Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9207458)

Losing Ramirez sucks. I think he's going to be a good college player.

I know the Mizzou coaches have long considered this a great in-state LB class and that's why they filled over their real need in this class (took 3 when they really wanted two). Hard to hold a spot in this class at that position, so once Ramirez started looking around, the writing was on the wall (Andy Hill and Pinkel have been spending a lot of time in the KC area checking in on JUCO DTs, DT Maliek Collins, OT Clay Rhodes - but no mention of checking in on Ramirez).

I'd imagine if either Burkett or Biesel had done the same thing as Ramirez, we'd be having the same conversation about them.

It worries me a bit that Missouri was taking 3 LBs in this class, all of whom project as MLB (Biesel for sure - and Burkett is a classic tampa 2 MLB). That's how you end up in situations where a guy like Andrew Wilson is playing in space all the time, against WRs.

There is no wiggle room for Pinkel and staff. They must turn some of the recruiting around. And they must turn the 2013 season around from where it was.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9208519)

And that will happen next year, if he doesn't turn it around.

Best outcome probably would have been Pinkel deciding to retire now, but that didn't happen. And honestly, trying to swim through the available coaching ranks this year against some of the competition would have been tough.

When Pinkel decided he wanted to come back, it put Alden in a tough situation. I'm not Alden's biggest fan, traditionally, but I agree with the decision to give Pinkel a chance to fix it. That is going to pay off when Alden is hiring Pinkel's replacement.

Alden's next hire will be incredibly critical. Pinkel is the best coach Missouri has had in 50 years (2001-current vs. 1959-1969 from Dan Devine). This is not, despite many thoughts, an easy job. The honest fact is that, no matter what, Missouri is ALWAYS going to be staring up at Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M and Tennessee when it comes to facilities, money in the program, etc. It currently is staring up at South Carolina and Arkansas, too.

This is the 8th-10th best job in a 14-team league, with upside that tops out at 7th or 8th best. To be more than what Pinkel was able to achieve prior to this year - consistent top 25-30 program (not talking about poll rankings - talking about wins, consistency, etc) - Missouri is going to need a truly elite coach. Those aren't exactly growing on trees.

I think it's easy to criticize Pinkel (something that he has made easier in the past year - honestly, I think he's lost some fire, some edge). But I think it's also easy to lose perspective and just think of him as an incompetent dummy.

I'm not saying this to excuse or apologize for Pinkel. His staff is at a crossroads and has a big hill to climb to prove it can turn it around (especially if he stays internal for the OC position).

I'm saying this because - to get back to my point in the third paragraph - Alden would have been in a tough spot if he forced Pinkel out or fired him after one losing season.

From an outside perspective, to a potential coaching hire, if Pinkel is fired, that's a warning sign. What does Alden say if asked:

"The guy I'd be replacing is the most successful coach at your school in 50 years. He's third on your all time wins list. And you fired him after one bad season that was devastated by injuries. Entering that season, his program had more games than all but a handful of programs.How do I know you won't do the same to me?"

Alden is giving Pinkel a chance to right the ship his way. That's an indicator of a good athletic director. By all indications, Pinkel has called in all his chips and is betting it all on the 2013 season. He's got no markers or political capital left.

He just went all in and got called. He's standing up and turning the cards over. Time will tell if he's holding pocket aces, Ace-Jack suited, a straight draw, or trash.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9208844)

You seem to be saying that Mizzou going 2-6 is evidence that the SEC move was a bad choice...yet you also claim that the Big 12 is a tougher conference.

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9209304)

You seem to be saying that the SEC is the better conference (which obviously is why you stunk) and that for some odd reason you like being 2-6 better than being competitive.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9209317)

I don't think being in a different conference caused us to suck. Sucking caused us to suck. We might have won another game or two in the Big 12, but big deal. The best players in the country want to play in the SEC. Mizzou is going to be just fine. Kansas fans, on the other hand, should worry about Kansas. When you don't beat a single D-1 team, and the season is called an IMPROVEMENT, you've taken suck to a new level.

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9209330)

Keep deluding yourself you might won "another game or two" in the Big 12. You were 9th in the Sagarin's among Big 12 teams. Even behind Iowa State. By that metric, you were looking at a 1-8 record had you stayed.


It's possible you could've beaten Tech (#27) or TCU (26) or WVU (28) in Columbia. But then, you lost to Vandy (31) there so even that's doubtful.

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 9209349)

Going to the SEC was, definitively, the correct move. Not even close.

We appreciate the concern and angst of other fans, though.

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9208804)

Why should they move on from him? Pinkel was an ardent supporter of the (now disastrous) move to SEC football. It seems odd you'd move on from him a year after he was so instrumental in making such a huge decision for the University.



They need to allow him enough time to prove his viewpoint on the move. 1 year is not enough.

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 9209426)

Did you support KU's disastrous decision to stay in the Big 12-4+2?

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9209446)

How has it been disastrous? The Big 12 is great for KU. We get to leech off the TV contract that the football schools like Texas and OU create for us, while keeping our own Tier III revenue from our basketball inventory. We'll make $28M next year in the conference, so we'd take a pay cut to go elsewhere.

Plus, the Big 12 super-secretly went behind the scenes to give KU that undeserved Orange Bowl bid. So they got our backs.

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 9209448)

Are you basing great vs. disaster on football wins or money? Serious question.

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9209457)

We weren't winning games in any BCS conference last year so I'm not sure what your question is.

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 9209472)

Per you, Mizzou made a mistake because of their record. Per you, KU loves the Big whatever due to money.

Shouldn't you at least feign consistency?

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 9209446)

How has it been disastrous? The Big 12 is great for KU. We get to leech off the TV contract that the football schools like Texas and OU create for us, while keeping our own Tier III revenue from our basketball inventory. We'll make $28M next year in the conference, so we'd take a pay cut to go elsewhere.

Plus, the Big 12 super-secretly went behind the scenes to give KU that undeserved Orange Bowl bid. So they got our backs.