You're going to have to define what you mean by "good old days" (believe me the OLD days weren't that good) when you ask this question.
I believe he
did define this as being years KSU was ranked in the top 5. Anybody with half a brain would know the era being referred to. Most of those 11-win teams had weeks during the season that they were ranked in the top 5. Take 1998, for instance, in which the team was ranked in the top 5 during 14 of 16 weekly polls.
You speak of going to "big" bowl games. We've been to two Fiesta Bowls in 20 years? That's two unless you count Cotton Bowls which I'm pretty sure makes the total four. Lets not try to make two to four "big" bowl games in 20 years mean that we're suddenly a dynasty.
Fiesta Bowl years were 1997 and 2003. That is two in a seven-year stretch, or two in the past 13 years. Why are you arbitrarily increasing it to 20 years? Also, I don't see how the Cotton or Holiday Bowls would not be considered big bowls since they are supposed to take the 2nd and 3rd place Big 12 team, respectively. In fact, all three times KSU went to the Holiday Bowl, they were ranked in the top 10 going into the game, won it, and ended up ranked in the 6th/7th/8th range. To KSU fans those were big bowls, and some years the team's on-field performance actually warranted a higher bowl than what they got (see 1998, 1999, and 2002).
As far as being in the Top 5 is concerned, haven't we only finish in the Top 5 once in 113 years?
KSU never did
finish a season ranked in the top 5. But what does that prove? There were six top 10 finishes (including three at 6th place), and an additional four top 20 finishes. I guess I don't understand what you are getting at, however. Nobody here proclaimed KSU an all-time football dynasty, yet you seem to be arguing against that point as if somebody did. KSU did win 11 games six times in a seven-year span and was only the second program ever to do that, and people just want to have some more years like that. Why bring up ancient history as if nobody is aware of how bad KSU was before Snyder.
If you mean like it really was (becoming consistantly bowl eligible and occasionally competing for a Big XII Championship and maybe even a National Championship) sure we can. We just have to make sure that coach Snyder's successor is someone with ties to the program who understands what it takes to win here (dumbing down the non conference schedule and beating the teams that we're supposed to beat on a regular basis).
I don't agree with your point about "dumbing down the non-conference schedule" either. There is no reason not to play at least one halfway decent top-35 caliber team each year, particularly now with 4 non-con games available instead of 3 like it was prior to 2006. It still bothers me that the 1997-1999 teams didn't get to play any non-con teams with a pulse during the regular season. Those teams were so good, they could have manhandled virtually any OOC team out there, and yet they got stuck playing way below-average teams. Maybe we are splitting hairs here, though. I agree we don't need to be scheduling two top 25 teams a year, especially during a rebuilding mode.
