Missouri vs. Nebraska Preview. This is the biggest preview I have ever seen.

[|Zach|]

Biggest ****ing preview I have ever seen in my life. Enjoy. !

--------------------------------------------------------------

This is from Haymarket Husker on Huskerpedia.com

Week 5 - Missouri preview
First and foremost: This ain't your daddy's Missouri.

NU hasn't lost to Mizzou in Lincoln since 1978. That was a huge upset, 35-31.

If MU wins in Lincoln 30 years later, however, it won't be an upset at all.

Mizzou hammered NU 41-6 last season in Columbia, its third straight 17+ point win against the Huskers in Columbia. Mizzou hasn't broken through in Lincoln yet under Coach Pinkel, though, but Saturday represents the Tigers' best shot. Mizzou is an 11-point favorite, perhaps the first time Mizzou has been favored in Lincoln since 1960.

Mizzou is for real. NU definitely has a chance at home to win this one, but Mizzou is a double-digit favorite for several legitimate reasons, led by QB Chase Daniel, who's been almost flawless this season. He looked like a skittish sophomore during his 2006 trip to Lincoln. This time, however, he enters Memorial Stadium as a steady senior.

NU will have to play significantly better than it has at any point this season -- or probably over the past 2 or 3 seasons -- to pull the upset.

MIZZOU IN 2008

Mizzou 52, Illinois 42
Mizzou dominated the Illini for most of this game, although UI caught Mizzou sleepwalking a bit in the third quarter and pulled to within 10. Illinois had two possessions trailing by 10, but Mizzou's defense woke up in time to turn the Illini away.

Mizzou 52, SE Mo St 3
This was an utter mismatch. No point in discussing it any further.

Mizzou 69, Nevada 17
MU hammered Nevada, again an utter mismatch. It's just depressing to discuss this one further, especially if you watched it. Mizzou's dominance was downright frightening, especially in the 2nd half.

Mizzou 42, Buffalo 21
Coach Gill's Bulls made Mizzou sweat, employing an interesting strategy from d-coordinator Jimmy Williams. Buffalo allowed Mizzou's receivers to catch the ball short and then punished them, causing three fumbles. They also hit Daniel a lot. It didn't result in a win, and Mizzou still had almost 600 yards in total offense, but Mizzou scored only 42 points, its lowest total of the season.

STATISTICAL COMPARISON
NU and Mizzou have played somewhat similar schedules: Va Tech and Illinois are comparable and W Mich and Buffalo are comparable. Nevada is better than San Jose St & N Mex St, but SE Mo St is worse. What does all of that mean? These statistical measurements should provide a meaningful comparison.

MU...........Stat Category...........NU
191.3 (31st)....Rush Off...(57th) 155.5
404.3 (2nd).....Pass Off...(24th) 265.5
595.5 (2nd)....Total Off...(33rd) 421.0
53.8 (2nd).....Score Off...(17th) 37.5

99.0 (24th)....Rush Def...(35th) 109.8
(58th)........Pass Eff Def.......(55th)
378.5 (79th)...Total Def...(64th) 354.8
20.8 (47th)....Score Def...(40th) 19.5

+0.5 (40th)...Turnovers...(75th) -0.25
9.00 (2nd).......TFL.......(29th) 6.50
2.75 (14th).....Sacks......(14th) 2.75
0.50 (8th)..Sacks Allowed..(35th) 1.25

48.8 (17th)...3rd Down Off...(85th) 35.6
34.3 (45th)...3rd Down Def...(63rd) 38.5
73.7 (14/19)..Red Zone TD Off. (12/17) 70.6
40.0 (4/10)...Red Zone TD Def.. (8/20) 40.0
Some statistical oddities:

Daniel completed a Big XII record 20 consecutive passes against Buffalo.

Daniel ranks 4th nationally with a passer rating of 193.4 ... but he's only 3rd in the Big XII. He ranks 4th nationally in total offense at 371.5.

Maclin is 5th nationally in all-purpose yards (193.5 per game).

Mizzou ranks first in the Big XII in total offense and last in total defense. However, Mizzou ranks 6th in the Big XII in scoring defense, meaning they give up some yards, but not many points.

LEADING MIZZOU INDIVIDUALS
MU's offense almost looks like a video game, because they make it look so easy. Their passing game is lethal, but if you forget about the run game, they'll hurt you there, too. Their O-Line uses the wide splits very efficiently, and Mizzou's offense is designed to pass the ball quickly, making it tough to sack the QB (Mizzou ranks 8th nationally in fewest sacks allowed). Their special teams are dangerous behind Jeremy Maclin, too. And defensively, they give up a lot of yards, but they force turnovers and score defensively - high risk, high reward type of defense.

