goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: EllRobersonisInnocent on October 20, 2013, 01:57:13 PM

Title: -9
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on October 20, 2013, 01:57:13 PM
No thank you.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 02:24:53 PM
 :lynchmob:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: TownieCat on October 20, 2013, 02:55:51 PM
 :kstategrad:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 20, 2013, 02:57:09 PM
Wow
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 02:58:49 PM
We are going to smash WVU. It's going to be fun to see this team finally start winning some football games.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 03:11:00 PM
I'd love to say :shakesfist: but I'm really more like  :dunno:

If First Half WVU shows up then you all cover, easy.

If Second Half WVU makes it out to Manhattan then I say it'll be a game.

Either way, its gonna be entertaining here on gE!   :cheers:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: meow meow on October 20, 2013, 03:16:50 PM
I'd love to say :shakesfist: but I'm really more like  :dunno:

If First Half WVU shows up then you all cover, easy.

If Second Half WVU makes it out to Manhattan then I say it'll be a game.

Either way, its gonna be entertaining here on gE!   :cheers:

You should come
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 03:28:38 PM

You should come

Would if I could, believe me!

Why don't one of you  :kstategrad: fly me out?
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 03:31:02 PM
WVU is really a bad team.  They have only beat William & Mary, Georgia State and a ranked OSU team.  KSU has beatean Louisiana Lafayette and UMass. Clearly, KSU is the superior team.  I can see why so many are so confident in the Cats.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 03:38:49 PM
WVU is really a bad team.  They have only beat William & Mary, Georgia State and a ranked OSU team.  KSU has beatean Louisiana Lafayette and UMass. Clearly, KSU is the superior team.  I can see why so many are so confident in the Cats.

Clearly, playing WVU hurts the image of your program.








 :peek:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 03:45:07 PM
WVU is really a bad team.  They have only beat William & Mary, Georgia State and a ranked OSU team.  KSU has beatean Louisiana Lafayette and UMass. Clearly, KSU is the superior team.  I can see why so many are so confident in the Cats.

Yeah, i think it will be a close game and one where we'll have to play well to win.  If they do a decent job of stopping sams and we have a couple turnovers, we'll lose.  This game is a tossup imo.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 03:46:42 PM
They won't stop Sams and they will struggle to move the football. We will go up by double digits before halftime and our TOP will make them panic and things will get out of control in the second half. Cats win big, guys.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: star seed 7 on October 20, 2013, 03:47:57 PM
WVU is really a bad team.  They have only beat William & Mary, Georgia State and a ranked OSU team.  KSU has beatean Louisiana Lafayette and UMass. Clearly, KSU is the superior team.  I can see why so many are so confident in the Cats.

Yeah, i think it will be a close game and one where we'll have to play well to win.  If they do a decent job of stopping sams and we have a couple turnovers, we'll lose.  This game is a tossup imo.

can be said for every game for the next 2.5 years   :dunno:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 03:48:39 PM
They are going to own the crap out of Waters all game next week.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 03:50:13 PM
They are going to own the crap out of Waters all game next week.

Waters will not play until the second half when we are up by 20.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 03:54:34 PM
Waters is going to start.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 03:58:23 PM
Waters is going to start.

I sure hope not. I think this is the week that Bill finally gets it through his old skull that Waters is awful.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 04:02:23 PM
I think this is the week that Bill finally gets it through his old skull that Waters is awful.

I sure hope not.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 04:12:06 PM
two weeks. home game. wvu is finesse and not well coached. we will beat them by quite a bit. i have never been so sure of a point spread in my entire life.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 20, 2013, 04:23:25 PM
 
two weeks. home game. wvu is finesse and not well coached. we will beat them by quite a bit. i have never been so sure of a point spread in my entire life.

Sounds like Officer Daris just gave you his "lock up" of the week
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Pete on October 20, 2013, 04:26:44 PM
two weeks. home game. wvu is finesse and not well coached. we will beat them by quite a bit. i have never been so sure of a point spread in my entire life.

Sounds like Officer Daris just gave you his "lock up" of the week

Daris is what they call a "shark." 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 20, 2013, 04:28:14 PM
The 'eers confidence is shot while ours is rising

38-13
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 04:31:26 PM
41-7
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
two weeks. home game. wvu is finesse and not well coached. we will beat them by quite a bit. i have never been so sure of a point spread in my entire life.

Sounds like Officer Daris just gave you his "lock up" of the week

i absolutely did. feel free to turn the tables, put me in jail and throw away the key if i'm wrong. police safety tip---> i won't be.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Pete on October 20, 2013, 04:36:37 PM

i absolutely did. feel free to turn the tables, put me in jail and throw away the key if i'm wrong. police safety tip---> i won't be.

In all your years of service (and thank you), have you ever ever seen anything more criminal than the lowness of this line?  Wouldn't it almost be "stealing" to take the Cats giving 9?  Or, would the real crime be to NOT take the Cats?  Moral dilemma.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 04:38:04 PM
Ya know, I'm beginning to think I may be on the wrong board...
 

