PDA

View Full Version : Pinkel signs 3 year extension


Saulbadguy
11-17-2006, 02:50 PM
Great news! 1.3 million a year!

http://missouri.rivals.com/default.asp

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 02:56 PM
Jeez, what was the hurry? I'd at least wait to see if he beat KU this year.

Personally, I would've waited until late 2007. I'm not sure where the program stands right now. This year, we beat the teams we were supposed to beat for a change. But we still choke in the big games that decide the division standings.

So is Team Pinkel ready to make that next step and start beating the good teams? Or is he simply a mediocre coach who can win 6-8 games beating schlubs? I suspect the latter, which is why at this point I don't want to be on the hook for him through 2011.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:08 PM
Jeez, what was the hurry? I'd at least wait to see if he beat KU this year.

Personally, I would've waited until late 2007. I'm not sure where the program stands right now. This year, we beat the teams we were supposed to beat for a change. But we still choke in the big games that decide the division standings.

So is Team Pinkel ready to make that next step and start beating the good teams? Or is he simply a mediocre coach who can win 6-8 games beating schlubs? I suspect the latter, which is why at this point I don't want to be on the hook for him through 2011.

Mizzou was picked to finish 5th in the North this year, so apparently he performed above expecatations.

Tigers are on track to finish 9-3 this season, which would be one of their best records of the last 25 years. Pinkel is winning games, bringing in talented players, and running a clean ship....what's not to like?

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 03:16 PM
Mizzou was picked to finish 5th in the North this year, so apparently he performed above expecatations.

Tigers are on track to finish 9-3 this season, which would be one of their best records of the last 25 years. Pinkel is winning games, bringing in talented players, and running a clean ship....what's not to like?

I dunno, I saw a lot of folks pick MU to contend for the North title because it was supposed to be weak this year.

They had a weak non-con sked, which is why I gave them credit for not blowing it (in the past they often got upset by supposedly inferior teams). They choke big time in big games, that's what's not to like. Which is why I asked -- is winning your weak non-con sked the first step toward taking the next? Or is Pinkel a mediocrity who won't be able to take the team to the next level?

Personally, I'm not satisfied long term with just beating directional schools in September and being everybody's else's bitch in October. My point was and is, I think it's too soon to commit to Pinkel for 5 more years.

Saulbadguy
11-17-2006, 03:19 PM
"On track to finish..."

Let's see how that works out.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:22 PM
I dunno, I saw a lot of folks pick MU to contend for the North title because it was supposed to be weak this year.

They had a weak non-con sked, which is why I gave them credit for not blowing it (in the past they often got upset by supposedly inferior teams). They choke big time in big games, that's what's not to like. Which is why I asked -- is winning your weak non-con sked the first step toward taking the next? Or is Pinkel a mediocrity who won't be able to take the team to the next level?

Personally, I'm not satisfied long term with just beating directional schools in September and being everybody's else's bitch in October. My point was and is, I think it's too soon to commit to Pinkel for 5 more years.

Sure they had a weak non-con....that's what most teams do, especially middle of the road programs like Mizzou. In years past Mizzou fans griped about losing to the weak teams in their non-con, now they are complaining even though they are winning them.

I'm not sure they "choke" in big games.....maybe they just aren't good enough to win those games yet. OU is loaded with 4 and 5 star kids, and Mizzou hasn't won in Lincoln in something like 25 years....it's not like Mizzou is losing gimmes here. They won a "big" game at the time in Lubbock, and they barely lost a close game in College Station.

That's fine if you're not satisfied, but I see this program moving in the right direction. Mizzou has a chance to win 10 games this year for the first time in a long time....IMO, that's progress.

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 03:22 PM
"On track to finish..."

Let's see how that works out.

Exactly. Why sign him now? Because some other teams might be sniffing around him?

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:25 PM
"On track to finish..."

Let's see how that works out.

Fine with me.....care to make any guesses on how they finish the season?

My money's on 2-0....ISU is awful and I think Mizzou will finally get over the KU hump.

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 03:25 PM
Sure they had a weak non-con....that's what most teams do, especially middle of the road programs like Mizzou. In years past Mizzou fans griped about losing to the weak teams in their non-con, now they are complaining even though they are winning them.

I'm not sure they "choke" in big games.....maybe they just aren't good enough to win those games yet. OU is loaded with 4 and 5 star kids, and Mizzou hasn't won in Lincoln in something like 25 years....it's not like Mizzou is losing gimmes here. They won a "big" game at the time in Lubbock, and they barely lost a close game in College Station.

That's fine if you're not satisfied, but I see this program moving in the right direction. Mizzou has a chance to win 10 games this year for the first time in a long time....IMO, that's progress.

You're writing around points I've already made in previous posts. You act like we're diametrically opposed, when the only difference is you're confident we're on the right track, and I've expressed skepticism about that. My whole point is, I simply think it's too early to commit to him -- unless you're satisfied with being a middle-of-the-road program. If I'm going to commit to someone for so long, I want to be sure he's the guy who can take them to the next level -- not necessarily the national championship, but a team capable of winning the North and getting a bowl better than Shreveport every year.

