think they’re being thrown into a brutal position, having had to learn the offense in a shortened offseason, having to play behind a shaky offensive line and facing this schedule. They could well prove me wrong, but until I see one of them play a full, productive game at this level, I’ll remain skeptical.

Gabe: Keke Chism in both I think. The way everyone has talked about him gives me faith. And Missouri doesn't have another wideout healthy who has done it on any level of college football for a full season.

Mitchell: I’ll go with Chism as well for receptions. I think he has the makings of a possession receiver who can use his big body to make contested catches on third downs and in the red zone, which will be really valuable. For yards, I’ll say Jalen Knox. Even though I bought into the hype last offseason as well and it burned me, Drinkwitz has talked about making a concerted effort to get him the ball, and he strikes me as more of a big-play threat than Chism.

Gabe: Nick Bolton.

Mitchell: I gotta go with Kobie Whiteside. He had far and away the most sacks on the team last year with 7.5. The next closest player had 2.5. I think his production will likely dip a little bit with Jordan Elliott no longer next to him to occupy two defenders on most plays, but I don’t have a lot of faith in anyone else to rack up, say, four or five sacks.

Gabe: I think the points per game can be relatively high and still get to .500. Because you can give up plenty to LSU, Alabama, Georgia, Florida and Tennessee and maybe win 24-17 type games against Kentucky, South Carolina, Vandy, Arkansas and Mississippi State. I don't think Missouri is going to win many (or maybe any) games in which they've got to score 35 to win. But I think they could give up 30 a game and still theoretically be 5-5.

Mitchell: That’s a fair point. Full disclosure, I wrote this question and a better phrasing probably would have been how many points can Missouri afford to give up if it’s going to have a shot to win a game. I think the answer is around 20. There might be a couple defenses, like Arkansas or Mississippi State, against whom the offense could put up 31 or something like that. But for the most part, I agree, if Missouri is going to win games this season, it’s going to be because the defense held the opponent to fewer than three touchdowns.

Gabe: Kris Abrams-Draine. I think he'll play a fair amount at wide receiver.

Mitchell: This may not be as much of a surprise since I just wrote about him the other day, but I’ll go with Darius Robinson. His name just keeps popping up during camp. I think Markell Utsey will probably start next to Whiteside, but would not be surprised if Robinson plays the second-most snaps among defensive tackles.

Gabe: The ceiling is probably seven wins. Understand, I don't really see that happening. Alabama and Georgia are almost certain losses. Florida and LSU are very likely losses, but in a perfect world and maybe with some help from COVID you split those. I don't really see Missouri running the table in the other six, but we're talking ceiling. The floor, honestly, is 0-10. They're only going to be favored in two games. They lost to Vandy last year and didn't beat Arkansas by much. Throw in the unknown health questions week to week and honestly, 0-10 is more likely than 7-3 to me. But I don't think either will happen.

Mitchell: I think the ceiling is 6-4. Theoretically, if it played every team on its schedule 10 times, Missouri might win once against every team not named Alabama. But the odds of beating multiple teams out of the Florida, Georgia, LSU group are so remote it’s not realistic. So let’s say they could win one of those. Then we have a similar dynamic with the group of Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina and Mississippi State. Could Mizzou beat each of those teams on the right day? Sure. But right now, I imagine it would be an underdog to all of them, so I can’t see winning all four as a realistic scenario. So three wins there plus beating Arkansas and Vanderbilt brings us to six victories as a best-case scenario. The floor, I agree, is 0-10. I don’t expect it to happen, but the Tigers could lose eight games this year without an upset, and it’s within the realm of possibility to lose to Vandy with a couple starters in quarantine and be too physically beaten down to care about the Arkansas game.

Gabe: I'm tempted to say Tennessee or Kentucky because those could be major swing games in surviving the first half of the schedule, but ultimately I'll go with South Carolina. Missouri is going to be expected to be 1-6 going into that game (I don't know that they will be, but that will be the projection). If you can get a win you might get some confidence and have a chance to finish with three straight Ws. If you lose that one and are sitting something like 1-7, there might be some mailing it in going on.

Mitchell: I’m going to go with Vanderbilt. Under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t list the worst team in the division as a swing game, but given the makeup of the schedule and the general lack of expectations for this season, it’s a game Mizzou has to win. If you lose that game, you’re almost certainly looking at an 0-5 start (maybe the team upset Tennessee the week before, but if it can’t beat Vandy, that seems unlikely). I’m not predicting this to happen, but I think something to keep an eye on this year with opt-outs available is whether some players utilize that option if the season really starts going south. At 0-5, it would officially be going South. On the flip side, there really shouldn’t be high expectations for Drinkwitz in his first season, at least in terms of record. But as long as the team can beat Vandy, the argument can be made, “okay, this whole year was a brutal draw for a first-year coach, but at least we’re moving in the right direction.”

Gabe: I've said 3-7 all along and that's what I see. I think they beat Vandy and Arkansas and either South Carolina or Mississippi State. Anything more than three is a pretty successful debut for Drinkwitz. I just don't think this team has the horses yet.

Mitchell: Hate to be boring, but I agree, both with the 3-7 record and how the team gets there. Four wins isn’t out of the question. Anything more would really, really impress me.