ranking '07 KSU talent at different unit vs. year's past..

[The Manhatter]

Because I'm a big nerd, I took Hatter's rankings and assigned the ranking as a point, then took the total talent points for each year and then ranked the teams by talent points (the lowest score is the best).  Here's how it played out in the Hatter Talent Points System (HTPS):

Year   HTPS
2000   29
2002   38
1998   38
1999   41
2003   46
2007   62
1997   69
2001   70
2006   77
2004   94
2005   101

...it's actually fairly accurate, imo, which is suprising.  So I take back all the mean things I said.  Although what it really says is, if you got a good record, you're probably a talented team. 

but zacker...did that include DT, LB, CB, and safety?  I just added those recently.  The reason I ask is because '97 should not be below '07.  But if you look at some of the individual units of that '97 team...not that good at that time.  The passing game was erratic in '97 and there was a ton of youth in the secondary.  Oh well.

[catzacker]

Because I'm a big nerd, I took Hatter's rankings and assigned the ranking as a point, then took the total talent points for each year and then ranked the teams by talent points (the lowest score is the best).  Here's how it played out in the Hatter Talent Points System (HTPS):

Year   HTPS
2000   29
2002   38
1998   38
1999   41
2003   46
2007   62
1997   69
2001   70
2006   77
2004   94
2005   101

...it's actually fairly accurate, imo, which is suprising.  So I take back all the mean things I said.  Although what it really says is, if you got a good record, you're probably a talented team. 

but zacker...did that include DT, LB, CB, and safety?  I just added those recently.  The reason I ask is because '97 should not be below '07.  But if you look at some of the individual units of that '97 team...not that good at that time.  The passing game was erratic in '97 and there was a ton of youth in the secondary.  Oh well.

Yes, it does include.  '97's RB, CB, DB, and DE rankings killed it. 

[KSU4ME]

1997 had a pud non-con and a weak south division.

[The Manhatter]

Because I'm a big nerd, I took Hatter's rankings and assigned the ranking as a point, then took the total talent points for each year and then ranked the teams by talent points (the lowest score is the best).  Here's how it played out in the Hatter Talent Points System (HTPS):

Year   HTPS
2000   29
2002   38
1998   38
1999   41
2003   46
2007   62
1997   69
2001   70
2006   77
2004   94
2005   101

...it's actually fairly accurate, imo, which is suprising.  So I take back all the mean things I said.  Although what it really says is, if you got a good record, you're probably a talented team. 

but zacker...did that include DT, LB, CB, and safety?  I just added those recently.  The reason I ask is because '97 should not be below '07.  But if you look at some of the individual units of that '97 team...not that good at that time.  The passing game was erratic in '97 and there was a ton of youth in the secondary.  Oh well.

Yes, it does include.  '97's RB, CB, DB, and DE rankings killed it. 

thanks.  Obviously '97 is the exception to the rule then because no way I'd take the '07 squad over '97.

However...at some individual units '97 had some defincies due to serious inexperience.

RB was just very average.
QB Bishop, despite his great talent...struggled mightily early in the year
WR...didn't really do anything until later in the year (Bishop effected this)
DE...Howard just a Soph and Beisel just a Fr
secondary was VERY young

[Kat Kid]

DE:
1. 1999: Howard Sr, Beisel Jr, Johnson Jr, Williams Fr
2. 2002: Shull Jr, Bryant Sr, Williams Sr, Houchin Jr
3. 2000: Beisel Sr, Johnson Sr, Williams Soph, Shull Fr
4. 2007: Jackson Sr, Campbell Jr, Abana Jr, Manu Sr, Guidry Fr
5. 1998: Howard Jr, Clements Sr, Beisel Soph, Johnson Soph
6. 2003: Shull Sr, Houchin Sr, Huntley Jr, Edmonds Soph
7. 2006: Campbell Soph, Jackson Jr, Childs Fr, Manu Jr
8. 2004: Huntley Sr, Edmonds Jr, George Jr, Seiler Soph
9. 2001: Shull Soph, Bryant Jr, Williams Jr, Houchin Soph
10. 1997: Howard Soph, Clements Jr, Beisel Fr
11. 2005: George Sr, Seiler Jr, Burch Jr

Overall Hatter I think you are pretty accurate.  This is one where I disagree.

