Question for those that were at the game

Got an opinion about the Tigers? Let's hear it.

[Complete Mizzou coverage on STLtoday.com]

Moderator: STLtoday Forum Moderators

1983cougar
Forum User
Posts: 90
Joined: 05 Jun 2024 19:16 pm

Question for those that were at the game

Post by 1983cougar »

Zollers only completed 7 passes. Are the receivers not getting any separation (an ongoing issue) or bad protection or bad play calling? My guess is some combination of the three. I also realize that he is a freshman QB making his first start so that probably has a little something to do with the results.
dhsux
Forum User
Posts: 3858
Joined: 23 May 2024 17:18 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by dhsux »

I wasn't at the game but he was throwing into coverage most every time.

Things were tight out there.
onemizzou
Forum User
Posts: 373
Joined: 23 Sep 2024 08:51 am

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by onemizzou »

I want at the game but there were no open receivers. I don't think he threw to even one open receiver all day. The passes that were caught were great catches by the receivers with defenders draped all over them. This is a scheme problem more than a receiver problem. The scheme is so simple that the defenders know where the receivers are going and just play the route they know it's there. Kirby Moore needs to find an opportunity elsewhere.
11WSChamps
Forum User
Posts: 3973
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 11WSChamps »

The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
onemizzou
Forum User
Posts: 373
Joined: 23 Sep 2024 08:51 am

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by onemizzou »

11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 11:36 am The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
I'm not a fan of the passing attack and my only concern is if Drink is the one holding Kirby back. If not, then Kirby definitely has to go. We can't afford to lose Zollers and Olugbode and we will if the passing game doesn't improve dramatically over the next three games.

Auburn thrashed Vandy's defense (at Vandy) and our starting QB was only able to get us 3 points in a half against them. That's a very real indicator of bad game planning.
11WSChamps
Forum User
Posts: 3973
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 11WSChamps »

onemizzou wrote: 09 Nov 2025 12:26 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 11:36 am The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
I'm not a fan of the passing attack and my only concern is if Drink is the one holding Kirby back. If not, then Kirby definitely has to go. We can't afford to lose Zollers and Olugbode and we will if the passing game doesn't improve dramatically over the next three games.

Auburn thrashed Vandy's defense (at Vandy) and our starting QB was only able to get us 3 points in a half against them. That's a very real indicator of bad game planning.
Like I said if the passing game doesn't greatly improve then Moore is gone.

MU under Drinkwitz has shown a very good rushing scheme with every back he's had here. The same can't be said in the passing game. You have to have a better balance and explosive plays to beat teams at the higher level.

The offense is way to predictable and if you're not going move off Drinkwitz then he has to move off Moore.

People are bagging on Zollers because they don't know any better. The kid has to play in these games so he can be coached up. Yesterday was a learning experience albeit a painful one but talent wise he's the best QB Drinkwitz has had and with these next three games and perhaps a bowl game plus a full offseason hexshould be ready to fulfill that potential in 2026 and beyond.
boulanger
Forum User
Posts: 452
Joined: 31 May 2024 17:59 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by boulanger »

"No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half."

I was screaming about this at the TV
Rojo Johnson
Forum User
Posts: 1025
Joined: 23 May 2024 23:25 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by Rojo Johnson »

boulanger wrote: 09 Nov 2025 14:26 pm "No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half."

I was screaming about this at the TV
They seem to spit the bit the longer they have to get ready. That was a poor game plan yesterday. Very poor.
Power74
Forum User
Posts: 160
Joined: 30 May 2024 06:43 am

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by Power74 »

They weren't letting him throw until it was second and third and long early either.
1983cougar
Forum User
Posts: 90
Joined: 05 Jun 2024 19:16 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 1983cougar »

If you have two hundred yard rushers, even though the numbers are a little misleading, it should open up the passing game. It didn't seem like they had any short passes designed to get the ball in the hands of the playmakers. It's nice that they tried to get the ball downfield but for the most part the long passes had no chance. It's really hard to be positive about the rest of the season but you've got to line up with who you've got. Hopefully the coaches can do a much better job of putting the players in a position to be successful.
bgwinn01
Forum User
Posts: 818
Joined: 31 Aug 2018 22:13 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by bgwinn01 »