But Mizzou's success over the past 1 1/2 seasons is all about the offense. The Tigers have scored a ton of points against everyone the past 20 games, and this year might be their best offensive team yet.

Rushing
The Tigers don't miss Tony Temple much; Washington has been very good, averaging 6.8 yards per carry. He has good quickness and can get tough yards when needed ... and he's scored 8 rushing TDs in just four games along with a receiving TD, ranking him 2nd nationally with 13.5 points per game. Daniel also is a very good runner, although MU hasn't used him much to carry the ball this season ... they haven't had to. The Tigers will use Maclin on reverses, too, although he hasn't broken a big gainer yet.

2008 STAT LEADERS
Washington 53-361, 8 TD
Jackson, Jimmy 20-129, 1 TD
Daniel 14-74, 0 TD
Maclin 8-43, 1 TD

Passing
Chase Daniel is as good of a QB as there is in college football. He understands Mizzou's offense, he spreads the ball around, he's very accurate both on the run and in the pocket, he's elusive and can run for first downs when needed, and he eats his ... never mind. The guy has completed 75.9% of his passes this season, and he'd be well over 80% if he hadn't had several dropped passes. Not only does he complete passes, but his pin-point accuracy usually hits his receivers in stride, which makes blazing fast guys like Maclin absolutely lethal. Daniel rarely gets sacked, just once all season, in 133 pass attempts. His TD-to-INT ratio is 12-to-1.

The best news about Daniel? He graduates this season.

2008 STAT LEADERS
Daniel 101-for-133, 1 INT, 12 TD, 1412 yards, 353 yd per game

Receiving
Mizzou has plenty of targets for Daniel, and he spreads the ball around well. Four Mizzou WRs have more than 65 yards per game receiving this season and at least 13.5 yards per catch - I'm counting Coffman as a WR ... a really big WR. Coffman is surprisingly elusive as a runner after the catch, and he's hurdled at least three defenders while advancing the ball downfield that I've seen this season. Maclin might be the most dangerous player in college football - a tremendous mixture of speed and elusiveness. Thanks to the first two receivers, Saunders and Perry both see a ton of single coverage, and they take advantage, getting down the field. The Tigers also throw to the running backs on occasion, although they really don't need to, maybe 2-3 times per game.

2008 STAT LEADERS
Coffman 28-379, 3 TD, 13.5 per catch
Maclin 26-391, 4 TD, 15.0 per catch
Saunders 19-308, 2 TD, 16.2 per catch
Perry 16-270, 2 TD, 16.9 per catch
Washington 7-79, 1 TD, 11.3 per catch

Returns
Maclin might be the most dangerous return man in the entire country. With NU's struggles on punt and kick coverage so far this season, NU will want to kick away from him whenever possible, especially on kickoffs, where Maclin already has a 99-yd TD this season. Hopefully Adi can keep banging kicks into the end zone Saturday. Maclin hasn't scored yet on a punt return, but his longest return this season is 46 yards. He had 2 TD punt returns last season and 1 TD kickoff return last season.

2008 STAT LEADERS
PUNT-Maclin 12 ret, 10.2 avg, 0 TD
KICK-Maclin 7 ret, 31.0 avg, 1 TD

Kicking
Jeff Woffert is a very good kicker for Mizzou, having hit 6 of his 7 FGs already and all 27 extra point attempts. Woffert ranks 1st nationally among kickers in scoring with 11.25 points per game. More impressively, Woffert has made 3 of 4 FGs from 43+ yards out - his only miss of the season was a 53-yarder against Buffalo. Woffert was outstanding last year, too, hitting 21-of-25 FGs and all 67 of his XPs.

Woffert has shown a strong leg on kickoffs, too, with 22.9% of his kickoffs going for touchbacks. Mizzou's opponents have started their drives after kickoffs on average at the 27-yard line, as Mizzou has struggled a little bit in covering kickoffs, including giving up a TD to Illinois.

Contrary to rumors, Mizzou does have a punter. Jake Harry has hit 3 of his 9 punts inside the 20 yard line (33%).

2008 STAT LEADERS
PK-Woffert 6-7 FG, 27-27 XP
PUNT-Harry 9 punts, 42.6 avg, 0 blocked ... OPP 3 returns, 4.7 avg
KICKOFF-Woffert 35 kickoffs, 8 touchbacks

Tackles
Mizzou's defense is the team's weakness, but when your offense and special teams are as good as the Tigers' units are, the defense almost can't help but be the third best unit. Weatherspoon is the heart of this defense - he leads the team by a mile in both tackles and tackles for loss, and he ranks 4th nationally in tackles per game with 12.0. He's scored twice on INT returns, which leads the nation. He led Mizzou in tackles last season with 130. He's also a very emotional, bordering on cocky, player, who, on occasion, will lose his cool. However, his multitude of good plays easily surpasses any negatives he brings.

