×îÐÂÐÓ°ÉÔ­´´

That’s the root cause for some of the angst stemming from Mizzou’s 27-24 loss to the Crimson Tide: There was an undeniable opportunity to secure the kind of program-defining win that eludes coach Eli Drinkwitz in his sixth season with the school.

But the lack of change can also be a cautious source of optimism.

No. 16 Missouri (5-1, 1-1) is very much alive as far as securing a spot in the College Football Playoff. Conventional wisdom, historical precedent and predictive analytics all support that notion.

“We lost,� Drinkwitz said after Saturday’s defeat, “but all is not lost. I mean, that’s the reality of college football.�

The new reality of college football, that is, where multiple-loss teams can and do make the CFP — particularly coming out of the Southeastern Conference.

It helped MU’s stock that it lost to Alabama in such close fashion.

Algorithms punished the Tigers very little for the result. (Pollsters were also gentle, dropping Missouri only two spots to No. 16.)

Mizzou registered a 72% postgame win expectancy according to ESPN’s SP+ metric, which is a wordy way of saying that teams with the kind of stats the Tigers had against Bama would usually win. That computerized consolation prize meant MU remained ranked eighth in the nation in SP+.

In ESPN’s Football Power Index, Missouri actually moved up three spots, passing Vanderbilt, Michigan and Louisiana State. Its season-long win projection, according to FPI, ticked downward only slightly to 8.4 wins.

But getting to eight or even nine wins is not the target for this Mizzou team, a group led by high-profile transfer portal additions whom Drinkwitz labeled his most talented yet.

It’s the playoff the Tigers are eyeing.

Their chances of getting there did take a hit with the loss to Bama. ESPN dropped MU’s playoff chances from 33.4% to 21.4%.

That gives Mizzou the 10th-best playoff chances among SEC teams, which is the lowest among the league’s programs that are still in the mix for a playoff spot. (Six have been more or less eliminated after picking up three losses.)

Three of the other nine SEC playoff contenders are on MU’s schedule: Vanderbilt, Texas A&M and Oklahoma. Those games now become far more important for the Tigers.

They can still take another loss and have a playoff-caliber resume: 10-2 will very, very likely be enough for SEC teams to make it in, given the strength of the conference.

Even after a relatively lackluster nonconference slate, Missouri has the 23rd-strongest resume in college football right now. Its remaining schedule is ranked as the 13th-toughest, so the final result shouldn’t have an issue stacking up with other programs’ tallies.

Before that can start to matter, though, the Tigers will need to start winning their way through six remaining SEC games — four of which are on the road.

That starts this weekend against an Auburn team that will be frustrated and desperate after an 0-3 start to its SEC slate. Though Mizzou has opened as a road underdog for that game, it needs to be a win to stay on pace for a spot in the playoff. Losing at Jordan-Hare Stadium would erase MU’s margin for error and just about sink playoff talk.

If Missouri can make it out of Auburn, it has two very winnable games left against Mississippi State and Arkansas, then the playoff-caliber games against Vanderbilt, Texas A&M and Oklahoma.

It sounds challenging. It will be.

The encouraging precedent for the Tigers is what they managed in 2023, when they finished the regular season ninth in the CFP Selection Committee’s rankings, which would’ve been good for a spot in the 12-team playoff had it started a year earlier.

In 2023, Mizzou started the season 5-0 with a perfect showing in its nonconference games and a solid if unspectacular win in its SEC opener. It then hosted Louisiana State and eventual Heisman Trophy winner Jayden Daniels in Week 6, losing a back-and-forth game in part due to a late interception.

Sounds a bit like the first half of Missouri’s 2025 season, no?

Mizzou showed its grit in 2023 by recovering from the LSU loss to beat a ranked Kentucky team on the road. Maybe Auburn under the lights this year could be the equivalent.

The 2023 Tigers lost at Georgia but beat South Carolina, Tennessee, Florida and Arkansas to finish 10-2. The key to beating the Vols and Gators, in particular, was improvement from what MU was earlier in the season.

So now, the course forward for Mizzou will be determined by whether it can follow the path of that ’23 squad that showed how to get to 10-2 at Missouri.

“We went toe to toe with (Alabama),� Drinkwitz said. “A lot of things we can get better at. Didn’t have our ‘A’ game today. Got to go back and find it.�

Mizzou’s Zion Young, who wasn’t even part of the play, got in the receiver’s face and was called for taunting.

Automatic first down.

The duality of the defense, right there.