1983cougar wrote: 09 Nov 2025 16:01 pm If you have two hundred yard rushers, even though the numbers are a little misleading, it should open up the passing game. It didn't seem like they had any short passes designed to get the ball in the hands of the playmakers. It's nice that they tried to get the ball downfield but for the most part the long passes had no chance. It's really hard to be positive about the rest of the season but you've got to line up with who you've got. Hopefully the coaches can do a much better job of putting the players in a position to be successful.
No swing passes, no outlet passes, no screen passes. A&M defense calling out our offensive plays before the snap. How futile could this offensive play calling be?
1983cougar
Forum User
Posts: 90
Joined: 05 Jun 2024 19:16 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 1983cougar »

bgwinn01 wrote: 09 Nov 2025 16:25 pm
1983cougar wrote: 09 Nov 2025 16:01 pm If you have two hundred yard rushers, even though the numbers are a little misleading, it should open up the passing game. It didn't seem like they had any short passes designed to get the ball in the hands of the playmakers. It's nice that they tried to get the ball downfield but for the most part the long passes had no chance. It's really hard to be positive about the rest of the season but you've got to line up with who you've got. Hopefully the coaches can do a much better job of putting the players in a position to be successful.
No swing passes, no outlet passes, no screen passes. A&M defense calling out our offensive plays before the snap. How futile could this offensive play calling be?
Exactly, I think we all hope this highly paid coaching staff can put together a decent game plan. The defense didn't play bad but they were just worn out by the end.
2forDiving
Forum User
Posts: 775
Joined: 23 May 2024 14:39 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 2forDiving »

11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 13:15 pm
onemizzou wrote: 09 Nov 2025 12:26 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 11:36 am The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
I'm not a fan of the passing attack and my only concern is if Drink is the one holding Kirby back. If not, then Kirby definitely has to go. We can't afford to lose Zollers and Olugbode and we will if the passing game doesn't improve dramatically over the next three games.

Auburn thrashed Vandy's defense (at Vandy) and our starting QB was only able to get us 3 points in a half against them. That's a very real indicator of bad game planning.
Like I said if the passing game doesn't greatly improve then Moore is gone.

MU under Drinkwitz has shown a very good rushing scheme with every back he's had here. The same can't be said in the passing game. You have to have a better balance and explosive plays to beat teams at the higher level.

The offense is way to predictable and if you're not going move off Drinkwitz then he has to move off Moore.

People are bagging on Zollers because they don't know any better. The kid has to play in these games so he can be coached up. Yesterday was a learning experience albeit a painful one but talent wise he's the best QB Drinkwitz has had and with these next three games and perhaps a bowl game plus a full offseason hexshould be ready to fulfill that potential in 2026 and beyond.
My concern is that Moore is doing exactly what Drink wants. It won’t make any difference who the OC is if Drink insists on running a basic offense that any decent DC can now game plan against without much effort. I agree with you, if this Moore’s playcalling he needs to go, I’m just not sure that is the case.
11WSChamps
Forum User
Posts: 3973
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 11WSChamps »

2forDiving wrote: 09 Nov 2025 17:11 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 13:15 pm
onemizzou wrote: 09 Nov 2025 12:26 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 11:36 am The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
I'm not a fan of the passing attack and my only concern is if Drink is the one holding Kirby back. If not, then Kirby definitely has to go. We can't afford to lose Zollers and Olugbode and we will if the passing game doesn't improve dramatically over the next three games.

Auburn thrashed Vandy's defense (at Vandy) and our starting QB was only able to get us 3 points in a half against them. That's a very real indicator of bad game planning.
Like I said if the passing game doesn't greatly improve then Moore is gone.

MU under Drinkwitz has shown a very good rushing scheme with every back he's had here. The same can't be said in the passing game. You have to have a better balance and explosive plays to beat teams at the higher level.

