Top 5 offensive line?

[ksu_FAN]

This guy says so....  It does sound like an interesting formula.  I'm sure it could be tweaked to get different results, but when you just look at our offensive numbers ours does look pretty decent.  Not sure about Top 5, but not as bad as we thought going into the year for sure.

[steve dave]

Going into the season I thought we may have a shot at bottom 5.  All but Robinson back next year?

[catzacker]

Going into the season I thought we may have a shot at bottom 5.  All but Robinson back next year?

Yes.  If this OL isn't above good/great next year then god help us.  It sucks that our defense will be terrible next year. 

[michigancat]

excellent play calling/overall strategy.

If we spent time piddling around "establishing a run game" it would be much worse.

[waks]

I think the fact that 3/4 of the Big XII teams are in the top 25 says more about Big XII pass rushes and defensive lines than anything else.


Also, Josh Freeman being so huge and slightly mobile helps in its own way in preventing sacks.. And the fact that we never run so we often get large chunks of yards when we do because it's such a surprise could inflate the numbers as well.


Overall, I'm still relatively pleased with the production that we've had from such a young o-line and the way the staff has worked around their inexperience.

[LimestoneOutcropping]

Going into the season I thought we may have a shot at bottom 5.  All but Robinson back next year?

Yes.  If this OL isn't above good/great next year then god help us.  It sucks that our defense will be terrible againnext year. 

QFT

[cireksu]

More of a result of our pass first, 3-5 step drops and get rid of the ball offense.

Watch the games and even on quick drops he's getting hurried a lot of the time.


the staff has done an excellent job of gameplanning around our oline.

[ksu_FAN]

More of a result of our pass first, 3-5 step drops and get rid of the ball offense.

Watch the games and even on quick drops he's getting hurried a lot of the time.


the staff has done an excellent job of gameplanning around our oline.

Yeah, the article might be better titled "teams that utilize their offensive line the best" or something like that.  No doubt there are "more talented" lines that didn't make the Top 25.

[The Manhatter]

Top 5 or not...wrong or right, black or white...the reality is the offense is fine.  People need to think DEFENSE, not offense.

Truths.

PPG
2000 - 40.8
2002 - 44.7
2003 - 36.6
2007 - 36.7

total offense per game
2000 - 424.2
2002 - 423.4
2003 - 441.0
2007 - 422.4

yards per play
2000 - 5.9
2002 - 6.3
2003 - 6.2
2007 - 5.8


And please.  Don't be that jackass who says, "but our ppg is influenced by kick returns and defensive scores blah blah"...because the '00, '02, and '03 teams didn't do those things?  LOL.

YES, the running game could be better and more consistent but the fact remains...it's our defense that is keeping us from being a 10-2 type team right now.  Not the offensive line.  Not another RB.  Not Josh Freeman.  Not James Franklin.  Think defense or mail order a new brain.

[michigancat]

I love Hatter.

[ksu_FAN]

Great points.  Even though our STs have been mostly a help, a few STs breakdowns have hurt us as well.  Of any phase of KSU football, offense is BY FAR moving in the best direction.

[catzacker]

Top 5 or not...wrong or right, black or white...the reality is the offense is fine.  People need to think DEFENSE, not offense.

Truths.

PPG
2000 - 40.8 - Beasley isn't a good QB
2002 - 44.7 - Ell can't throw the ball well
2003 - 36.6 - Ell can't throw the ball well
2007 - 36.7 - We don't have a running game

The bold is what fans were/are saying when we were putting up those numbers.  As you pointed out, what 2007 doesn't have that 00, 02, 03 had some semblence of a good/great defense.  You could almost make an argument that this offense is more productive than those offenses because our defense doesn't put us in as good of positions as the prior defenses. 

[cireksu]

Top 5 or not...wrong or right, black or white...the reality is the offense is fine.  People need to think DEFENSE, not offense.

Truths.

PPG
2000 - 40.8
2002 - 44.7
2003 - 36.6
2007 - 36.7

total offense per game
2000 - 424.2
2002 - 423.4
2003 - 441.0
2007 - 422.4

yards per play
2000 - 5.9
2002 - 6.3
2003 - 6.2
2007 - 5.8


And please.  Don't be that jackass who says, "but our ppg is influenced by kick returns and defensive scores blah blah"...because the '00, '02, and '03 teams didn't do those things?  LOL.

YES, the running game could be better and more consistent but the fact remains...it's our defense that is keeping us from being a 10-2 type team right now.  Not the offensive line.  Not another RB.  Not Josh Freeman.  Not James Franklin.  Think defense or mail order a new brain.

absolutely.

[The Manhatter]

You could almost make an argument that this offense is more productive than those offenses because our defense doesn't put us in as good of positions as the prior defenses. 

bingo, and there it is.  A thing of beauty from 'zacker.  Can you imagine how badly we would hammer some teams if we had some of those defenses on the field for us right now?  Setting us up in great field position..the scores would get ugly.

People do need to chill about the offense...the offense is very close to where we want it to be and likely will be there next year.  Next year it should be unstoppable for the most apart unless we're playing against an OU defense or something similar and even then we'll probably notch 24 pts. just stepping on the field.

The special teams are good.  Two of the 3 phases are good enough right now to be a championship contender in this conference.  I know Prince desperately wants a great defense because he talks about it all of the time and mentions Va. Tech so often.

