What other message boards are saying (Mizzou Edition)

[Vol in Buckeye Land]

Actually many who cover TN came out and said something happened between Hooker and Banks that threw off all rhythm and created locker room issues prior to the game. I’m not saying that cost us the game, but I’d argue there’s more evidence to that than Michigan giving SC play calls.

You realize the two aren’t mutually exclusive, right? The sheer mental inflexibility on display day in and day out on this board completely astounds me. It’s as if most of us can’t grasp the very simple fact that one event can have multiple causes. Is the public school system really failing so miserably at inculcating basic logic?

 

[Stickseller]

These two comments are my expectation..... There is nothing to suggest that Mizzou should be able to keep up with our offense. Not one bit.

And yes I agree with the sentiment by Mizzou fans that the UGA choke job last week was demoralizing for them. I fully expect them to roll over after they blew that game.

Won’t hurt the Vols to do a little prep ahead for Georgia so we’re more than ready for that game.

 

[CR-vol]

Yes they did and no there's not. People were looking for a reason to explain it away. It isn't conjecture that Banks and Hooker had a clash or that Banks was left home because of it. Generally those kinds of things are pretty much of null effect. They happen a lot more frequently than we are told about. Occasionally the team will actually pull together because of it.

But there isn't more evidence that the tiff between Hooker and Banks had any impact on the game beyond the absence of Banks on D.

When presented with what is known and provable, the other Big 10 schools went ballistic. It happened and it wasn't just a one man operation. I believe it is Thamel who reports that as many as 65 associates of that analysts spread out to steal signals. They had a vested and BIG interest in seeing both UT and Clemson get a 2nd loss. Both were likely to be taken in the CPF ahead of Michigan and deservedly so. Then suddenly... completely out of the blue... a team that was just trampled by a bad UF team... struggled with an awful Vandy team and were beaten by a Mizzou team that UT had boat raced... became perfect... they were the best team in CFB. They beat two of the best 3 teams on their schedule and just couldn't do any wrong. Coaches who had looked like bumbling fools for 10 games were suddenly the best in football... only to revert to their true selves this year.

I'm sorry if that sounds like a reasonable proposition to you. It isn't.

I don't believe any of this nonsense about stolen signs costing us the SC game last year. The team didn't even show up for that game. They didn't even look the same. And everyone saying we had to lose that game for Michigan to sneak into the playoff ahead of us. Nonsense. There's so much anti-SEC bias out there in all likelihood hood Michigan would have gotten in ahead of us. Not to mention historical relevance, which isn't supposed to be a factor in choosing teams for the playoff.. ..but when there's a tie somewhere and it comes down to a program like Alabama or Michigan getting the nod, they will always get it and we won't. That's just how it is. Regardless last year's SC game is in the rear view mirror. Making excuses looks bad and changes nothing about what happened.

 

[sjt18]

I don't believe any of this nonsense about stolen signs costing us the SC game last year. The team didn't even show up for that game.

Willful ignorance. That team looked EXACTLY how a team would look if the other team knew what their play calls were going to be... including the in game frustrations.

They didn't even look the same.

But that's not the point. USCe didn't look the same... and they went from being a really bad football team barely bowl eligible to PERFECT. Not good. Not improved. Not great. They were PERFECT. Great teams like Bama and UGA do not achieve that level of perfection... yet this really bad team with a buffoon for a coach did?

And everyone saying we had to lose that game for Michigan to sneak into the playoff ahead of us. Nonsense.

Nope. Not non-sense at all.

There's so much anti-SEC bias out there in all likelihood hood Michigan would have gotten in ahead of us.

Richard Nixon's scandal was probably not necessary. It was paranoia that caused him to do what he did. This is precisely why it is NOT non-sense. Michigan had a strong motive to eliminate risks. And there wasn't anti-Clemson bias.

Not to mention historical relevance, which isn't supposed to be a factor in choosing teams for the playoff.. ..but when there's a tie somewhere and it comes down to a program like Alabama or Michigan getting the nod, they will always get it and we won't. That's just how it is.

Michigan did not enjoy that any more than UT or Clemson last year.

Regardless last year's SC game is in the rear view mirror. Making excuses looks bad and changes nothing about what happened.

Not an excuse. Do you truly not understand the difference between reasons and excuses?

If a company's information is stolen through industrial espionage resulting in a competitor gaining market share... is it "excuse making" for them to expect law enforcement to stop it? Is it excuse making to relate their recent downturn to that illegal activity... or are they just making excuses?

 

[mizzou waltz]

This was a fun read from start to finish.

And yes, Tigerboard was built in the ‘90s. 1995 or ‘96.

 

[Sarms58]

This was a fun read from start to finish.

And yes, Tigerboard was built in the ‘90s. 1995 or ‘96.

Drink gets my vote for coach of the year in SEC…he has your team playing outstanding ball.