The offense is way to predictable and if you're not going move off Drinkwitz then he has to move off Moore.

People are bagging on Zollers because they don't know any better. The kid has to play in these games so he can be coached up. Yesterday was a learning experience albeit a painful one but talent wise he's the best QB Drinkwitz has had and with these next three games and perhaps a bowl game plus a full offseason hexshould be ready to fulfill that potential in 2026 and beyond.
My concern is that Moore is doing exactly what Drink wants. It won’t make any difference who the OC is if Drink insists on running a basic offense that any decent DC can now game plan against without much effort. I agree with you, if this Moore’s playcalling he needs to go, I’m just not sure that is the case.
At least in my experience in the college game the head coach almost always has at least some influence because after all the buck stops with him.

If I was the head coach I wouldn't think it would be prudent to be locking horns with my coordinators but rather share a philosophy in how they want both sides of the ball to function.

Im saying we're at the point where Drinkwitz needs to pivot and get an OC who frankly can have autonomy and get more out of the QB MU now has and thus move the passing game to another level which is the glaring weakness of this program right now.
2forDiving
Forum User
Posts: 775
Joined: 23 May 2024 14:39 pm

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by 2forDiving »

11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 17:19 pm
2forDiving wrote: 09 Nov 2025 17:11 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 13:15 pm
onemizzou wrote: 09 Nov 2025 12:26 pm
11WSChamps wrote: 09 Nov 2025 11:36 am The route concepts are tremendously lacking and as far as I could see the coaches didn't do Zollers any favors.

No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half.

My take is this unless things greatly improve in the passing game Drinkwitz will be forced to let Moore go hire an OC who can get Zollers to reach his potential and keep him and Olugbode content with staying here.

Drinkwitz will have next season (yes with a tougher schedule)to start winning some of these games or else the university and donors may be looking elsewhere.
I'm not a fan of the passing attack and my only concern is if Drink is the one holding Kirby back. If not, then Kirby definitely has to go. We can't afford to lose Zollers and Olugbode and we will if the passing game doesn't improve dramatically over the next three games.

Auburn thrashed Vandy's defense (at Vandy) and our starting QB was only able to get us 3 points in a half against them. That's a very real indicator of bad game planning.
Like I said if the passing game doesn't greatly improve then Moore is gone.

MU under Drinkwitz has shown a very good rushing scheme with every back he's had here. The same can't be said in the passing game. You have to have a better balance and explosive plays to beat teams at the higher level.

The offense is way to predictable and if you're not going move off Drinkwitz then he has to move off Moore.

People are bagging on Zollers because they don't know any better. The kid has to play in these games so he can be coached up. Yesterday was a learning experience albeit a painful one but talent wise he's the best QB Drinkwitz has had and with these next three games and perhaps a bowl game plus a full offseason hexshould be ready to fulfill that potential in 2026 and beyond.
My concern is that Moore is doing exactly what Drink wants. It won’t make any difference who the OC is if Drink insists on running a basic offense that any decent DC can now game plan against without much effort. I agree with you, if this Moore’s playcalling he needs to go, I’m just not sure that is the case.
At least in my experience in the college game the head coach almost always has at least some influence because after all the buck stops with him.

If I was the head coach I wouldn't think it would be prudent to be locking horns with my coordinators but rather share a philosophy in how they want both sides of the ball to function.

Im saying we're at the point where Drinkwitz needs to pivot and get an OC who frankly can have autonomy and get more out of the QB MU now has and thus move the passing game to another level which is the glaring weakness of this program right now.
Yes, I couldn’t agree more with you.
onemizzou
Forum User
Posts: 373
Joined: 23 Sep 2024 08:51 am

Re: Question for those that were at the game

Post by onemizzou »

boulanger wrote: 09 Nov 2025 14:26 pm "No easy throws to get him into the game or any rhythm which they had two weeks to script for at least the opening drive of each half."

I was screaming about this at the TV
You and me both. When I saw the first few passes I was thinking "WTH are you doing try to throw those kinds of passes with a freshman QB in his first start against the #3 team in the country?".
Post Reply