Now ranked No. 16, Mizzou actually fared OK in the 27-24 loss to now-No. 6 Alabama, but mental mistakes and a lack of timely stops doomed the D. Yes, quarterback Beau Pribula’s subpar play — and the lack of runs by Ahmad Hardy — were primary reasons Mizzou’s not 6-0 right now. But the defense deserves a microscope, for better or worse (of which we saw both Saturday in Columbia).

“The first two drives were penalty-driven drives,� said the safety Carnell, whose teammate Marvin Burks Jr. was ejected on the second drive for targeting. “I mean, spotting the team 14 points ... giving them a lot of yards off penalties is just never really going to end well.�

Alas, it ended in a brutal three-point loss at home. But it wasn’t only the penalties. Mizzou’s defense didn’t rise up against the Tide on fourth downs. Bama was 3 for 3, including a fourth-quarter fourth-and-1 — a brilliant Ty Simpson pass and Jamarion Miller catch near the left sideline.

Heading into this game, from these newspaper pages to the radio airwaves to the online message boards, Mizzou’s secondary was discussed, sometimes with disgust. While the Tigers defense entered Saturday with elite stats (No. 2 in the land with 203.8 yards allowed), the secondary as a whole — holy moly — was holey. Quarterbacks from Kansas and South Carolina took advantage and made game-swaying plays. And here was Heisman candidate Simpson coming to town.

So credit where credit’s due: Mizzou’s secondary didn’t have any major breakdowns. Yes, on another fourth-and-1 — this one from the 1 — Simpson completed a touchdown pass and a couple of Missouri players were animated with each other on the field. But that’s a high-percentage play, regardless of the down.

“I feel like we did a pretty good job against the pass,� Carnell said. “(Simpson) had 200 passing yards. That’s his season low. I mean, he made big-time plays when they needed him. ... But overall, I feel like we did pretty decent against the pass.�

Mizzou is known for its defensive line — and even against the NFL prospects on Bama’s offensive line, the Tigers got a respectable amount of pressure on Simpson.

Much has been made about Young, who entered this season with hype on hype. He did commit another dumb penalty on that same first drive — a third-down offsides. But he also brought that X factor of his: his knack for causing fumbles (or scooping fumbles).

On the very first play of the third quarter, No. 9 in black and gold bulldozed from the left side, simultaneously sacking and stripping Simpson. Fellow defensive end Damon Wilson II recovered the football (incidentally, it was Alabama’s first lost fumble of the year). Mizzou had possession — immediately in the red zone. Three plays later, Pribula’s touchdown run tied it at 17-17, essentially resetting the game.

Oh, and how about Wilson — the man’s a menace! The former defensive end for Georgia is a Missouri bulldog — and he had arguably his best game against the best team Mizzou’s faced. The acclaimed statistics site Pro Football Focus gave him a 74.4 rating for the Bama game, which was fourth-highest on the defense and best of the defensive lineman. He now has 5.5 sacks for the season — tied for 10th in the nation.

And his first sack was particularly impactful.

In the second quarter, Mizzou was down 17-7. The Tigers got the ball ... and went three and out. A Bama score could’ve made the score insurmountable. But on third-and-4, Wilson penetrated the Tide line and sacked Simpson. Bama punted — and Mizzou responded with a field goal on its drive.

And really, on the afternoon, Wilson and the defense did a commendable job against Bama’s run offense. The visitors averaged just 2.8 yards per carry. And Simpson, not a running back, had the team’s longest run at 20 yards. So yeah, a lot to like about Missouri’s defense, even in a loss. But it was still a loss.

And Mizzou’s defense had trouble getting off the field. The time of possession was unbalanced. Bama even had a nine-minute drive late (which resulted in a field goal).

So you mix that with the early penalties, the spotted 14 points, the first-quarter ejection of a starter and troubles in big moments ... and like Mizzou as a team, the defense still has room for improvement.

Unfortunately, this was a prove-it game.

All of that, plus complete snap counts, is below.

If this is your first PFF rodeo, or you just need a reminder: PFF is not perfect in its grades, as you'll notice soon enough. They're just a convenient, simple way to quantify player performances — and nothing more. Rest assured nobody on the MU coaching staff is making decisions based on PFF grades.

The site bases all of its grades, including college ones, on an "NFL standard": 90-100 is elite, 85-89 is Pro Bowl caliber, 70-84 is starting level, 60-69 means backup and anything between 0-59 is replaceable.

