MM was the leading rusher against Kentucky. I'll let that sink in for a little bit before I confuse you any more about how football works. Every team I played on from grade school to college except one year was successful. The one bad year had 13 starters injured by week 5. EVERY team had a great running attack, with an average to above average QB. Without a RB who can do his job, not blaming MM for anything. The receivers don't catch the ball very well either. Having Locke throw to dickheads that can't the ball won't change the fact that they can't catch. It's like selling the horse, because the cow stopped making milk.

ZERO RUN GAME........leads to people only rushing 3 or 4 people and dropping the rest into coverage. That's 7-8, if you follow the rules of football, dropped into coverage......running down 4 receivers and a back dropping in the flats or an under route. 7-8 guys can effectively cover 4-5 guys unless they are horrible on D. Kentucky gives up about 200 yards a game through the air. That's better than Miss State, Bama, Wisconsin, Notre Dammit, Oklahoma, Tennesee, BYU, KState and plenty more

You go sort the stats.
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/st...5&sort=1121

When you don't have a run game, without an option style run first quarterback you have what you have with Mizzou. Putting in Locke won't change a damn thing. Neither QB can make the receivers catch the ball. Until the guy who is 17-5 as a starter can't go, or can't get wins with a proficient running back in there.......Locke learns from the sidelines. I don't blame the 50% completion rate on MM. If you watched any of the damn games, you wouldn't either.