Offensively, I noticed that when Missouri goes with 2 TEs, which is fairly often, they remove their slot receiver and play with 2 outside receivers.   As I've written about extensively throughout Fall Camp, Missouri's best receivers are mostly lining up in the slot.    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that by removing the slot receiver in favor of the second TE, the Tigers weaken themselves at the receiver position.    

J'Mon Moore was targeted more than 3 times as often as the next most targeted receiver.   Part of that was because the game plan was to attack the inexperienced DB on that side of the field.   I like the idea of attacking a weak link.   That's promising.    But I don't think Moore is Missouri's best receiver, so I think that targeting him 23 times was bound to end up being inefficient.   It worked some, but it didn't work well enough.    

It seems obvious to me that when the Tigers use two TEs, they should take 1 of the outside receivers off the field, and leave the slot receiver on the field.   For example, one of the frequently utilized plays in the 2-TE set was the wide receiver screen, a play which was much more effective when one of the slot receivers was on the receiving end.   Johnson ran that play much more effectively than did Moore.   He used his blocks better, made the West Virginia defenders miss, and picked up more positive yardage.   There's no reason to run that play to an outside receiver when the Tigers have 4-5 inside receivers, punt-return type guys, to run that play more effectively.

This is the type of criticism I have of what I've seen so far, what I would term less than maximal utilization of personnel, particularly at the WR position.

For the full game break down and analysis by position and performance become a MizzouInsiderZone.com member HERE