MU Per ESPN: OU has best offense in BigXII because they run the ball better?!?!?

CoMoChief · 05:09 AM

Really? Through 5 games.....

MU team rushing stats
165 carries for 966 yds 6 ypc 15 TD's

OU team rushing stats
231 carries for 895 yds 4 ypc 16 TD's

MU's top rusher - Derrick Washington
67 carries 500 yards 7.5 ypc 10 TD's

OU's top rusher - DeMarco Murray
85 carries 431 yds 5.1 ypc 5 TD's

Not only that but MU passes more often than OU does and are a lot more effective scoring on ST return game and getting good field position, thus limiting the number of plays MU has to run in order to score points considering how well and efficient that offense is on a shorter field. Just because they run the ball more doesn't mean they are more effective doing so.

I guess they say that because OU has the better Oline?

Stewie · 10-05-2008, 05:58 AM

Yeah, they said OU has a better Oline. They also said Texas Tech has a better offense than MU, too. I think they were yanking crap out of their assses.

kstater · 10-05-2008, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stewie

Yeah, they said OU has a better Oline. They also said Texas Tech has a better offense than MU, too. I think they were yanking crap out of their assses.

Tech has a better offense.

LiL stumppy · 10-05-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stewie

Yeah, they said OU has a better Oline. They also said Texas Tech has a better offense than MU, too. I think they were yanking crap out of their assses.

OU does have a better line, 1 if not 2 potential 1st rounders in Robinson and Loadholt. They are very big up front.

Dr. Van Halen · 10-05-2008, 06:44 AM

I've heard ESPN Radio make this comment several times over the past week.

I think they are looking for justification to support a traditional football power, rather than a relative newcomer. It's a safer bet.

**banyon** · 10-05-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Van Halen

I've heard ESPN Radio make this comment several times over the past week.

I think they are looking for justification to support a traditional football power, rather than a relative newcomer. It's a safer bet.

This is the same reason they were saying USC was invincible just a couple of weeks back.

Until there's a playoff, it's all just a bunch of hype to promote the paper champion as legit.

Priest31kc · 10-05-2008, 07:11 AM

How does Tech have a better offense than Mizzou??

Did they not see last years game Mizzou - Texas Tech game?

Harrell and TT had their worst passing game in like 2 years against Nevada this year. The next week, Mizzou puts 69 on Nevada and Daniel has over 400 yards and 4 TD with like 2 incompletions.

Mizzou has better skills players, an actual running game thats statistically better than Oklahomas, and Daniel>Harrell anyday. Tech has no running game. All they do is pass. And when a defense controls their passing game, they struggle. Just like what Mizzou's D did to them last year. They dont have a Chase Coffman at TE to create huge mismatches. Perry, Alexander, Saunders and company are much much better than their other WRs. Yes, Crabtree is awesome, but I'd still rather have Maclin because of his gamebreaking speed and versatility in the run game and return game.

Much rather have Mizzou's offense.

I don't mind them saying that about OU just because they do have a power running game and we do not. But i'd give the edge to our passing game.

ohiobronco2 · 10-05-2008, 07:38 AM

Oklahoma has the bigger names on the O-Line, so they'll naturally be deemed the better running team. What I want to know is how Stoops has escaped all the criticism that Jim Tressel has received. Buckeyes have been embarrassed in back to back championship games, but if memory serves me right, Stoops has lost the last few BCS games he's been in and has done so as the favorite. I've seen Oklahoma blow out teams year after year to start the season, only to lose once or twice to a big 12 rival once conference play begins. Then get completely dismantled in a BCS game.

milkman · 10-05-2008, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ohiobronco2

Oklahoma has the bigger names on the O-Line, so they'll naturally be deemed the better running team. What I want to know is how Stoops has escaped all the criticism that Jim Tressel has received. Buckeyes have been embarrassed in back to back championship games, but if memory serves me right, Stoops has lost the last few BCS games he's been in and has done so as the favorite. I've seen Oklahoma blow out teams year after year to start the season, only to lose once or twice to a big 12 rival once conference play begins. Then get completely dismantled in a BCS game.

You answered your own question.

OSU has been blown out in the National Championship in consecutive years.

That's the bigger story.

boogblaster · 10-05-2008, 07:52 AM

OU is always a contender thats why they get rep ... Im glad MU has finally got a good program ...

Sure-Oz · 10-05-2008, 07:54 AM

Mark May said MU had the 3rd best O in the big 12, that's fine if they want to keep sipping that koolaid. MU can run with anyone as well.

