COLUMBIA, Mo. 鈥 Greedy are the eyes of the leaky secondary.
At least in the case of Missouri鈥檚 safeties, anyway.
The most glaring flaw of the No. 20 Tigers鈥 4-0 start to the season is an appalling tendency to lose opposing receivers and give up big plays in pass coverage. It鈥檚 not a new issue, having dogged Mizzou at times in 2024, but it has become a pressing one.
MU coach Eli Drinkwitz is putting his foot down 鈥 not that he hasn鈥檛 been aware of the problem before but that this week is the one in which the coverage issues must be fixed.
鈥淭his is getting ridiculous, how porous our pass defense is,鈥 he said after Missouri beat South Carolina over the weekend, 鈥渁nd that鈥檚 got to get shored up in a hurry. ... That crap has got to get corrected.鈥
One assumes he might have used even stronger language in film studies and meetings since that game because coverage breakdowns are really the sole reason the Gamecocks even made it a close game. South Carolina rushed for a net loss of 9 yards on the ground yet threw for 302 yards, picking up a whopping 16.8 yards per completion. Mizzou, for reference, gained 10.7 yards per completion.
People are also reading…
The Gamecocks鈥 two touchdowns came on passes of 49 and 24 yards. They wound up with five passing plays that picked up 30 or more yards 鈥 rarely after the catch, either.
This was receivers getting open behind the secondary and South Carolina quarterback LaNorris Sellers finding them easily. It鈥檚 also not news to anyone who watched the game. Perhaps that鈥檚 why Drinkwitz and some MU players were blunt about the issue when they met with the media on Tuesday.
鈥淭he main thing is bad eyes in our zone coverage,鈥 Drinkwitz said.
鈥淪ome of the guys are being greedy with their eyes,鈥 hybrid safety Daylan Carnell explained, 鈥渢rying to rob things low that鈥檚 not really their job.鈥
That, in a nutshell, is the issue. Mizzou鈥檚 safeties are looking too much into the backfield and at low routes that aren鈥檛 their responsibility, leading them to move out of position. As that鈥檚 happening, cornerbacks are struggling to cover deep routes without safety help over the top, leading to unfavorable matchups for the Tigers and deep completions for their opponents.
Which is exactly what happened on South Carolina鈥檚 first touchdown of the game, a 49-yard completion from Sellers to wideout Vandrevius Jacobs early in the second quarter.
The defensive play call, Drinkwitz explained Tuesday, was a version of Cover 2. Cornerbacks would be responsible for picking up wideouts, but there would be two high safeties available behind them as helpers 鈥 meant to keep a lid on the play, so to speak.
Jacobs was lined up on the right side of the play, with cornerback Toriano Pride Jr. covering him. Safety Santana Banner was the assigned help defender on that play.
The Gamecocks set up the pass with a play-action fake handoff, which sucked in Banner for a moment. This is part of the 鈥済reedy eyes鈥 that Carnell was talking about.
鈥淪ometimes we鈥檙e stopping the run so well, some of the (deeper) guys want to get in on that too,鈥 Carnell said.
Pride became isolated in coverage, with Banner too shallow to be able to help.
鈥淥ur safety on the divide got off, left Toriano in a vulnerable position,鈥 Drinkwitz said.
Sellers made the deep touch pass over the top to a fully open receiver.
South Carolina鈥檚 second touchdown, a 24-yard pass from Sellers to wide receiver Brian Rowe Jr. later in the second quarter, was a bit more complicated.
The play ended with quite the defining image of Missouri鈥檚 secondary: Rowe, casually stepping into the end zone, with safety Jalen Catalon and cornerback Drey Norwood looking at each other with raised arms 鈥 the kind of body language that makes it immediately clear something went wrong.
The Tigers were also supposed to be in a Cover 2 look for that play, with Catalon helping Norwood deep.
That coverage became complicated by the combination of routes the Gamecocks ran from the right side of their formation. The outside receiver went about 10 yards downfield and cut inside on a 鈥渟it鈥 route to try to find a gap over the middle of the field. The slot receiver ran outside first, then streaked deep along the numbers on a 鈥渨heel鈥 route.
Norwood stuck with the wheel but couldn鈥檛 keep pace 鈥 he needed Catalon鈥檚 help. The safety, though, had become preoccupied with the other receiver and seemed unaware of what was happening on the outside.
By the time Catalon caught on, the South Carolina receiver had already found an open lane to run toward the pylon. Another well-thrown ball from Sellers produced the score.
鈥淲e didn鈥檛 have a holistic understanding of who was covering the sit route, so our divide safety wanted to cross stems,鈥 Drinkwitz said. 鈥淗e saw one open, so he thought he needed to cover that 鈥 didn鈥檛 expand his vision and left the wheel route open. That鈥檚 both player and coaching responsibility. You鈥檝e got to understand the whole part. He understood the part but didn鈥檛 understand the whole. That鈥檚 on teaching.鈥
On South Carolina鈥檚 second-longest completion of the game, a 43-yard pass that reached the MU 2-yard line, the issue was a safety not following the nuanced rules to the play call.
It was third down and short, so the Tigers wanted to keep a defender assigned to Sellers as a 鈥渟py鈥 in case he tried to escape the pocket and throw.
鈥淲e were in a quarterback-attacking coverage where if they were in shotgun, we were going to have a safety assigned to the quarterback in the run game,鈥 Drinkwitz said. 鈥淭hey came out under center ...and we didn鈥檛 make the right adjustment to that.鈥
The Gamecocks only sent two routes downfield, trying to sell play action by keeping more blockers home as if they were going to run. Each receiver was picked up by an MU corner 鈥 Stephen Hall was on Jacobs, who was the eventual target 鈥 and there should鈥檝e been a high safety helping in a Cover 1 look because Sellers went under center for the snap.
Instead, the safety bit on the play action, and by the time Jacobs had made it 10 yards downfield with a head of steam, the safety help was actually closer to the line of scrimmage than he鈥檇 been when the ball was snapped.
Hall was beaten one-on-one 鈥 鈥淲e didn鈥檛 play the ball in the air very well,鈥 Drinkwitz said 鈥 and the Tigers were burned.
So while defensive coverages and contingencies are far more complicated than this, Mizzou鈥檚 issue seems to be two-pronged: Against fast, crafty receivers, the team鈥檚 corners need help from high safeties. Yet those safeties 鈥 especially when play-action is involved 鈥 tend to be looking into and moving down toward the backfield, neglecting their duties to help the outside defenders.
What鈥檚 the fix? It remains to be seen whether Missouri can sort it out.
If they can鈥檛, a receiver like Alabama鈥檚 Ryan Williams could be in for a field day in a few weeks, and the ultra-speedy receiving corps of Auburn and Texas A&M will find themselves wide open.
But if the Tigers can fix this, a defense that looks so promising up front when it comes to stopping the run and pressuring quarterbacks could cement itself as one of the best in the Southeastern Conference.
鈥淥nce we clean up these small mistakes from that back seven 鈥 because we鈥檙e all involved in that, front all the way to the back 鈥 once we clean these things up, we鈥檙e going to be a really hard defense to score on,鈥 middle linebacker Josiah Trotter said.