Saulbadguy
11-17-2006, 03:27 PM
Fine with me.....care to make any guesses on how they finish the season?

My money's on 2-0....ISU is awful and I think Mizzou will finally get over the KU hump.
I will guess 2-0 as well, but I wouldn't call either of those games a lock. Maybe @ISU - they have packed it in.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:29 PM
You're writing around points I've already made in previous posts. You act like we're diametrically opposed, when the only difference is you're confident we're on the right track, and I've expressed skepticism about that. My whole point is, I simply think it's too early to commit to him -- unless you're satisfied with being a middle-of-the-road program. If I'm going to commit to someone for so long, I want to be sure he's the guy who can take them to the next level -- not necessarily the national championship, but a team capable of winning the North and getting a bowl better than Shreveport every year.

My point is that some Mizzou fans make us out to be Michigan or USC, when we're not. We haven't been consistently good since the 60's, and now it looks like we are starting to get back on track. This year Mizzou is primed to go to the best bowl game the program has been to in awhile, and it's one year after arguably the greatest QB in the program's history graduated.

Reasonable minds can disagree, but as a fan who saw the awful teams in the 80's and early 90's, I am satisfied with how the program is rolling right now.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:32 PM
I will guess 2-0 as well, but I wouldn't call either of those games a lock. Maybe @ISU - they have packed it in.

I wouldn't call them a lock either, which is why I never said I guaranteed we'd finish 2-0. We will be favored in both games, and at this point it appears we have a good chance to finish 9-3.....that's a successful season in my book.

Frazod
11-17-2006, 03:39 PM
I would have been pissed about this last year, and I still don't know if he's the answer. But at least we're winning the games we should, and actually finally won one we shouldn't have. We'll probably get a decent bowl and flirt with a Top 25 ranking.

Still sucks that we can't hang with the big dogs, though. But in the utterly unfair world of college football, I really don't know that I can blame Pinkel for losses to teams that have so much more talent to draw on than we do.

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 03:40 PM
My point is that some Mizzou fans make us out to be Michigan or USC, when we're not. We haven't been consistently good since the 60's, and now it looks like we are starting to get back on track. This year Mizzou is primed to go to the best bowl game the program has been to in awhile, and it's one year after arguably the greatest QB in the program's history graduated.

Reasonable minds can disagree, but as a fan who saw the awful teams in the 80's and early 90's, I am satisfied with how the program is rolling right now.

All good points that I don't disagree with. Hey, I remember being pissed at Onofrio for losing to KU every year, even though he was also beating top 10 teams. You don't know what you've got till it's gone.

I'm not dissatisfied with the way the program's heading, I'm just not sure where it's ultimately going. Like I said, you have to beat the patsies before taking the next step. We did that this year. I just don't know if Pinkel is capable of taking the next step up, which should be beating the big boys occasionally, whoever the league leaders are that year.

To reiterate my point, I'm just leery about committing to Pinkel right now, because I see us as being on the fence between going up, staying middle of the road or sliding back. I just think it's too early to tell. JMHO. :)

Saulbadguy
11-17-2006, 03:42 PM
Still sucks that we can't hang with the big dogs, though. But in the utterly unfair world of college football, I really don't know that I can blame Pinkel for losses to teams that have so much more talent to draw on than we do.
Missouri has what, the population of 6 million? They have NO Division I-A competition in the state. I don't think I can name another state that has such favorable conditions to draw from and underachieve like Missouri does in both Football and Mens Basketball.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:42 PM
Not sure if it's fair to say we "can't hang with the big boys".

We've beaten Nebraska the last two times they came to Columbia, we beat Texas Tech in Lubbock, we beat a very good South Carolina team, we barely lost to a good A&M team in College Station.....we could do better, but we do a lot worse.

Frazod
11-17-2006, 03:46 PM
Missouri has what, the population of 6 million? They have NO Division I-A competition in the state. I don't think I can name another state that has such favorable conditions to draw from and underachieve like Missouri does in both Football and Mens Basketball.

I mean in general, not in the state itself. Obviously, when it comes to recruiting, Missouri is not in the same league with teams like Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas.

siberian khatru
11-17-2006, 03:46 PM
Missouri has what, the population of 6 million? They have NO Division I-A competition in the state. I don't think I can name another state that has such favorable conditions to draw from and underachieve like Missouri does in both Football and Mens Basketball.

They've been saying that since before you were born. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Missouri is a sleeping giant" for just those reasons.

Frazod
11-17-2006, 03:48 PM
Not sure if it's fair to say we "can't hang with the big boys".

We've beaten Nebraska the last two times they came to Columbia, we beat Texas Tech in Lubbock, we beat a very good South Carolina team, we barely lost to a good A&M team in College Station.....we could do better, but we do a lot worse.

Bottom line - we didn't hang. Losing in Lincoln and Lubbock wasn't that surprising, but getting punked at home by the Gooners really put things back in perspective.

eazyb81
11-17-2006, 03:51 PM
Bottom line - we didn't hang. Losing in Lincoln and Lubbock wasn't that surprising, but getting punked at home by the Gooners really put things back in perspective.

