In what alternate universe should Missouri be top 25

[UConnCat]

“Separate yourself by how you play, not by how you look.”

 

[Farney]

Gotta say I side with Sophie. Obviously tucking the shorts in to your spandex looks bad but can't Nike make a few pairs of shorts that don't cover the knees for players who want them?

 

[Orangutan]

It used to be that the shorts were made short and tight and if you want to stand out you had to find a XXL pair so that you could wear them long and baggy. Now, they're made long and you have to roll them up so that you can wear them short.

Trends are a funny thing. More and more girls are wearing the shorts short again.

 

[OldAlum]

Fashion report:
I think that this years UConn uniforms have shorts that are a bit shorter and also appear less baggy - a much nicer look to me.
I can understand rolling the waistband - being shortwaisted I have had to do this to keep the waistband from being up under the bra or the crotch halfway to my knees, though I suspect it is less of a problem for college BB players! But the bunching of the bottom of the shorts? They look like bloomers! Just not done, my dear...

I'm also a bit surprised there is not an NCAA rule against some of the modifications as they seem pretty picky about some aspects.

 

[toadfoot]

I watched the game, and I have to say I was impressed by Tennessee's defense. Their offense is nothing special, even with all the talent, but I don't think UConn could have done a much better defensive job against Missouri than Tennessee did. Even on good cuts to the basket by Missouri, no one was open for more than a split second. That also reflects the team's basic athletic talent, but also a good level of hustle and intensity on defense. That (along with rebounding) is what Tennessee has always been good at, and they still are.

The 2-21 3-point shooting by Missouri had a whole lot to do with Tennessee's defensive pressure.

Is it Tennessee's defense or Missouri's poor offense. My sense is that it's some of both, but more due to Missouri's lack of quickness, poor spacing and bad offensive execution. I turned the game off in the 3rd quarter, but I honestly can't recall a single decent Missouri screen and their ball movement seemed to be very slow and deliberate. Maybe my old eyes are playing tricks on me and it was Tennessee's "astounding" quickness, but I'm think... no.

 

[Justavisitor]

Watching Missouri vs Tennessee. Missouri doesn't have anyone with quickness and they struggle just to pass to one another. Just awful.

The same universe that still has DePaul ranked.

 

[toadfoot]

The same universe that still has DePaul ranked.

Not even close to a valid comparison. 4 of DePaul's 5 losses have been against teams currently ranked in the top 15 with 3 of those on the road and the 4th at home against UConn. This was Missouri's 1st game against a team rated higher than 62 and most were in the high 100's or 200's.

 

[EricLA]

Not even close to a valid comparison. 4 of DePaul's 5 losses have been against teams currently ranked in the top 15 with 3 of those on the road and the 4th at home against UConn. This was Missouri's 1st game against a team rated higher than 62 and most were in the high 100's or 200's.

Moreover, Depaul beat 2 top 15 teams - aTm and Northwestern. Missou beat... ummm... Wake Forest and Colorado? LOL.

 

[Frodo]

their ball movement seemed to be very slow and deliberate.

Funny you should say that...I had the same feeling watching Missouri run offense...they looked like they were just following a script...at 3/4 speed.

 

[BlueDevils]

At least they didnt lose by thirty to an unranked team

 

[Striper69]

Missouri isn't a terrible team, they just haven't played anybody with a pulse really. Their ranking is a little misleading though, they haven't faced anywhere near the athleticism they'll see in conference play. I still think any team that shoots the three as well as Missouri (not tonight obviously) is a tough out.

Live by the three...

 

[Striper69]

The only thing on Missouri that impresses me is Sophie Cunningham's potential. She's really struggled tonight but you can tell there is talent there. But yeah, Missouri is nowhere near good enough to be a top 25 team just based on watching them tonight.

Unlike UCONN most teams have off nights...

 

[Txhoopsalot]

Sticking to the important stuff, I will return to the topic of shorts. I join in support of Sophie and other girls who may be a bit vain or may feel more comfortable moving in shorter shorts. In junior high, the girls wore one-piece gym outfits with legs that bloomed out. Yes, I took the loose material and rolled it into the elastic. Would it be so wrong to let the players choose shorter or longer shorts? I do not think so.

 

[CocoHusky]

The crazy thing about this game, TN hasn't made beating them look easy and if Mizzou had gone to the rim more they could've kept it closer. If you spread TN out they will give you the lane. Mizzou kept working the motion offense looking for three but were pretty easily getting into the lane and then just standing there pivoting. If anyone on Mizzou had a midrange this one would have gone down to the wire. Tennessee does have a way of making winning look hard though.