The safety Moore is outstanding, too, even though the numbers aren't great this season. He has 16 tackles, but he did not play against Buffalo because of injury. He should be OK for the NU game.

One area where Mizzou's defense hasn't been great is in forcing fumbles - Mizzou has forced only 3 in four games, recovering 2.

2008 STAT LEADERS
Weatherspoon 48
Garrett 27
Christopher 25
Gettis 23

Tackles for loss
Weatherspoon comes on the blitz quite a bit for Mizzou, and he's effective with 8 tackles for loss in 4 games. (He'll also draw the TE in man-to-man coverage at times, he's a very versatile player. However, he will bite on play action at times.) Sulak and Christopher put great pressure on the QB from the DE spots as well, combining for four sacks. Mizzou has 11 sacks already. Mizzou brings a ton of pressure from LBs and DBs, and they're always going after the QB. High risk, high reward type of defense much of the time. So far this season, the risks have paid off most of the time.

2008 STAT LEADERS
Weatherspoon 2.5 sacks, 8 TFL
Sulak 3.0 sacks, 5.5 TFL
Christopher 1.0 sacks, 4.0 TFL
Hood 2.0 sacks, 4.0 TFL
Chavis 2.0 sacks, 3.0 TFL

Passes defended
Weatherspoon is very good in coverage, too, with the 3 INTs mentioned earlier and with 3 other passes broken up. Rutland and Bridges have combined to have seven passes broken up.

3RD DOWN CONVERSIONS
Mizzou is one of the top teams in the country in converting 3rd downs, ranking 17th at 48.8%. Defensively, Mizzou is closer to the middle of the pack, allowing opponents to convert 34.3% of 3rd down plays (45th nationally).

What's a little frightening is that Mizzou hasn't faced many 3rd downs - especially considering how many plays the Tigers run in their spread attack. Probably the most interesting aspect of this statistic is how rarely Mizzou faces 3rd and long, especially for a team that throws it so much. Of course, when you rarely have incomplete passes, you don't have many 3rd & 10 situations, even if you throw on almost every down.

When MU does face 3rd & long, they're converting 56% with Daniel in the game. Not much bothers Mizzou under Daniel.

Here's how Mizzou's 3rd downs offensively have looked on possessions with Daniel in the game, where they've converted 56.3% of their 3rd downs, which would rank #6 in the country.

OFFENSE
TOTAL: 18-of-32, 56.3%
3rd & short - 3 yds or less - 10-of-13, 76.9%
RUSH (80%, 4-of-5)
1* 1* 1* 2* 2
PASS (75%, 6-of-8)
2* 2* 2* 2* 3* 3* 3 3
3rd & medium - 4-7 yds - 3-of-10, 30.0%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-2)
5 7
PASS (30%, 3-of-8)
4* 4 5 5 5 6* 6* 6
3rd & long - 8+ yards - 5-of-9, 55.6%
RUSH (100%,2-of-2)
9* 10*
PASS (42.9%, 3-of-7)
8* 8 9* 10* 11 12 12

Here are Mizzou's tendencies on 3rd down when Daniel is in the game...

RUSH
TOTAL, 6-of-9, 67%
Daniel, 3-of-6, 50%: 1* 1* 2 5 7 9*
Washington 1-of-1, 100%: 1*
Maclin 1-of-1, 100%: 2*
Jackson 1-of-1, 100%: 10*

PASS
TOTAL, 12-of-23, 52%
Coffman 4-of-8, 50%: 2* 4 6* 6* 6 8 10* 11
Saunders 4-of-5, 80%: 2* 2* 3* 3 8*
Maclin 2-of-3, 67%: 4* 5 9*
Perry 2-of-3, 67%: 2* 3* 12
Alexander 0-of-2, 0%: 5 5
Washington 0-of-1, 0%: 3
1 sack

*-converted

Daniel is running less this season overall, but he still will scramble or run QB draws or sneaks on 3rd down. Mizzou still throws most of the time on 3rd down, however, and Coffman is Daniel's favorite target. He also prefers to go Saunders on 3rd down.

DEFENSE
Mizzou's defense is very good on 3rd & medium and 3rd & long - they bring the pressure, and they've come up with 6 sacks on 3rd down plays in the I-A games looked at here (vs Illinois, Nevada, and Buffalo). Unfortunately, NU has faced a ton of 3rd & medium/long situations this season - if Mizzou can keep up these numbers vs Nebraska on 3rd & medium/long, NU could be in for a long night.

