Missouri 2017

  • Did not compete in 2016
  • Weekly BB, FX in 2016
  • 2015 RQS: FX – 9.775, BB – 9.725
Angie Kern
  • Fixture of VT, FX lineups in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: FX – 9.815, VT – 9.760
Tia Albritten
  • Weekly BB, late-season UB in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: BB – 9.765
  • 2016 average: UB – 9.604
Kennedi Harris
  • Late-lineup contributions on VT, FX
  • 2016 RQS: FX – 9.885, VT – 9.860
Shauna Miller
  • Returned to AA late in 2016 season
  • 2016 RQS: UB – 9.805, VT – 9.750, BB – 9.700
  • 2016 average: FX – 9.675
Becca Schugel
  • Weekly UB, BB in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: UB – 9.830, BB – 9.810
Allison Bower
  • Made final BB, FX lineups in 2016
  • Provided backup UB
  • 2016 RQS: FX – 9.835, BB – 9.810, UB – 9.725

  • Competed weekly UB, frequent VT, occasional FX in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: UB – 9.815, VT – 9.750
  • 2016 average: 9.763
Brooke Kelly
  • Anchored UB much of 2016
  • Provided early-season routines on FX, BB, VT
  • 2016 RQS: UB – 9.845, FX – 9.775, BB – 9.540
  • 2016 average: VT – 9.413
Xarria Lewis
  • Competed regular VT in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: 9.795
Morgan Porter
  • Star AA performer in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: FX – 9.895, UB – 9.870, VT – 9.840, BB – 9.835
Michaelee Turner
  • Occasional FX (including regionals) in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: FX – 9.645
Britney Ward
  • Team-best VT, BB routines in 2016
  • 2016 RQS: BB – 9.900, VT – 9.885
Alyssa Johnson
  • Twin City
  • 2015 JO Nationals VT 10th
Rachel Ley
  • Top Flight TX
  • 2015 Texas state VT 9th
Mary Nicholson
  • Empire TX
Aspen Tucker
  • 2016 JO Nationals VT 4th, BB 6th, FX 7th

Recent History
2016 – 19th
2015 – 21st
2014 – 41st
2013 – 43rd
2012 – 20th
2011 – 32nd
2010 – 12th

Missouri is on the upswing following the dark years, having refreshed and reinvented itself two years ago with a brand new staff and crop of competitive gymnasts. Like Kentucky, Missouri will hope that extreme youth serves the team well, returning all of last year’s postseason routines. That’s usually a portent of improvement, and while Missouri hasn’t broken into the nationals conversation yet, this season should be marked by inching forward, not inching backward.

Everyone being healthy (and using their own credit cards), the goal will essentially be to keep last year’s lineups intact and then add in Aspen Tucker to replace whoever got the lowest 9.7. Sounds like a plan to me.

Top returners – Ward (9.885), Harris (9.860), Porter (9.840)
Returning options – Lewis (9.795), Kern (9.760), Miller (9.750), Huber (9.750), Kelly (9.412)

The most important vault for Missouri will come from Britney Ward and her 10.0-start Omelianchik, which led the scoring last season. That’s why Ward’s absence from the December intrasquad was mildly horrifying. She needs to be there, and she needs to be vaulting.

The rest of the team will bring fulls, providing enough options to allow the coaching staff to pick and choose the better ones. Shauna Miller caused a stir at the beginning of her freshman year with her excellent full, but her vault has been a little too medium ever since. To have any chance to improve on last season’s 49.120 RQS, Missouri will need Miller to bring back those bigger scores in the 9.8s, but as on all the events, keeping pace with last year’s numbers is the minimum expectation.

Top returners – Porter (9.870), Kelly (9.845), Schugel (9.830), Huber (9.815), Miller (9.805)
Returning options – Bower (9.725), Albritten (9.604), Harris (9.275)

Missouri showed just five bars routines at the December intrasquad, but the roster should provide more depth than that considering the number of routines returning from last season, several of which will go 9.800+.