Exactly! Two pass against the TN defense and you are guaranteed to get an open shot. Three passes you get a layup. Three dribbles and a change of direction will get you fouled or at least two step by the TN defender.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Sticking to the important stuff, I will return to the topic of shorts. I join in support of Sophie and other girls who may be a bit vain or may feel more comfortable moving in shorter shorts. In junior high, the girls wore one-piece gym outfits with legs that bloomed out. Yes, I took the loose material and rolled it into the elastic. Would it be so wrong to let the players choose shorter or longer shorts? I do not think so.

weird that they cant just ask for a pair of "mediums" instead of xlarge from the equipment manager... ir get them tailored by the schools seamstress

 

[mudcat]

weird that they cant just ask for a pair of "mediums" instead of xlarge from the equipment manager... ir get them tailored by the schools seamstress

Schools seamstress????

 

[ThisJustIn]

I'LL BE IMPRESSED WHEN SHE LEARNS HOW TO WEAR A BASKETBALL UNIFORM. (the rolled-up waistband AND the tied-up bottoms are ridiculous.)

Read da blog and you would know: http://www.columbiatribune.com/spor...cle_2215358f-6e1e-5bc8-9851-dbcba560f1b2.html
At first glance, it appears Cunningham’s bunchy britches are fighting a losing battle with static cling, although that is not the case.

“I pulled my groin and hip flexor at the beginning of the season, so I have these special compression shorts” underneath her game shorts. “I hate when I sweat, the feeling of them, so I just tuck my shorts into them so I don’t feel them,” she explained. “And women just like shorter shorts in general.”

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Schools seamstress????

Doesn't every staff have Betsy Ross at their beck and call?

 

[ocoandasoc]

As a Mizzou fan and alum I've seen all but one game (Colorado -- their only previous weak showing that resulted in a close win). If you watched their other games you would know a few things about them. 1) At least half the teams in the SEC have more talent. 2) They are, for the most part, neither fast nor quick and have only mediocre ball handling. 3) They had NEVER played against the ball pressure they saw from Tenn. Warlick has been under a lot of pressure to have her team play up to their talent (I've also watched all but two of the Lady Vols games) and she admitted she has been keying her practices for a couple weeks around this first SEC matchup. They took Mizzou totally out of their game in the third quarter and they never recovered. The picks, and cuts, and plays that got them open threes (the kind their many good perimeter shooters need to be effective) against non-ranked teams would not work against a quick, physical and well-controlled press. This was Tenn's best defensive performance of the year, by far.

In essence, Mizzou paid the price for a weak non-conference schedule. But if you watched their other games you'd know that they are a better team than they showed on Monday (and Tennessee is a better team now than when they lost to Va Tech, at least defensively).

Missouri has no allusions about where they are. But winning those 13 straight to start the year has helped attendance and built some media interest. They won't beat the South Carolinas and Kentuckys on their schedule. And probably not even the Miss States and A&M. But if they can beat Auburn, Vandy, Ole Miss, Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas and Florida, they'll finish with 18 or 19 wins and a top seven finish in the SEC and that will land them their first NCAA bid in a long, long time -- and that's their goal for this year.

On a good night they CAN shoot the three, and the inside game is much improved. Freshman Cunningham and Porter are the highest ranked recruits in the team's history. Pingeton is a very good coach who has them playing team basketball and the team chemistry seems to be very good. Pingeton almost always plays at least 10 or 11 players in virtually every game. There is not a single senior in the starting five nor among their top scorers. It's too early to say whether they'll reach their goal this year or not. And they've been prone to injuries the past few years.

As far as being a Top 25 team...they would have passed the eye test up until Monday, but their best win was probably a convincing victory at St. Mary's, a team that beat Cal. Once you get past about the first 7 or 8 teams, though, there's not much to choose from. Look at Stanford's recent games. Or Kentucky's loss to Auburn. Or Duke. Louisville has looked awful once or twice and ND struggled against Pitt and Baylor lost to OkSt who then lost to IaSt. This year, more than ever perhaps, it's all going to be about the match-ups and consistent play. Mizzou now goes against a much improved Georgia and then two Top 10 teams (SC and MissST). So, yeah, that 13 and 0 and #20 ranking may well change to 13 and 4 and unranked real quick. And, of course, those are the games that will be the most watched on the tube. But because of their modest goals, Mizzou's most important games will actually be the ones they play against the LOWER-rated SEC teams and they'll need to show some consistency there if they want that top half conference finish and an NCAA bid. (Charlie Creme has them as an #8 seed, and they'd be tickled with that!)