What do you mean "put things back in perspective"? Did you really think that we had more talent than OU heading into that game? While it would have been great to win, it's not surprising that we lost at this point. They are oozing with talent and won a NC just a couple years ago.

Bob Dole
11-17-2006, 03:57 PM
Missouri has what, the population of 6 million? They have NO Division I-A competition in the state. I don't think I can name another state that has such favorable conditions to draw from and underachieve like Missouri does in both Football and Mens Basketball.

Oh yeah. Bob Dole has noticed that all the big name program's rosters are filled with kids who went to high school in Missouri.

In fact, whenever someone says "high school football", Missouri is the first state that probably comes to most people's minds.

Frazod
11-17-2006, 03:59 PM
What do you mean "put things back in perspective"? Did you really think that we had more talent than OU heading into that game? While it would have been great to win, it's not surprising that we lost at this point. They are oozing with talent and won a NC just a couple years ago.

I was foolishly starting to believe we were in their league. WRONG. Keep in mind, following the Tigers up here in Big 10 Hell isn't the easiest thing in the world to do.

ExtremeChief
11-17-2006, 04:56 PM
Oh yeah. Bob Dole has noticed that all the big name program's rosters are filled with kids who went to high school in Missouri.

In fact, whenever someone says "high school football", Missouri is the first state that probably comes to most people's minds.

I would have to think most people think Texas when someone says "high school football", but it is big in Missouri as well.

Even with 6 mil, 2 of the major metropolitan areas border other states, so I don't know if allegiance(sp) to the state of Missouri is as big a thing here as it might be in other states.

Brock
11-17-2006, 05:00 PM
Ha ha.

redbrian
11-17-2006, 05:12 PM
Oh yeah. Bob Dole has noticed that all the big name program's rosters are filled with kids who went to high school in Missouri.

In fact, whenever someone says "high school football", Missouri is the first state that probably comes to most people's minds.

It's not!!!!!!

I thought every team in the nation had a Missouri kid tearing up the field.

Sure-Oz
11-17-2006, 05:28 PM
MU needs a running game and they would be dangerous.

Saulbadguy
11-17-2006, 06:24 PM
Oh yeah. Bob Dole has noticed that all the big name program's rosters are filled with kids who went to high school in Missouri.

In fact, whenever someone says "high school football", Missouri is the first state that probably comes to most people's minds.
It's not just about recruiting, it's about $$$.

Cochise
11-17-2006, 07:13 PM
I see the team getting better. We need some more talent, and hopefully this year where the team looks like it's on the way up helps bring some more in.

Really, if you add a running back who doesn't suck donkey balls, shore up the defense in a few spots, we could take the next step. And what is an extension really? Puts them on the hook for some money. Doesn't mean they can't make a change if they feel it's needed.

I think the team is ascending and the next couple of years they should be even better.

Bob Dole
11-18-2006, 02:02 PM
It's not just about recruiting, it's about $$$.

"Missouri has what, the population of 6 million? They have NO Division I-A competition in the state. I don't think I can name another state that has such favorable conditions to draw from and underachieve like Missouri does in both Football and Mens Basketball."

"Favorable conditions to draw from..." sure doesn't sound like you're saying it's about dollars.

Who cares if there's 6 million people to pull from. If they're all second-level talen, you end up with a team full of second-level talent. Bob Dole's point is that there doesn't appear to be a lot of talent leaving the state for bigger programs. There just doesn't appear to be a lot of talent in Missouri.

Pitt Gorilla
11-25-2007, 06:56 PM
Ha ha.Seems like a pretty good deal. Some of you people are incredibly short-sighted.

siberian khatru
11-25-2007, 07:01 PM
Jeez, what was the hurry? I'd at least wait to see if he beat KU this year.

Personally, I would've waited until late 2007. I'm not sure where the program stands right now. This year, we beat the teams we were supposed to beat for a change. But we still choke in the big games that decide the division standings.

So is Team Pinkel ready to make that next step and start beating the good teams? Or is he simply a mediocre coach who can win 6-8 games beating schlubs? I suspect the latter, which is why at this point I don't want to be on the hook for him through 2011.

:hmmm: ROFL :jester:

:hail:

BigRedChief
11-25-2007, 07:21 PM
looks like a good contract. Probably cost them $500,000 more a year now.

DeezNutz
11-25-2007, 07:30 PM
Jeez, what was the hurry? I'd at least wait to see if he beat KU this year.

Personally, I would've waited until late 2007. I'm not sure where the program stands right now. This year, we beat the teams we were supposed to beat for a change. But we still choke in the big games that decide the division standings.

So is Team Pinkel ready to make that next step and start beating the good teams? Or is he simply a mediocre coach who can win 6-8 games beating schlubs? I suspect the latter, which is why at this point I don't want to be on the hook for him through 2011.

You were not in the minority with this. Two years ago, I was calling for Pinkel to be fired. :shake:

eazyb81
11-25-2007, 07:53 PM
I'd like to point out that I was supportive of this move. I guess that makes me a genius.

Saulbadguy
11-25-2007, 07:55 PM
Gimme a plate of crow! With mango salsa.