[LimestoneOutcropping]

You could almost make an argument that this offense is more productive than those offenses because our defense doesn't put us in as good of positions as the prior defenses. 

bingo, and there it is.  A thing of beauty from 'zacker.  Can you imagine how badly we would hammer some teams if we had some of those defenses on the field for us right now?  Setting us up in great field position..the scores would get ugly.

People do need to chill about the offense...the offense is very close to where we want it to be and likely will be there next year.  Next year it should be unstoppable for the most apart unless we're playing against an OU defense or something similar and even then we'll probably notch 24 pts. just stepping on the field.

The special teams are good.  Two of the 3 phases are good enough right now to be a championship contender in this conference.  I know Prince desperately wants a great defense because he talks about it all of the time and mentions Va. Tech so often.

Well then, when is he going to get one?

[michigancat]

You could almost make an argument that this offense is more productive than those offenses because our defense doesn't put us in as good of positions as the prior defenses. 

bingo, and there it is.  A thing of beauty from 'zacker.  Can you imagine how badly we would hammer some teams if we had some of those defenses on the field for us right now?  Setting us up in great field position..the scores would get ugly.

People do need to chill about the offense...the offense is very close to where we want it to be and likely will be there next year.  Next year it should be unstoppable for the most apart unless we're playing against an OU defense or something similar and even then we'll probably notch 24 pts. just stepping on the field.
 
The special teams are good.  Two of the 3 phases are good enough right now to be a championship contender in this conference.  I know Prince desperately wants a great defense because he talks about it all of the time and mentions Va. Tech so often.

Well then, when is he going to get one?

QFT. 

GO GET A CHAMPIONSHIP DEFENSE MR. RON!!!!!!   NOW!!!!!

[ksuno1stunner]

The explanation for us being #4 is LOL.

[Bullfn33]

Top 5 or not...wrong or right, black or white...the reality is the offense is fine.  People need to think DEFENSE, not offense.

Truths.

PPG
2000 - 40.8
2002 - 44.7
2003 - 36.6
2007 - 36.7

total offense per game
2000 - 424.2
2002 - 423.4
2003 - 441.0
2007 - 422.4

yards per play
2000 - 5.9
2002 - 6.3
2003 - 6.2
2007 - 5.8


And please.  Don't be that jackass who says, "but our ppg is influenced by kick returns and defensive scores blah blah"...because the '00, '02, and '03 teams didn't do those things?  LOL.

YES, the running game could be better and more consistent but the fact remains...it's our defense that is keeping us from being a 10-2 type team right now.  Not the offensive line.  Not another RB.  Not Josh Freeman.  Not James Franklin.  Think defense or mail order a new brain.

I think the offense has been fine all year, except in this ISU game.  Red zone offense combined with the offense giving up 7 points on the pick six cost us the game more than defense. The defense gave us a chance to win in the 2nd half and the offense couldn't put up points, regardless of how many yards they covered.  Offenses should be measured based on how many points they can convert.  I would agree that the defense lost us the other games.

If we still had the same defense we took to Auburn, we'd be a 10 win team.  It seems to me that injuries and guys playing less than 100% is a part of the reason the defense has declined.

[hemmy]

Red Zone offense is almost as big of a problem as defense IMO.

All the times we have gotten close and had to settle for a FG attempt has left so many points off of the board it could have been the difference.

[Bookcat]

It's because Freeman knows how to escape and throw the ball away if he has to. It also helps he's 6'6 250 lbs...just guessing.

[The Manhatter]

Red Zone offense is almost as big of a problem as defense IMO.

It's okay to gather some facts before posting.

#22 nationally: http://cfbstats.com/2007/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category27/sort01.html

#4 Big12 in conference play:
http://www.big12sports.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2007-2008/confonly.html

[fatty fat fat]

even w/our crap defense..we should still be better than 5-4. damn.

[ChiefCatchacold]

Red Zone offense is almost as big of a problem as defense IMO.

It's okay to gather some facts before posting.

#22 nationally: http://cfbstats.com/2007/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category27/sort01.html

#4 Big12 in conference play:
http://www.big12sports.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2007-2008/confonly.html

But the TDs per red zone opportunity ratio is only better than ISU & Baylor.

[catzacker]

even w/our crap defense..we should still be better than 5-4. damn.

QFT.  I blame it on turnovers we made (irregardless of the turnovers we caused).  There's a pattern that only a crappy team like Baylor could disrupt.

Team - # TO's
UT -  0
ku - 3
CU - 0
OSU - 3
BU - 2
ISU - 3

[opcat]

dumb article.

We can't run consistently

[The Manhatter]

But the TDs per red zone opportunity ratio is only better than ISU & Baylor.

Yep, and Redzone pct is based on whether a team SCORES in the redzone, not just TD's.

Then again the horrific PPG that is on par w/ the early 2000's teams is unacceptable so nothing to see here...carry on.

[ChiefCatchacold]

Yep, and Redzone pct is based on whether a team SCORES in the redzone, not just TD's.

o rly 

Then again the horrific PPG that is on par w/ the early 2000's teams is unacceptable so nothing to see here...carry on.

Guess I should have read the whole thread first.  I just think the redzone offense has been a weakness, but agree that it is not even close to the defense.

 

[Hawkish]

How is Minnesota on that list. There are more problems with the team as a whole than any one person can count.