With that in mind, this week's findings:

Offensive line

• LT Cayden Green, 56 snaps, 62.8 grade
• LG Dominick Giudice, 56 snaps, 67.4
• C Connor Tollison, 56 snaps, 68.5
• RG Curtis Peagler, 56 snaps, 59.1
• RT Keagen Trost, 56 snaps, 70.6

There was better synergy between the offensive line and quarterback Beau Pribula, and the 11 pressures allowed by the O-line were less than the 12 given up in Week 2 against Kansas. Three were deemed the responsibility of Trost, while the lone sack blamed on the line was attributed to Peagler.

Green returned from his two-game absence to start and play the whole game, but clearly was not trusted by the coaching staff to help much in run blocking. Of the Tigers' 21 designed runs, only four went to the left and none went outside of Green. On the opposite side of the line, for example, Mizzou ran the ball off Trost's outside shoulder nine times. 

On a day where there was broader bemusement about MU's run-game choices, that's another wrinkle.

Quarterback

• Beau Pribula, 56 snaps, 52.9 grade

Not a good grade and not a good day for Missouri's first-year starter. For all of the MU coaching staff's talk of accuracy, he completed just 57.1% of his passes and has posted completion percentages below 60% in both of the Southeastern Conference games he's played in.

Pribula took 3.44 seconds to throw the ball, on average, which is by far the longest tally of the season. The only games in which he's been above 2.7 seconds in time to throw were Alabama and South Carolina (3.06), which is where the struggle to complete passes came in to play.

The Crimson Tide rarely blitzed, only sending extra rushers on seven of Pribula's 34 dropbacks. Instead, they seemed content to let him throw. With clean pockets, Pribula went 12 for 22 for 123 yards, two touchdowns and two interceptions.

Running backs

• Ahmad Hardy, 31 snaps, 61.1 grade
• Jamal Roberts, 26 snaps, 70.7 grade

Hardy was head-scratchingly limited in this game by Mizzou's abandonment of the run, and he posted his season-low rushing total: 52 yards. Somehow, according to PFF, he posted 53 yards after contact. Maybe it's a glitch, or maybe he ground out all of his yards and then some after taking hits.

For one brief stretch of the game, Hardy was back in the locker room, but that didn't lead to all that much usage for Roberts, either. The latter's lone carry of the second half was the fake punt.

Receivers and tight ends

• TE Brett Norfleet, 52 snaps, 70.1 grade
• WR Marquis Johnson, 49 snaps, 54.7
• WR Joshua Manning, 41 snaps, 58.8
• SR Kevin Coleman Jr., 29 snaps, 51.9
• TE Jordon Harris, 20 snaps, 44.9
• WR Donovan Olugbode, 15 snaps, 85.9
• SR Daniel Blood, 7 snaps, 54.8
• WR Xavier Loyd, 2 snaps, 60.0

If there's an offensive positive to be gleaned from this game, it's Olugbode, who finished as MU's leading receiver with a late flurry of catches to try to lead a miraculous comeback. He caught all three of his catchable targets, including one that was contested. 

Coleman's 2 receiving yards is his lowest-ever output in an FBS game. He was targeted only three times. 

Norfleet continued to be a solid piece of the receiving game, with three catches on four targets and 22 of his 38 yards coming after the catch.

Defensive line

• DT Chris McClellan, 50 snaps, 69.3 grade
• DE Damon Wilson II, 52 snaps, 74.4
• DE Zion Young, 51 snaps, 61.5
• DT Sterling Webb, 47 snaps, 62.8
• DT Marquis Gracial, 29 snaps, 73.7
• DE Langden Kitchen, 24 snaps, 70.8
• DE Darris Smith, 23 snaps, 61.1
• DT Jalen Marshall, 20 snaps, 61.4
• DE Nate Johnson, 8 snaps, 75.2

It's performances like this one that show why Mizzou was so eager to add Wilson out of the transfer portal from Georgia. He notched five quarterback pressures, two of which were sacks and made a 7-yard tackle for a loss in pass coverage. That's high-end production from one of the SEC's best edge rushers.

McClellan managed four pressures of his own, while Young posted three and a sack. Playing 60 snaps is an impressive workload for McClellan, a 323-pound defensive tackle who'd never played more than 37 in a game this season.

Linebackers

• Josiah Trotter, 70 snaps, 69.4 grade
• Nicholas Rodriguez, 33 snaps, 64.8
• Khalil Jacobs, 33 snaps, 79.2
• Triston Newson, 21 snaps, 74.3

On the QB pressures train, Trotter registered four and a sack while Jacobs added two and a sack: a solid day's work of blitzing from the linebackers.

As a group, these four didn't miss a tackle, which is always solid.

Rodriguez, level on snaps with Jacobs, played more than usual, at least relative to the rotation here. His speed seemed to help with chase-down situations.

