Better thread: Predict ppg given up by defense

[fatty fat fat]

in conference play

a few reference points (all done from memory, btw (stud->>fff))

2006: 27.25
2005: 32
2004: 32.4
2003: 15.1
2002: 11.4
2001: 21
2000: 23.25
1999: 17.1
1998: 14
1997: 16.5
1996: 19 (this could be wrong)

I'll go with

24.375

[catzacker]

25.79

[ChicoRodriguez]

18.3

[kstatefan11]

16.8 i think if our starters stay healthy we should suprise some people, but beyond our starters there is not much.

[WildCatzPhreak]

21.0

[Bookcat]

25

[doom]

27.4  I think our defense will not be as good as last year.  Our defense/ coordinator were fairly good.  The reason the ppg were a bit higher, is that last year the offense didn't stay on the field for very long.  So our defense had to defend for a lot more drives and possessions and Josh threw it into their hands alot.

[mjrod]

18.5 ppg

[cireksu]

24.345

[fatty fat fat]

anything lower than 20 would be phenomenal.

[mjrod]

anything lower than 20 would be phenomenal.

I was being homerish, but what you just said is absolutely true.

[WorldWideBalla21]

PA- 22.6
PF- 25.2

[cas]

-1000000

[ew2x4]

22.3

[Dan Rydell]

32 PPG

[Leyton]

26

[Bookcat]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

[NorthChamps07]

<17 will put us in the top 10. And probably Big 12 champs. I'll go with that!

[waks]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

Auburn isn't a high scoring offense. They don't help your argument at all.

[Kat Kid]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

Auburn isn't a high scoring offense. They don't help your argument at all.

That is true but they could kill us on differential.

I could see a 28-0 or 35-0 drubbing and if they can turn us over it could be a little more high scoring on both ends than we think now.

[waks]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

Auburn isn't a high scoring offense. They don't help your argument at all.

That is true but they could kill us on differential.

I could see a 28-0 or 35-0 drubbing and if they can turn us over it could be a little more high scoring on both ends than we think now.

I predict they have two defensive touchdowns an offensive touchdown and a field goal.

[steve dave]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

Auburn isn't a high scoring offense. They don't help your argument at all.

Neither is NU.  Actually, OK St and Mizzou will probably score more against us than NU or Aub.

[FBWillie]

25

[waks]

ppg could be higher this year than last and our defense could be improved.

@Auburn
@NU
@Texas

There is some scoring there.

and,

Watts,
Moore,
Baldwin,
McKinney
Chandler

is a good group depending on who you like.

Auburn isn't a high scoring offense. They don't help your argument at all.

Neither is NU.  Actually, OK St and Mizzou will probably score more against us than NU or Aub.

True.