I did not include the game against I-AA SE Mo St in these stats.

TOTAL: 18-of-53, 34.0%
3rd & short - 3 yds or less - 10-of-14, 71.4%
RUSH (87.5%, 7-of-8)
1* 1* 1* 2* 2* 3* 3* 3
PASS (50%, 3-of-6)
2* 2 3* 3* 3 3
3rd & medium - 4-7 yds - 4-of-18, 22.2%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-3)
4 5 7
PASS (26.7%, 4-of-15)
4* 4 4 4 5 5 5 6* 6 6 6 7* 7* 7 7
3rd & long - 8+ yards - 4-of-21, 19.0%
RUSH (50.0%, 1-of-2)
8* 11
PASS (15.8%, 3-of-19)
8* 8 8 9 9 10* 10 10 11 11 12* 12 12 12 14 14 17 20 25

*-converted

Nebraska - 3rd downs in 2008

Offensive numbers are only with Ganz in the game. I've mentioned quite often in these previews how NU is facing far too many 3rd & long situations this season (caused in large part by poor rushing numbers), and Va Tech killed NU Saturday on 3rd & longs.

After facing 3rd & short on each of its first two possessions -- and failing to convert either one when choosing to throw on both plays, which was beyond odd -- NU had only one 3rd & short the remainder of the game. Meanwhile, NU faced 3rd & 6 or more eight times the rest of the game vs Va Tech, converting only two, one of those on Ganz's desperation scramble. Out of its base offense, NU didn't have an answer for VT's pressure packages on 3rd & medium and 3rd & long. That's a very distressing sign heading into a game against a team that pressures the QB as much as Mizzou.

On 3rd down, Ganz was just 1-for-6 throwing, scrambling twice and being sacked once. He was very uncomfortable against VT's 3rd-down pressure, and Mizzou will be bringing the heat, too.

NU must do a better job on 1st & 2nd downs vs Mizzou, or it will be a long night.

OFFENSE (only with Ganz in game)
3rd & short - 3 yds or less - 6-of-9, 66.7%
RUSH (83.3%, 5-of-6)
1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 2
PASS (33.3%, 1-of-3)
2 3* 3
3rd & medium - 4-7 yds - 1-of-12, 8.3%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-2)
4 7
PASS (10%, 1-of-10)
5 5 6* 6 6 6 6 7 7 7
3rd & long - 8+ yards - 8-of-20, 40.0%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-1)
22
PASS (42.1%, 8-of-19)
8 9* 9* 9 9 10* 10* 10* 11* 11 11 11 12* 13 14* 14 22 24 25

With the pressure VT brought on third down against Ganz, he threw to the WRs only twice in the 6 passes he attempted. Peterson, who had been his favorite 3rd down target, did not have a 3rd-down pass thrown his way in the VT game. Ganz's only 3rd-down completion vs VT was the 29-yard play to Lucky, which he appeared to catch one-handed. It was a rough, rough night for Ganz on 3rd down.

INDIVIDUAL THIRD DOWN CONVERSIONS
RUSH
THIRD AND SHORT
100%, 3-of-3, Castille
66.7%, 2-of-3, Lucky

PASS (with Ganz in game)
66.7%, 2-of-3, Swift
57.1%, 4-of-7, Peterson
25%, 1-of-4, Holt
20%, 1-of-5, Lucky
0%, 0-of-2, Henry
0%, 0-of-1, Castille
0%, 0-of-1, Gilleylen
0%, 0-of-1, McNeill
0%, 0-of-1, Paul
0%, 0-of-1, Young
2 sack
4 scrambles (2 converted)
0 INTs

*-converted

DEFENSE
Obviously, VT did a very nice job of moving into 3rd & short opportunities vs NU, converting 5 of 7 of them.

Mizzou faces so few 3rd down plays that, when you get the chance to make them kick, you'd better cash in.

3rd & short - 3 yds or less - 16-of-25, 64.0%
RUSH (75%, 9-of-12)
1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 2* 3 3 3
PASS (53.8%, 7-of-13)
1* 1* 1* 1 1 2* 2* 2 3* 3* 3 3 3
3rd & medium - 4-7 yds - 3-of-14, 21.4%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-3)
5 5 5
PASS (27.3%, 3-of-11)
4* 4* 5 5 5 6* 6 6 7 7 7
3rd & long - 8+ yards - 5-of-24, 20.8%
RUSH (0%, 0-of-3)
9 9 10
PASS (23.8%, 5-of-21)
8 8 8 9* 9 9 9 10* 10* 10* 10 11 11 12 15 15 16 16 18 22 23*

*-converted