That 1998 unit should be higher.  I really struggle to see this years unit being better.  I like Jackson and Campbell a TON.  But do we think either Jackson or Campbell is as talented as Howard?  Is Joe Bob really enough of a downgrade to compensate for Howard?  People forget how huge Howard was.  I think the depth has the potential to be better, but talent wise I really wonder.

Also, the LB rankings are generous to Diles and Archer.  There is little doubt in my mind that Buhl and Hickman pulled together a better unit than Diles and Archer. 

[KSU4ME]

I can't believe we didn't get ratings for PK, P, PR, KR and LS.

[The Manhatter]

DE:
1. 1999: Howard Sr, Beisel Jr, Johnson Jr, Williams Fr
2. 2002: Shull Jr, Bryant Sr, Williams Sr, Houchin Jr
3. 2000: Beisel Sr, Johnson Sr, Williams Soph, Shull Fr
4. 2007: Jackson Sr, Campbell Jr, Abana Jr, Manu Sr, Guidry Fr
5. 1998: Howard Jr, Clements Sr, Beisel Soph, Johnson Soph
6. 2003: Shull Sr, Houchin Sr, Huntley Jr, Edmonds Soph
7. 2006: Campbell Soph, Jackson Jr, Childs Fr, Manu Jr
8. 2004: Huntley Sr, Edmonds Jr, George Jr, Seiler Soph
9. 2001: Shull Soph, Bryant Jr, Williams Jr, Houchin Soph
10. 1997: Howard Soph, Clements Jr, Beisel Fr
11. 2005: George Sr, Seiler Jr, Burch Jr

Overall Hatter I think you are pretty accurate.  This is one where I disagree.

That 1998 unit should be higher.  I really struggle to see this years unit being better.  I like Jackson and Campbell a TON.  But do we think either Jackson or Campbell is as talented as Howard?  Is Joe Bob really enough of a downgrade to compensate for Howard?  People forget how huge Howard was.  I think the depth has the potential to be better, but talent wise I really wonder.

Also, the LB rankings are generous to Diles and Archer.  There is little doubt in my mind that Buhl and Hickman pulled together a better unit than Diles and Archer. 

I think we underrate the '06 LB unit.  Diles had a very good season.  I think he's one of the better LB's we've had.  As for the '03...Hickman was not as good as a senior as he was as a junior (I think he was on juice in '02 and not in '03 but whatever).  Buhl is one of my favorite players but he did have some shortcomings...I can't get over how he was dominated in the run game vs. Marshall and Oklahoma State.  Sims....well, Sims is the biggest reason why I put '06 ahead of '03. 

DE '98...Howard is amazing and w/ Newman our most talented and dominant defensive player over these teams.  But nobody in their right mind would come close to taking Clements over the two this year or even Abana most likely(admittedly this remains to be seen).  And Beisel and Johnson BARELY played that season.

[KSU4ME]

Hickman was definitely juicing.  His girlfriend commented on some of the physical side effects.

[fatty fat fat]

How could you put 2001 behind 2007? 2001 absolutely bulldozed people.

[The Manhatter]

How could you put 2001 behind 2007? 2001 absolutely bulldozed people.

what was great about 2001?  First year for most of those DT's.  DE's..Williams went down in OU game did not return until Syracuse.  Shull missed first 5 or 6 games.  Alax Carrier had to play and never played again..at least not much.  Buhl's first year and he struggled.  We had issues on 3rd down defense from I could remember.  Faggins was very average and struggled w/ confidence.  Passing game was absolutely terrible and had no pass protection and OL had plethora of injuries.

I fully expect 2007 to be a better team than 2001. 

[fatty fat fat]

I'm talking about the Offensive Line. We ran for 300+ multiple times that year. Hell, we had no receivers or QB's that could throw and we still ran on people. The defense knew what was coming and we STILL ran on people.

[fatty fat fat]

Also, no top tier talent in 2007. Not a single group cracked the top 3, and only 3 cracked the top 5.

[The Manhatter]

I'm talking about the Offensive Line. We ran for 300+ multiple times that year. Hell, we had no receivers or QB's that could throw and we still ran on people. The defense knew what was coming and we STILL ran on people.

We didn't run over everybody.  Syracuse, Colorado..they stoned us cold.

And how good were some of those teams?

Remember...we started Honarchian at RT..would you take him over Stringer?  Robertson got hurt by Texas Tech and was done for the season.  We played musical chairs on the OL that season. 

