It’s also really f***in’ tough.
RIP Mizzou’s Playoff chances: January 1st, 2024 – November 16th, 2024.
Despite all of the returning offensive production and talent on defense, there really hasn’t been any point this season where Mizzou felt like a Playoff team. In fact, I’d say the only thing that Mizzou was outstanding at was “winning close games” and, as we saw on Saturday night, that’s not always a guarantee.
However, even through all the consternation of this season – whether it’s complaining about Brady Cook, Kirby Moore, the offensive line, defensive coverages, injuries – at some point I hope we all just collectively realize that this is how games are going to go under Eli Drinkwitz. You know: brief stretches of brilliance, brief stretches of incompetence, questionable time management, and a game that’s within one-score late and Mizzou’s in a position to lead despite everything.
I think we’d all prefer the one-sided blowouts from last year – and clearly, when he has the right team, that’s an option, too – but the way that Eli wants his teams to play doesn’t really lend itself to that sort of play.
To wit: do you know how many times an Eli Drinkwitz Missouri team has beaten a P4 team by more than one score?
This is four years (and counting) of P4 games.
Think hard!
Are you ready?
The answer is ten times:
- Kentucky ‘20 (20-10)
- Vanderbilt ‘20 (41-0)
- at Vanderbilt ‘21 (37-28)
- at South Carolina ‘22 (23-10)
- at Vanderbilt ‘23 (38-21)
- at Kentucky ‘23 (38-21)
- South Carolina ‘23 (34-12)
- Tennessee ‘23 (36-7)
- at Arkansas ‘23 (48-14)
- vs. Ohio State ‘23 (14-3)
It averages out to twice per season at this point, zero of which have happened this season (so far). But, also, six of those instances happened last year. With one of the greatest Mizzou teams of all time.
But how about this: do you know how many times an Eli Drinkwitz Missouri team has scored more than 40 points on a P4 team? Take a second and guess.
Think really hard.
Ready?
It’s four times:
- LSU ‘20 (W 45-41)
- Vanderbilt ‘20 (W 41-0)
- Arkansas ‘20 (W 50-48)
- at Arkansas ‘23 (W 48-14)
Then again…road games are hard. Under Eli Drinkwitz Mizzou is 7-15 in true road games. And most of those are not close games.
As we round out Eli’s fifth season at the helm we know what he likes his teams to do: shrink the game down to 10-ish possessions, maximize efficiency by running the ball a ton and making quick passes, sprinkle in some downfield shots if you have the guys to do that, and lean on your defense and kicker to keep the game close and win it in the last minute.
If you have a great quarterback, a reliable kicker, and manage the clock well, you can win a ton of games that way. Hell, even with this most recent loss Drinkwitz is 16-8 in one-score games so it clearly works.
But it can also feel frustrating. Like you’re leaving points off the board, or not utilizing offensive pieces well, or being way too conservative at, like, all times and letting teams hang around too long.
And that’s if you win! When you lose, like against South Carolina, then it feels much worse.
Let’s check in with the advanced box score:
This is a really interesting box score as the stats are fairly similar across the board but success rate and points per opportunity tell the story. Both teams ran the ball at essentially the same rate but Mizzou’s success rate was nearly 40% higher than South Carolina’s. On the flip side, both teams threw the ball at essentially the same rate but Carolina’s success rate was 20% higher than Missouri’s. The Tigers managed an unexpected level of big plays and a herculean effort from Nate Noel, but LaNorris Sellers’ big play offense kept connecting and allowed the Gamecocks to score touchdowns on five of their seven opportunities, whereas Drinkwitz attempted four field goals among his seven attempts. As I always say, finishing drives is important, and Shane Beamer’s boys did enough to finally beat their big bad bully.
When Missouri Has the Ball
In a world where two things can be true at the same time, during the game I was both 1.) surprised that this game was close, and 2.) surprised that Mizzou lost. South Carolina’s defense seemed perfectly built to havoc Missouri’s offense to death, and I was unsure how a limited Brady Cook could operate with a defensive line in his lap all night. But the run game was utilized effectively, Mizzou created some surprise big plays on the ground and through the air, and – essentially – did enough to win the game. I usually feel like the “THEY SCORED TOO EARLY” anxiety crowd is a little too trigger happy with that thought…but, boy, last night I thought of that immediately and, lo, proven correct.
Run The Dang Ball
YEAH THEY DID. Every guy who ran the ball that wasn’t Nate Noel stunk but Noel was good enough to have a 63% success rate on his own. I set the goal at a 44% success rate on the ground and the Tigers finished with a collective 60%. In my most Boomer voice possible: they should have run the ball more.