Missouri does lack a little star power on bars, with actual 9.9s a fairly rare commodity, which tends to keep the scores right around 49.0 and 49.1, built mostly on 9.825s and 9.850s. Still, the bars lineup should provide enough oomph to stay on 196 pace by retaining those top-five returning scores and then adding in Tucker and perhaps Johnson, whom I also liked on bars in the little I’ve seen. Of course, if Missouri wants to move up and truly challenge for nationals, that will require getting out of the 49.0/196.0 station at which a lot of these lineups reside, but that’s about where we are.

Top returners – Ward (9.900), Porter (9.835), Schugel (9.810), Bower (9.810)
Returning options – Albritten (9.765), Miller (9.700), Kelly (9.540)

As on vault, Britney Ward emerged as the star of the team last year on beam with multiple and legitimate 9.9s, often raising the team score up into the 49s and above the 9.750-9.775 territory we tended to see from the rest of the lineup.

This lineup should also stay mostly intact, albeit with Tucker and Heimsath presenting themselves as additional options this time around. In watching JO videos, beam was my favorite event for Tucker, so hopefully she’ll provide an opportunity to reinvigorate that collection of relatively inconsistent 9.775s that saw Missouri rank 27th last year.

Top returners – Porter (9.895), Harris (9.885), Bower (9.835), Kern (9.815)
Returning options – Kelly (9.775), Huber (9.763), Miller (9.670), Turner (9.645)

Missouri has a tendency to get stuck in double-pike-for-9.825 land on floor, especially when scored realistically at away meets, which hurts in the SEC when competing weekly against lineups that are upset if they don’t get at least four 9.9s and build summer cottages out of E passes. Still, Porter and Harris were able to emerge from last season with strong, competitive scores and should continue the mission.

The issue on floor primarily came from the first couple lineup positions. Missouri had about three or four good scores but often filled out the remaining spots with non-competitive numbers, which took the team score down into the lower 49s. You can get by with that on a couple events, but not on four events, and because scores go highest on floor, floor is usually the best place to improve on 49.0.

There will be more options this season. In addition to Tucker, Missouri will hope to bring Schugel and Heimsath back into the floor lineup as well as adding a routine from Lewis, who only vaulted last year. All things being healthy, I see ten floor routines on this roster, which should allow for experimentation to see who makes up a more complete lineup of six scores.

The smart money is on Missouri 2017 looking pretty similar to Missouri 2016, a team that hangs around the outskirts of contention and presents itself as a mild upset threat at a regional (an upset that almost happened last season). In searching for signs that Missouri is actually improving on last season, however, look to the beginning of the floor lineup to see if it has changed and if it is scoring more competitively at away meets, where Missouri never went over 49.150 last season. That looks like Missouri’s best opportunity wrench itself out of 196.0 mundanity.


7 thoughts on “Missouri 2017”

    1. Porter was suspended after her arrest on suspicion of felony credit card fraud. However, her charge at arraignment was misdemeanor-level. That case is still pending, but I’m assuming that she was let back on the team because she wasn’t actually charged with a felony.

  1. Meh. Where the pending charge is a misdemeanor, I wouldn’t advocate for indefinite suspension unless the alleged crime was violent in nature (and most of those crimes are felonies anyway).

    1. Well let me rephrase what I said: I should have said if she was a scholarship athlete I would have the suspension be indefinite. Because I just feel like the charge should be against some sort of code of conduct. But I get what you mean. It just kinda makes me give them the side eye.

  2. Without getting into details, Morgan was victim of an ugly situation, she served out her suspension & is apparently extra fired up for the season.

    Ward was held out of the inter squad because of her bad back, but should be fine for season.

    Becca Schugel is back on floor with her triple full & Kennedi Harris has a double layout ready to go, so hopefully fewer double pike mounts this season.

    Thank you for reviewing my alma mater!! 🐯

  3. To echo what Olin said, if you just take it at face value, Caroline, I see where you are coming from. I definitely like the athletes to be held to a high standard of conduct. But some situations aren’t what they seem.

Comments are closed.