**morphius** · 10-05-2008, 07:59 AM

They are just going to keep questioning Mizzou until they make up for the double losses to OU last year. The fact that they have you ranked so high already is a good sign.

beavis · 10-05-2008, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morphius

They are just going to keep questioning Mizzou until they make up for the double losses to OU last year. The fact that they have you ranked so high already is a good sign.

That remains to be seen. OU dominated us on the line last year. I fear it won't be an different this year.

**Skip Towne** · 10-05-2008, 09:32 AM

OU has lost 5 of their last 6 bowl games.

triple · 10-05-2008, 08:21 AM

espn's job is not to report the news, it's to keep you interested by whatever means necessary

10-05-2008, 05:00 AM	Topic Starter
CoMoChief Mahomes Dynasty Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $7712254	Per ESPN: OU has best offense in BigXII because they run the ball better?!?!? Really? Through 5 games..... MU team rushing stats 165 carries for 966 yds 6 ypc 15 TD's OU team rushing stats 231 carries for 895 yds 4 ypc 16 TD's MU's top rusher - Derrick Washington 67 carries 500 yards 7.5 ypc 10 TD's OU's top rusher - DeMarco Murray 85 carries 431 yds 5.1 ypc 5 TD's Not only that but MU passes more often than OU does and are a lot more effective scoring on ST return game and getting good field position, thus limiting the number of plays MU has to run in order to score points considering how well and efficient that offense is on a shorter field. Just because they run the ball more doesn't mean they are more effective doing so. I guess they say that because OU has the better Oline? Last edited by CoMoChief; 10-05-2008 at 05:09 AM..
Posts: 39,236

10-05-2008, 05:58 AM	#2
Stewie MVP Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: West of the Equator Casino cash: $-1600099	Yeah, they said OU has a better Oline. They also said Texas Tech has a better offense than MU, too. I think they were yanking crap out of their assses.
Posts: 13,830

10-05-2008, 06:44 AM	#5
Dr. Van Halen Starter Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Missoula, MT Casino cash: $10005005	I've heard ESPN Radio make this comment several times over the past week. I think they are looking for justification to support a traditional football power, rather than a relative newcomer. It's a safer bet.
Posts: 824

10-05-2008, 07:11 AM	#7
Priest31kc Veteran Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: JCMO Casino cash: $3715291	How does Tech have a better offense than Mizzou?? Did they not see last years game Mizzou - Texas Tech game? Harrell and TT had their worst passing game in like 2 years against Nevada this year. The next week, Mizzou puts 69 on Nevada and Daniel has over 400 yards and 4 TD with like 2 incompletions. Mizzou has better skills players, an actual running game thats statistically better than Oklahomas, and Daniel>Harrell anyday. Tech has no running game. All they do is pass. And when a defense controls their passing game, they struggle. Just like what Mizzou's D did to them last year. They dont have a Chase Coffman at TE to create huge mismatches. Perry, Alexander, Saunders and company are much much better than their other WRs. Yes, Crabtree is awesome, but I'd still rather have Maclin because of his gamebreaking speed and versatility in the run game and return game. Much rather have Mizzou's offense. I don't mind them saying that about OU just because they do have a power running game and we do not. But i'd give the edge to our passing game.
Posts: 4,743

10-05-2008, 07:38 AM	#8
ohiobronco2 Veteran Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Upper Arlington, OH Casino cash: $7115685	Oklahoma has the bigger names on the O-Line, so they'll naturally be deemed the better running team. What I want to know is how Stoops has escaped all the criticism that Jim Tressel has received. Buckeyes have been embarrassed in back to back championship games, but if memory serves me right, Stoops has lost the last few BCS games he's been in and has done so as the favorite. I've seen Oklahoma blow out teams year after year to start the season, only to lose once or twice to a big 12 rival once conference play begins. Then get completely dismantled in a BCS game.
Posts: 1,417

10-05-2008, 07:52 AM	#10
boogblaster MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Verdigris Valley Campsite Casino cash: $10004900	OU is always a contender thats why they get rep ... Im glad MU has finally got a good program ... __________________ WR or S please
Posts: 10,305

10-05-2008, 07:59 AM	#12
morphius World's finest morphius Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $5845027	They are just going to keep questioning Mizzou until they make up for the double losses to OU last year. The fact that they have you ranked so high already is a good sign.
Posts: 26,022

10-05-2008, 09:32 AM	#14
Skip Towne Supporter Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: T-Town Casino cash: $10004900	OU has lost 5 of their last 6 bowl games.
Posts: 69,689

10-05-2008, 08:21 AM	#15
triple Stop saying &quot;This.&quot; Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	espn's job is not to report the news, it's to keep you interested by whatever means necessary
Posts: 2,110