That OL could run block..sure, but they couldn't pass block to save their lives. 

And one other thing...how many yards do we rush for in '06 if Roberson is our QB.  Some of it is that our runners and scheme made the line look better than it was...do you disagree?

[fatty fat fat]

Ocean Honarchian

 

[The Manhatter]

Ocean Honarchian

 

Hell, '01 was the toughest to come up a starting line up because we had so many.

Martin started most games at LT.  And I believe Leckey may have started every game at LG.  Other than that?

Robertson was at RG for the first 5 games? 

Honarchian traded off w/ Burkes at RT.

Who started at RG after Robertson got hurt?

I remember that Eby played several positions but I think he started most games at center.

[fatty fat fat]

Hatter I get what you're saying about the qb run game making it easier to rack up yards. I mean, it doesn't have ell back there running around.

But I can't get that USC-KSU 2001 game out of my head. 340 rushing yards on a Carroll team.


The Cu and Su games were incredible. No running game = LOL on offense.

[The Manhatter]

Hatter I get what you're saying about the qb run game making it easier to rack up yards. I mean, it doesn't have ell back there running around.

But I can't get that USC-KSU 2001 game out of my head. 340 rushing yards on a Carroll team.

yeah but...that SC team went 6-6 and Utah ass pounded them physically on both sides in their bowl game.  While they had talent defensively Patterson, Grootegoed, Cody...they were freshman.  Nazel needed more time in the weightroom.  Udeze was an out of shape Soph.

btw...naysayers can use that defense as a template...young players can improve and get better..ya think?

[KSU4ME]

The 2001 offensive backfield of Roberson/Scobey/Cartwright could make a bad line look good.  Toss in Hall and Sproles as the mother of all change ups. 

Good grief that was an insane amount of running threats.  More than enough to make up for the MASH OL we put out there.

The only time that running game wasn't clicking is when Dunn went under center.  Watching him run option made eyes bleed.

Hatter -- You're forgetting Thomas Barnett, the shotgun kidnapper, as a starting OT in '01.  He disappointed that year, but was still solid.

[Pete]

I guess I disagree that we "average" out to ahead of the '01 squad.  It goes back to projecting 07 based on 06 "results" rather than 06 talent.  Take those rankings and pretend you're going into the '02 season....If you would have done this you should have projected another crappy year, if not worse.  This is why I think "talent" rankings are gay. 

 

QFT

You are both ffuccking idiots if you think the 2007 team is even close to any team between 97 and 03.  This will be proved this year...as will your incompetence.  Save this post...I will.

[Pete]

our schedule is 10x tougher than most of the schedules those teams faced.  Kansas and Mizzou are better than they were....Nebraska, while not what they were in 90's and early 2000's, is a solid program right now.  Iowa State...we'll see.  They are definitely better than 97-98..prolly about where they were in 99.  But the South is much tougher. Auburn is definitely better than any OOC w/ the exception of '02 SC.

Our "tougher" schedule has provided a very convenient way for you to avoid being proven wrong on this point.

[KSU4ME]

I guess I disagree that we "average" out to ahead of the '01 squad.  It goes back to projecting 07 based on 06 "results" rather than 06 talent.  Take those rankings and pretend you're going into the '02 season....If you would have done this you should have projected another crappy year, if not worse.  This is why I think "talent" rankings are gay. 

 

QFT

You are both ffuccking idiots if you think the 2007 team is even close to any team between 97 and 03.  This will be proved this year...as will your incompetence.  Save this post...I will.

 

The comparison indicates this year is closest to the 2001 team.  If that gets you all sandy, deal with it.

[The Manhatter]

Hatter -- You're forgetting Thomas Barnett, the shotgun kidnapper, as a starting OT in '01.  He disappointed that year, but was still solid.

Barnett missed 2001 w/ a foot injury.

He played '98, '99, '00, and '02.

[fatty fat fat]

didn't he make the 2001 all big 12 list despite missing the whole year? <---showing off my knowledge

[KSU4ME]

Uh, yeah, like I said, he disappointed.

 

There's no emoticon for D'oh!

[catchat]

what is the  point of this useless information? I don't get it, what does anyone get out such garbage?

[ChicagoCat]

what is the  point of this useless information? I don't get it, what does anyone get out such garbage?

You register for this?  Wait...I get it.  Your post is ironic!

[fatty fat fat]

bump. time to add 2008, hat.