In all honesty, the Mizzou program right now reminds me a bit of UConn right after Geno came in the late eighties when I lived in CT and would take my daughter to the games in the Fieldhouse and then in Gampel. The biggest difference might be that the Big East back then was a weak conference for women's basketball with even the strongest teams -- Providence and Villanova -- being early tourney outs, while Mizzou has to deal with a very strong SEC. I think Mizzou's SOS rating now is well into the 200's; but by the end of the year it's projected to be in the top 35. And, by then, we'll know how good this team really is.

 

[LadyVols9]

great post. Mizz has a great team that has a lot potential to upset any top team. and I agree, TN has been focused on this game for awhile. they knew how tough this game would be. TN has historically been awful at defending the 3 ball. however, I haven't seen them play that great on defense in a long, long time. they were swarming Mizz players like old school LV teams. Lobo gave the LVs a shout out for their defense. will that last? who knows. consistency has been an issue for the LVs.

good luck with the rest of the season. you guys could finish top 5 IMO. the SEC is brutal!

As a Mizzou fan and alum I've seen all but one game (Colorado -- their only previous weak showing that resulted in a close win). If you watched their other games you would know a few things about them. 1) At least half the teams in the SEC have more talent. 2) They are, for the most part, neither fast nor quick and have only mediocre ball handling. 3) They had NEVER played against the ball pressure they saw from Tenn. Warlick has been under a lot of pressure to have her team play up to their talent (I've also watched all but two of the Lady Vols games) and she admitted she has been keying her practices for a couple weeks around this first SEC matchup. They took Mizzou totally out of their game in the third quarter and they never recovered. The picks, and cuts, and plays that got them open threes (the kind their many good perimeter shooters need to be effective) against non-ranked teams would not work against a quick, physical and well-controlled press. This was Tenn's best defensive performance of the year, by far.

In essence, Mizzou paid the price for a weak non-conference schedule. But if you watched their other games you'd know that they are a better team than they showed on Monday (and Tennessee is a better team now than when they lost to Va Tech, at least defensively).

Missouri has no allusions about where they are. But winning those 13 straight to start the year has helped attendance and built some media interest. They won't beat the South Carolinas and Kentuckys on their schedule. And probably not even the Miss States and A&M. But if they can beat Auburn, Vandy, Ole Miss, Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas and Florida, they'll finish with 18 or 19 wins and a top seven finish in the SEC and that will land them their first NCAA bid in a long, long time -- and that's their goal for this year.

On a good night they CAN shoot the three, and the inside game is much improved. Freshman Cunningham and Porter are the highest ranked recruits in the team's history. Pingeton is a very good coach who has them playing team basketball and the team chemistry seems to be very good. Pingeton almost always plays at least 10 or 11 players in virtually every game. There is not a single senior in the starting five nor among their top scorers. It's too early to say whether they'll reach their goal this year or not. And they've been prone to injuries the past few years.

As far as being a Top 25 team...they would have passed the eye test up until Monday, but their best win was probably a convincing victory at St. Mary's, a team that beat Cal. Once you get past about the first 7 or 8 teams, though, there's not much to choose from. Look at Stanford's recent games. Or Kentucky's loss to Auburn. Or Duke. Louisville has looked awful once or twice and ND struggled against Pitt and Baylor lost to OkSt who then lost to IaSt. This year, more than ever perhaps, it's all going to be about the match-ups and consistent play. Mizzou now goes against a much improved Georgia and then two Top 10 teams (SC and MissST). So, yeah, that 13 and 0 and #20 ranking may well change to 13 and 4 and unranked real quick. And, of course, those are the games that will be the most watched on the tube. But because of their modest goals, Mizzou's most important games will actually be the ones they play against the LOWER-rated SEC teams and they'll need to show some consistency there if they want that top half conference finish and an NCAA bid. (Charlie Creme has them as an #8 seed, and they'd be tickled with that!)

In all honesty, the Mizzou program right now reminds me a bit of UConn right after Geno came in the late eighties when I lived in CT and would take my daughter to the games in the Fieldhouse and then in Gampel. The biggest difference might be that the Big East back then was a weak conference for women's basketball with even the strongest teams -- Providence and Villanova -- being early tourney outs, while Mizzou has to deal with a very strong SEC. I think Mizzou's SOS rating now is well into the 200's; but by the end of the year it's projected to be in the top 35. And, by then, we'll know how good this team really is.

 

[VA Huskie]

Ditto. Love the balance in your comments and the clear knowledge base. Thanks for educating us.

 

[Nuyoika]

Exactly! Two pass against the TN defense and you are guaranteed to get an open shot. Three passes you get a layup. Three dribbles and a change of direction will get you fouled or at least two step by the TN defender.