Defensive backs

• STAR Daylan Carnell, 77 snaps, 76.4
• S Jalen Catalon, 62 snaps, 76.7
• CB Stephen Hall, 57 snaps, 58.0
• S Santana Banner, 56 snaps, 67.8
• CB Drey Norwood, 56 snaps, 62.7
• CB Toriano Pride Jr., 43 snaps, 55.3
• S Trajen Greco, 21 snaps, 60.0
• S Marvin Burks Jr., 14 snaps, 53.8

This was Carnell's best game of the season, with five tackles and a low passer rating allowed when targeting him. He was only off the field for one defensive snap, which is also impressive.

After Burks was ejected for a targeting penalty, Banner came in and also impressed. He was targeted four times but only allowed one catch, which came on a perimeter play behind the line of scrimmage. 

Missouri continues to rotate its cornerbacks, though Hall and Norwood seemed to be the preferred tandem.

As a whole, the secondary was improved in that it held Alabama quarterback Ty Simpson to 200 hard-won yards and did not concede much via complete coverage breakdowns.

Another ill-timed tally went on that list Saturday, when the Crimson Tide beat Mizzou 27-24.

Tollison, asked what the difference between MU and Alabama was, looked down at the printed-out box score in front of him. He wasn’t looking for anything he didn’t already know.

“One for 10 on third down,� he said, scanning the sheet. “Wherever that’s at.�

That’s how Missouri fared on third downs, in case it wasn’t clear, which was a continual offensive struggle against the Crimson Tide. Alabama went 6-for-15 and converted all three of the fourth downs it attempted.

“Ultimately, we just had too many critical mistakes in critical situations to win,� Tigers coach Eli Drinkwitz said. “Third downs in the first half on defense, third downs the whole game on offense, and then fourth-down conversions.�

On a day when MU’s offensive approach deviated from its normal devotion to the run and its overall effectiveness suffered, third downs illustrate the depth and implications of the struggle.

Mizzou’s lone successful third down conversion came at the start of the second quarter, when tailback Ahmad Hardy gained 9 yards on third and 1.

That was one of only two third downs on which Hardy touched the ball. And it was the only time the Tigers converted third and short (defined as third and 4 yards or less to go).

Across the 10 third down tries, MU ran the ball four times. That itself is a deviation from the norm: Through the first five games of this season, the Tigers ran on 52% of their offensive plays across all downs and distances.

Two of those were Hardy carries. Another was a scramble from Beau Pribula that didn’t gain any yards. The other was a designed run for Pribula on which he fumbled, requiring a teammate to fall on top of the ball.

There was also a sack, which counts as a rushing attempt in college football but wasn’t really Missouri trying to run.

That leaves five third downs on which Pribula threw the ball. His tally there: one completion for 7 yards and two interceptions.

“Obviously wasn’t good enough,� Pribula said of his overall performance. “My job is to lead scoring drives so we score more points. Wasn’t able to do that.�

Part of the issue was that Mizzou was stuck in third down so often in the first place. It was lackluster results on first and second down that got the Tigers in those situations.

“I don’t know the statistics behind it, but I feel like we were in third and long a good bit and just couldn’t find a rhythm,� Pribula said.

“We need to find a rhythm (to) stay out of third down. Ten third downs is a lot for the lack of time we had on the field.�

To his latter point, sort of: Mizzou faced a third down every 2.1 minutes it had the ball. Alabama, meanwhile, faced third down once every 2.5 minutes. There’s a difference there, albeit not a vast one.

And the Crimson Tide actually saw longer third downs (6 yards to go, on average) than Missouri did (5.8).

But the Tide gained 5.5 yards per third down while the Tigers only got 1.8.

“You gotta stay on schedule when it comes to offense,� Tollison said. “Third and 2 is a lot easier than third and 9.�

After the game, Drinkwitz was not especially eager to diagnose his discontent with the rushing attack or lack thereof. Asked by the Post-Dispatch about the difference between MU’s first drive, when it ran five times to great effect, and the rest of the game, he offered a couple of different deflections.

“They’ve got a good football team,� he said. “We just didn’t get it done today. Not gonna assign blame to anybody other than the head football coach. It’s my responsibility to get our team ready to go. We had ourselves a chance at the end of the game. So, it’s my responsibility.�

When the Post-Dispatch followed up to ask whether Alabama did anything to deny MU the ability to run, Drinkwitz wasn’t any more verbose.

“I don’t know. I have to watch it,� he said. “I’m not going to make a judgment on that until I watch the game. It’s a good question. It’s a legit question. I just, I don’t know.�

Perhaps — though he was careful not to admit this — his gripe was with the playcalling of offensive coordinator Kirby Moore. Maybe it was the execution of his players.