Winner: Missouri
Explode Through the Air
YEAH THEY DID THIS TOO. I was looking for seven explosive pass plays and we got:
- Q1: Brady Cook to Theo Wease, Jr. for 23 yards.
- Q1: Brady Cook to Theo Wease, Jr. for 23 yards (yes, it happened twice).
- Q2: Brady Cook to Theo Wease, Jr. for 22 yards.
- Q4: Brady Cook to Marquis Johnson for 49 yards.
- Q4: Brady Cook to Luther Burden III for 37 yards and a touchdown.
In the end they only managed five explosive plays through the air but those five plays (15.1% of their called passes) accounted for 154 yards (64.7% of their total passing yards).
Winner: South Carolina
FINISH. YOUR. DANG. DRIVES.
If anything is reinforced to you by this exercise it’s that Missouri’s offense did everything right. The goal was 7 scoring opportunities at 3.7 points per opportunity and they finished with 7 and 4.3. The goal was exceeded but South Carolina was just slightly better here and had the ball last.
Winner: Missouri
When South Carolina Has the Ball
I know the conversation is swirling around how badly the defense let the team down against Carolina, and some of that criticism is absolutely fair. But I don’t think this was an abnormal performance from this group by any stretch. Heading into this game Mizzou’s defense faced the fewest total plays of any defense in the country, which has helped hide some of its deficiencies that we know exists (big plays, pass coverage, etc.). Against South Carolina they faced the most plays of any game this year, still annihilated the run, but gave up big plays through the air thanks to a few busted coverages and some lousy tackling on the back end. But they’ve always been that way. And that’s not an excuse, more of a reminder that South Carolina’s offensive strengths managed to take advantage of Corey Batoon’s defense in the way an offense should and managed to win by having the last realistic chance to score.
Get Sacks
South Carolina’s sack liability at the left tackle position ended up not playing and his replacement, Tree Babalade, did fairly well in pass protection. The pressures were there but the sacks weren’t, as referenced by the one sack on the day and the 13 rushes that Sellers ended up committing to because of a Tiger defender barreling down on him. 1 sack on the night < the 3 sack goal I set.
Winner: South Carolina
Turn Them Over
Even if you don’t count the last pass that was intercepted before the inevitable pitchy-pitchy-woo-woo that Mizzou was clearly setting up, the Tigers would have finished at a mere +1 in turnover margin. South Carolina had a lucky recovery of a fumble in the mid-late stages of the game that Missouri certainly could have benefitted from, and the lone interception Missouri did get didn’t lead to points.
Winner: South Carolina
The Little Things
South Carolina held advantages in yards per play, points per scoring opportunity, and 3rd-down conversions. Mizzou benefited from an average 7-yard advantage in starting field position. It’s a wonder that Mizzou managed to keep it close!
On the demerit side, Mizzou was called for one more penalty than South Carolina but 25 more yards. The officiating crew – as is true of most officials this year – were not super great in their decision-making abilities and might have cost Mizzou 4 points that they needed. But the flags were fairly even on the day, for whatever it’s worth.
Extra Points
- In a one-score game you can point to many things that “decided the game”. For me? It was the second quarter; Mizzou’s offense was great outside of the 5 runs and 13 passes that accumulated 48 yards on an 18% success rate. That included the Mizzou interception that lead to a 3-and-out-and-missed-field goal that yielded to two South Carolina touchdowns which created the 15-point halftime hole.
- This is one of the more unique skews as far as yards per down go. For instance, Missouri went 1-9 on 3rd-downs because the 9 plays the ran netted a -2 yard total. Also, Mizzou accrued 262 of their 379 yards – 69.1% of their total – on 2nd-down. Meanwhile, South Carolina was nigh unstoppable on 1st and 2nd-downs and quite a bit more mortal on 3rd. Mizzou’s 3rd-down defense has been elite all year and, while it wasn’t quite enough this game, certainly did a good enough job to limit the damage.
From a success rate standpoint Mizzou’s best quarters were Q3 and Q4; from a yardage standpoint it was Q1 and Q4. For Carolina, success rates stipulated their best was Q1 and Q4 while yardage says Q2 and Q4. You can see the common thread here which is why the last quarter was so entertaining. Bad entertaining, since Missouri lost, but entertaining nonetheless.
Welcome back, Nate Noel! After being a non factor in the past four game, Noel achieved 8 first downs on his 28 touches and jumped back into a tie for first with Marcus Carroll. The other big 1st-down generating machine was Brady Cook throwing to Theo Wease (5 on the day).
Conclusion
Losing this one sucks but winning the next two gives you 9 wins, plus whatever you do in the bowl. That’s absolutely worth it. Let’s hope the players and coaches finish out strong.