It was an ugly game but it certainly looked like TN was out there working hard. They really had to work for that win. I've watched games this year where they played ugly and won but it didn't look like they were really trying. I'm not sure if that is good or bad but I did find it interesting that the announcers were talking about how good TN defense was. Good defense is more than just what you allow your opponent to score... 20+ fouls to me is not good defense. Especially against a team that is no where near as athletic as you are.

 

[Striper69]

I liked the way Sophie didn't back down even though she had a sub-par offensive game. She stuffed Diamond twice that I can remember and got into a little tussle with one of the Tenn. bigs (and came away with a grin on her face).
The girl has got swagger and game!

 

[CocoHusky]

Doesn't every staff have Betsy Ross at their beck and call?

No but every team has a Nike rep (in your case Under Armour) rep who will gladly get you as many pairs of shorts and sneakers as you need. Since 1985 because of Villanova men every school has to account for every game Jersey, Shorts & Practice Uniform and pairs of sneakers even those issued to male practice players to the NCAA. Missing equipment is considered a secondary violation.

 

[Bgillon]

As a Mizzou fan and alum I've seen all but one game (Colorado -- their only previous weak showing that resulted in a close win). If you watched their other games you would know a few things about them. 1) At least half the teams in the SEC have more talent. 2) They are, for the most part, neither fast nor quick and have only mediocre ball handling. 3) They had NEVER played against the ball pressure they saw from Tenn. Warlick has been under a lot of pressure to have her team play up to their talent (I've also watched all but two of the Lady Vols games) and she admitted she has been keying her practices for a couple weeks around this first SEC matchup. They took Mizzou totally out of their game in the third quarter and they never recovered. The picks, and cuts, and plays that got them open threes (the kind their many good perimeter shooters need to be effective) against non-ranked teams would not work against a quick, physical and well-controlled press. This was Tenn's best defensive performance of the year, by far.

In essence, Mizzou paid the price for a weak non-conference schedule. But if you watched their other games you'd know that they are a better team than they showed on Monday (and Tennessee is a better team now than when they lost to Va Tech, at least defensively).

Missouri has no allusions about where they are. But winning those 13 straight to start the year has helped attendance and built some media interest. They won't beat the South Carolinas and Kentuckys on their schedule. And probably not even the Miss States and A&M. But if they can beat Auburn, Vandy, Ole Miss, Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas and Florida, they'll finish with 18 or 19 wins and a top seven finish in the SEC and that will land them their first NCAA bid in a long, long time -- and that's their goal for this year.

On a good night they CAN shoot the three, and the inside game is much improved. Freshman Cunningham and Porter are the highest ranked recruits in the team's history. Pingeton is a very good coach who has them playing team basketball and the team chemistry seems to be very good. Pingeton almost always plays at least 10 or 11 players in virtually every game. There is not a single senior in the starting five nor among their top scorers. It's too early to say whether they'll reach their goal this year or not. And they've been prone to injuries the past few years.

As far as being a Top 25 team...they would have passed the eye test up until Monday, but their best win was probably a convincing victory at St. Mary's, a team that beat Cal. Once you get past about the first 7 or 8 teams, though, there's not much to choose from. Look at Stanford's recent games. Or Kentucky's loss to Auburn. Or Duke. Louisville has looked awful once or twice and ND struggled against Pitt and Baylor lost to OkSt who then lost to IaSt. This year, more than ever perhaps, it's all going to be about the match-ups and consistent play. Mizzou now goes against a much improved Georgia and then two Top 10 teams (SC and MissST). So, yeah, that 13 and 0 and #20 ranking may well change to 13 and 4 and unranked real quick. And, of course, those are the games that will be the most watched on the tube. But because of their modest goals, Mizzou's most important games will actually be the ones they play against the LOWER-rated SEC teams and they'll need to show some consistency there if they want that top half conference finish and an NCAA bid. (Charlie Creme has them as an #8 seed, and they'd be tickled with that!)

In all honesty, the Mizzou program right now reminds me a bit of UConn right after Geno came in the late eighties when I lived in CT and would take my daughter to the games in the Fieldhouse and then in Gampel. The biggest difference might be that the Big East back then was a weak conference for women's basketball with even the strongest teams -- Providence and Villanova -- being early tourney outs, while Mizzou has to deal with a very strong SEC. I think Mizzou's SOS rating now is well into the 200's; but by the end of the year it's projected to be in the top 35. And, by then, we'll know how good this team really is.

Another great example of why this site is so good. Great post; informative, objective, and optimistic on behalf of your team. Well done!