And despite the unwillingness to run and inability to convert on third downs, Mizzou only lost by three points. Still, a loss is a loss and those are among the reasons why.

“We didn’t get off the field on fourth downs and didn’t stay on the field on third downs,� Drinkwitz said.

You can call that assessment simplistic. You can make the case that’s overdoing it to reduce a highly competitive clash between a pair of Top 15 teams that went down to the final minutes game to who had the ball in his hands more. That’s fine.

Nobody can deny that Simpson left his imprint on the outcome of the game especially in crunch time. If Alabama needed yards, points or a big conversion, Simpson repeatedly provided.

The numbers weren’t gaudy. Simpson passed for a season-low 200 yards, but he threw three touchdowns and every yard he accumulated mattered. Alabama converted all three of his fourth-down tries in the fourth quarter, and each came on exceedingly back-breaking completion by Simpson.

“He made big-time plays when they needed them,� Mizzou senior safety Daylan Carnell said of Simpson. “He’s a real good player. That fourth down he converted on the run, that’s just a great ball. Great players make great plays, and he made a play for his team and helped them win the game. But overall, I feel like we did pretty decent against the pass.�

Carnell reference a fourth-and-1 rollout by Simpson at the Mizzou-41 to keep a drive alive with 10:23 remaining. Simpson ran right, forced a defender to commit to him and then flipped the ball to running back Jamarion Miller for 10-yard gain.

Later in the quarter on the drive that ultimately lead to Alabama’s winning points, Simpson dropped a 29-yard pass through a small window between defenders and into the arms of Lotzier Brooks on fourth and 8.

Simpson capped that drive with a 1-yard touchdown on fourth and goal when defensive confusion allowed a receiver to break open uncovered in the end zone.

For some reason Hardy, the nation’s leading rusher entering the weekend (146 yards per game), didn’t get that same opportunity to help his offense.

The primary offensive catalyst all season for the Tigers, Hardy worked in tandem with the offensive line to give that unit an identity and an attitude through the first five games — five wins — yet his presence wasn’t felt with anything resembling the quantity or volume in Saturday’s 27-24 loss at Faurot Field.

The Tigers averaged 5.8 yards per rush in the game. Hardy, who carried the ball 103 times in the first five games, carried just 12 times (52 yards) against the most formidable defense his team faced all season. He touched the ball just 14 times in the game.

Entering the fourth quarter, the Tigers trailed 20-17 after the defense held inside it’s own 5-yard line and forced Alabama to kick a field goal. Hardy carried the ball two times on the opening drive of the fourth quarter, picked up six total yards and then didn’t carry the ball again for the rest of the game.

His only other touches were a pair of receptions as a check down receiver for quarterback Beau Pribula.

The Tigers ran the ball just five times in the fourth quarter, and one of those came on a fake punt when Jamal Roberts came up just short of converting.

So did Alabama do something to take the run away from the Tigers in the second half, or did the Tigers get away from it own their own?

“I don’t know. I have to watch it,� Mizzou head coach Eli Drinkwitz said. “I’m not going to make a judgment on that until I watch the game. It’s a good question. It’s a legit question. I just, I don’t know.�

The Tigers registered the third-highest rushing offense in Football Bowl Subdivision (292 yards per game) through five games.

Saturday, they ran the ball more in the second quarter (12 times) than in the second half.

In response to a question about trouble getting the run game going, senior center Connor Tollison replied, “We averaged 5.8 yard per carry. I don’t think we had a bad run game today.�

Pribula led the Tigers in rushing yards (61 yard on 11 carries), primarily via scrambles. However, the senior quarterback turned in his most disappointing performance so far this season, including a pair of interceptions on a day he went 16 of 28 passing for 167 yards with two touchdowns.

Both Pribula and Drinkwitz admitted the offense lacked rhythm. They went 1-for-10 on third down conversions. The had one drive that lasted more than three minutes, and they went three-and-out three times, four plays out and on another drive.

Meanwhile, Alabama’s offense controlled time of possession 38 minutes, 33 seconds compared to Mizzou’s 21 minutes, 27 seconds.

“At times I felt like we went three-and-out too much and we weren’t on the field that much,� Pribula said. “We just let them control the ball too much.�

Pribula took accountability for the offense after the game, calling it his job to lead them on scoring drives and referring to a need to “find� more completions to keep the offense going.

Really, the Tigers could have done Pribula a favor by using the running game more consistently.

Instead of leaning on Hardy, the leaned on Pribula. Just like Drinkwitz, I don’t know why.