Week two of college football is upon the city of Columbia, Mo. and a week two matchup against the Buffalo Bulls is set up for 6 p.m. on a Saturday night for Missouri football.

The Tigers now have a performance baseline after a week one blowout, but the Bulls should prove to be more of a challenge. Plenty of guys played solid in limited snaps. Majority of the skill-position starters didn’t play at all in the second half, making it hard to judge how well they truly played.

Buffalo should be a matchup the Tigers can handle which might limit the amount of time the starters play. With a few minor injuries last week, as well as some players who didn’t quite play as well as they could have, here are four players to take note of on Saturday night.

There are no doubts that Cook will play to his potential as the season progresses, but some missed deep balls and other throws in general may have left a bad taste in some peoples mouths. He went 19-of-30 against Murray State, with 228 passing yards and a touchdown.

His accuracy wasn’t necessarily an issue, only missing a few debatably-bad throws. These are throws he is capable of making. Those mistakes were likely nothing more than early-season miscues, ones that can be fixed with more reps in practice and more deep shots in game.

Head coach Eli Drinkwitz was not thrilled with the passing core as a whole against the Racers, receivers included. Some general inconsistencies that were displayed were ones that needed to get ironed out in practice.

“Fundamentals. It starts with fundamentals, route depth, timing, the quarterback setting his feet when he makes throws,” Drinkwitz said.

This time last season, Cook was not a set starter. He was splitting game-reps with sophomore quarterback Sam Horn, but won the position battle. Now, he is a consensus starter with room for error. The deep ball is something he needs to improve on by the time the Tigers make it to conference play, but should be an area he shows growth in in the early part of the season. Expect Cook to fall back on the deep ball again against Buffalo where he has room to make mistakes and teammates to fall back on.

Starting tight end Brett Norfleet was ruled out against Buffalo earlier in the week, according to ESPN reporter Pete Thamel. With Norfleet out, the reigns get passed down to backups Tyler Stephens and Jordon Harris.

READ: Key Offensive Playmaker to Miss Missouri’s Week 2 Game with Injury

Stephens will play against his alma mater for the first time in his career on Saturday night. He was the only other tight end to record a reception last season outside of Norfleet, recording five receptions for 49 yards. He was questionable last week in limited snaps, splitting targets with Harris. It is not clear who will be the starter between the two, but both of them should see the field.

Harris did not record any receptions last week, but was listed as the second string ahead of Stephens. He has not recorded a single reception in his career as a Tiger, but he gives Cook, or whoever is at quarterback, a large and athletic target. He is not as experienced as Stephens, but Cook does like to dump it down to his tight ends. Harris also plays an important pass and run blocking role, giving him another reason to see the field.

Young did not put any numbers on the stat sheet this week, but that is likely to change. He had an impressive quarterback pressure last week that resulted in Murray State quarterback Jayden Johannsen throwing a pick-six to Tiger cornerback Toriano Pride Jr. Young displayed power and bend to get to the quarterback.

It’s only a matter of time before Young records a sack or tackle for loss with the moves he put on display against the Racers. The entire Tiger defensive line really stood out, with defensive tackles Chris McClellan and Kristian Williams also putting pressure on the quarterback and getting in the stat books.

Young never posted incredible numbers with the Michigan State Spartans, his former team, with a career high of 26 total tackles and a sack-and-a-half in his 2023 campaign. He showed the same flashes last week that he did all of last season with the Spartans. He has more freedom to show off his pass rush moves in the Tiger defense and in the right situation, his moves could stand out above the rest.

Everything to Know About Missouri vs. Buffalo

WATCH: All Things Mizzou Podcast: Tigers Handle Business in Week 1, Buffalo Preview

‘We Don’t See A Drop Off’: Depth, Versatility Bolster Missouri’s Defensive Line

A Missouri judge ruled Friday evening that a reproductive-rights amendment did not comply with state initiative petition requirements, leaving the door open to potentially withhold it from the November ballot. 

Cole County Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled that the coalition behind the citizen-led ballot measure failed to meet the sufficiency requirement through a “failure to include any statute or provision that will be repealed, especially when many of these statutes are apparent.”

A spokesperson for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind the reproductive-rights amendment, said they plan to appeal. 

Limbaugh also wrote that while he found a “blatant violation” of state law, he “recognizes the gravity of the unique issues involved in this case, and the lack of direct precedent on point.” 

As a result, he won’t issue an injunction preventing the amendment from being printed on the ballot until Tuesday to allow time for “further guidance or rulings” from the appeals court. 

The constitutional deadline for ballots to be printed is Tuesday. 

Amendment 3 would establish the constitutional right to an abortion up until fetal viability and grant constitutional protections to other reproductive health care, including in-vitro fertilization and birth control. It would also protect those who assist in an abortion from prosecution. 

“The court’s decision to block Amendment 3 from appearing on the ballot is a profound injustice to the initiative petition process,” Rachel Sweet, campaign manager with Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, said in a statement. “And undermines the rights of the 380,000 Missourians who signed our petition demanding a voice on this critical issue.

The lawsuit was filed two weeks ago by a group of anti-abortion lawmakers and activists against Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who certified the citizen-led ballot initiative for the Nov. 5 ballot  nine days earlier. The group is arguing that the initiative should never have been allowed on the ballot.

The plaintiffs — state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, state Rep. Hannah Kelly, anti-abortion activist Kathy Forck and shelter operator Marguerite Forrest — said in a statement Friday evening that the amendment’s scope is “staggering.” 

“Missourians have a constitutional right to know what laws their votes would overturn before deciding to sign initiative petitions,” they said. “Amendment 3 isn’t just about abortion.”

The plaintiffs were represented in court by Mary Catherine Martin, an attorney with the Thomas More Society who argued during a brief bench trial Friday morning that the campaign behind the amendment fell short of the law by failing to list the specific laws or constitutional provisions which would be repealed if the amendment is approved by voters. 

Missouri law requires that initiative petitions “include all sections of existing law or of the constitution which would be repealed by the measure.” 

“No one disputes,” she said, “one of its primary purposes and effects is to repeal Missouri’s ban on abortion.” 

Speculation isn’t necessary to come to this conclusion, Martin said, pointing to the ballot summary which reads, in part, that a yes vote would “remove Missouri’s ban on abortion.”

Loretta Haggard, an attorney representing the campaign supporting the amendment, said that while the amendment would supersede existing law, it would not erase it from the current constitutional text, and therefore would not truly repeal the current statute. 

She told the judge in court that this is because the two texts do have some overlapping similarities: both protect women who get abortions from prosecution and both restrict abortion after the point of fetal viability. 

Fetal viability is an undefined period of time generally seen as the point in which the fetus could survive outside the womb on its own, generally around 24 weeks, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.  

When it comes to everything else, Haggard said, the amendment would leave the current law to be interpreted through the lens of the new law, meaning any restrictions implemented by the government on abortion prior to fetal viability will have to withstand strict scrutiny in court to remain. She ventured that most of Missouir’s current restrictions would not survive for this reason.

Ultimately, Limbaugh sided with the plaintiffs, writing that the page attached to the initiative petition forms “included no disclaimer or any equivalent to a disclaimer.” 

“In fact,” he concluded. “The full and correct text failed to identify any ‘sections of existing law or of the constitution which would be repealed by the measure.’”