:shakesfist:

Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 04:40:48 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 04:48:15 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Pete on October 20, 2013, 04:50:15 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

ANSWER THE QUESTION, "CATZACKER!"
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 04:52:45 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 04:54:39 PM
I mean, i get that WestVa is shitty, but we're pretty shitty too so...
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Spracne on October 20, 2013, 04:55:32 PM
Should be a crap show. Can't wait.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: The Big Train on October 20, 2013, 04:56:02 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.

Our 2 best WR haven't played the last 2 weeks also.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 04:57:39 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.

Should be a barnburner!
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 05:01:09 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.

Our 2 best WR haven't played the last 2 weeks also.

are they playing this week?
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 05:01:43 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.

Luckily, this game shouldn't be close.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 05:04:27 PM
Should be a crap show. Can't wait.

Yep
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 05:06:04 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

ANSWER THE QUESTION, "CATZACKER!"

he won't answer it pete. i mean just look at the guy, he doesn't even use his real name when posting on this blog like you and i do.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 20, 2013, 05:07:08 PM
I expect the cats to play mediocre which should be enough to beat WVU
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 05:11:56 PM
I expect the cats to play mediocre which should be enough to beat WVU

Well that's just not a very nice thing to say.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: TownieCat on October 20, 2013, 05:13:49 PM
38-17 Cats.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: wetwillie on October 20, 2013, 05:16:28 PM
We got this, man.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 20, 2013, 05:18:11 PM
The game lines up well for us.  Coming off the buy week playing against our third straight spread team. The oline is playing better, Lockett and Thompson are Expected to play.  Wva just doesn't match up well with us.  Holgersen himself said it last year they don't even have scout team fb's and te's to simulate what we do in practice.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 05:18:55 PM
I guess I should actually tell you all how its gonna go down.

34-21 'Eers.

"It's a great day to be a Mountaineer, wherever you may be!"
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 05:23:41 PM
I can't wait until WVU trolls the hell out of our fan base then local radio hosts talk on air about how our fans are going to violently react against all WVU'ers in attendance. 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 05:24:38 PM
I guess I should actually tell you all how its gonna go down.

34-21 'Eers.

"It's a great day to be a Mountaineer, wherever you may be!"

i'm sure you've heard this a million/billion times, but i just now noticed how much west virginia looks like a turkey and was kind of surprised. interested state shape, huh? what's the deal w/ that?

also and in case you are wondering, kansas looks like a square if someone took a small bite out of the upper right corner.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 20, 2013, 05:30:14 PM
the amount of el caminos and private mobile domiciles in manhattan is going to explode this coming weekend
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 05:31:46 PM
I guess I should actually tell you all how its gonna go down.

34-21 'Eers.

"It's a great day to be a Mountaineer, wherever you may be!"

i'm sure you've heard this a million/billion times, but i just now noticed how much west virginia looks like a turkey and was kind of surprised. interested state shape, huh? what's the deal w/ that?

also and in case you are wondering, kansas looks like a square if someone took a small bite out of the upper right corner.

More of a rectangle, really.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 05:34:00 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

Take me home country roads....
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2013, 05:35:15 PM
You chose poorly, catzacker.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 05:38:25 PM
i'm sure you've heard this a million/billion times, but i just now noticed how much west virginia looks like a turkey and was kind of surprised. interested state shape, huh? what's the deal w/ that?

also and in case you are wondering, kansas looks like a square if someone took a small bite out of the upper right corner.

I enjoyed this post. :thumbs:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 05:40:40 PM
Halfway through the season and we haven't beaten a bcs team.   They have.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 05:41:02 PM
now that teams have more film to breakdown on sams, i think we could be in trouble.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 05:42:28 PM
this game will come down to WestVa's ability to breakdown film
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 05:47:42 PM
this game will come down to WestVa's ability to breakdown film

QB sweep/counter right, QB sweep/counter left.  Pretty easy.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 05:49:46 PM
this game will come down to WestVa's ability to breakdown film

QB sweep/counter right, QB sweep/counter left.  Pretty easy.

seemingly
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 05:51:46 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

Take me home country roads....

you're going to look very foolish in one week.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 20, 2013, 05:52:59 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

Take me home country roads....

you're going to look very foolish in one week.
that coming from the guy with wing sauce all over his face is really rich, lmao
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 20, 2013, 05:53:14 PM
Halfway through the season and we haven't beaten a bcs team.   They have.

Hard hitting analysis here you must be running some type of computer program to come up with this stuff.  Nobody else could have seen that angle.

Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 06:02:52 PM
guys, we're not very good.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 06:09:13 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

Take me home country roads....

you're going to look very foolish in one week.
that coming from the guy with wing sauce all over his face is really rich, lmao

i actually don't have wing sauce all over my face, but maybe that's because i have working hands, eyes and mouth as well as a functioning brain to accept all of that afferent information and coordinate accordingly. dunno.

Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 20, 2013, 06:10:17 PM
guys, we're not very good.
and wvu is? We run away with the next three games
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CyberToothCat on October 20, 2013, 06:10:34 PM
We have yet to reach 30 points against anyone with a pulse. I don't see how we can beat anyone by 9 or more, unless we completely shut down their offense. And I have seen nothing from our D to make me think we can shut down WVU. I think the Cats can win, but I sure don't think it will be by many points. 28-25 or so.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 20, 2013, 06:13:38 PM
guys, we're not very good.

We're not that good but not all that bad either.  WVA also isn't that good and they're on the road.  When two less than seller teams play take the home team. 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 20, 2013, 06:15:19 PM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

great message boarding "catzacker". let me ask you a serious question though.

if someone came to you and said that you had to pick one side of the line and if you lost they would kill you and you really knew that this person could and would kill you... what side would you pick?

Take me home country roads....

you're going to look very foolish in one week.
that coming from the guy with wing sauce all over his face is really rich, lmao

i actually don't have wing sauce all over my face, but maybe that's because i have working hands, eyes and mouth as well as a functioning brain to accept all of that afferent information and coordinate accordingly. dunno.
sounds like someone is having a crunchy peanut butter kinda day, smh
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Tobias on October 20, 2013, 06:16:08 PM
We have yet to reach 30 points against anyone with a pulse. I don't see how we can beat anyone by 9 or more, unless we completely shut down their offense. And I have seen nothing from our D to make me think we can shut down WVU. I think the Cats can win, but I sure don't think it will be by many points. 28-25 or so.

if anything is for sure, their only ability to generate offense by drawing pass interference flags is about to get shut the eff down.  our guys won't be anywhere near them.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 06:19:11 PM
We have yet to reach 30 points against anyone with a pulse. I don't see how we can beat anyone by 9 or more, unless we completely shut down their offense. And I have seen nothing from our D to make me think we can shut down WVU. I think the Cats can win, but I sure don't think it will be by many points. 28-25 or so.

1-it's at home
2-two weeks
3-they are not physical
4-we are/will be
5-snyder teams peak in the middle of the season
6-this is the middle of the season
7-they are poorly coached
8-see game last year


Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 06:25:52 PM
we commit penalties every other play and our offense is not explosive
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CHONGS on October 20, 2013, 06:27:04 PM
In[95]:= scoreMachine[stats2,"West Virginia", "Kansas State"]
Out[95]= West Virginia   23
Kansas State   39
Title: Re: -9
Post by: wetwillie on October 20, 2013, 06:27:19 PM
I need TLBL to be back you guise.  That would boost my confidence ALOT.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: cDubya on October 20, 2013, 06:45:08 PM
Here's some analysis for ya...

WVU
3rd own:   att/made - 33/106    31.1%
4th down: att/made - 4/12        33.3%
Passing TD/Int - 9/7
Rushing Yd/Att - 4.3    TD: 9
Penalties/Yds: 41/388


KSU
3rd down: att/made - 38/78      48.7%
4th down: att/made - 3/6          50.0%
Passing TD/Int - 6/9
Rushing Yd/Att - 4.6    TD: 14
Penalties/Yds: 32/267

There, some stats.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kso_FAN on October 20, 2013, 07:00:40 PM
Here's some analysis for ya...

WVU
3rd own:   att/made - 33/106    31.1%
4th down: att/made - 4/12        33.3%
Passing TD/Int - 9/7
Rushing Yd/Att - 4.3    TD: 9
Penalties/Yds: 41/388


KSU
3rd down: att/made - 38/78      48.7%
4th down: att/made - 3/6          50.0%
Passing TD/Int - 6/9
Rushing Yd/Att - 4.6    TD: 14
Penalties/Yds: 32/267

There, some stats.  :thumbsup:

Nice cDubyalysis.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: DQ12 on October 20, 2013, 07:02:16 PM
we're going to smash west virginia's ass into the cold hard dirt.  that's a fact.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: XocolateThundarr on October 20, 2013, 07:26:57 PM
CONFIDENCE RISING!!
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kso_FAN on October 20, 2013, 07:30:19 PM
Guys,  national college football experts have called K-State the best 2-4 team in the country.  We got this.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 07:37:49 PM
you guys, and i'm being dead serious when i say this, only a rough ridin' mouth breathing idiot or person who has never actually watched kstate football over the past twenty years would think we won't cover. my god.

i mean if i had one billion dollars that would obviously cover me and everything that i could ever want to do for the rest of my life, i'd take that billion and bet every last penny just cause why not have 2 billion? we are covering. easily.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 07:41:51 PM
Guys,  national college football experts have called K-State the best 2-4 team in the country.  We got this.

Paul Rhodes type stuff here.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 08:19:08 PM
BKCat, tnuss, hjfklmor, wollam and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.


wow. a literal who's who. 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:22:26 PM
This game has kstate blowout written all over it.  Tuff break for the frighten spittoons.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: BKCat on October 20, 2013, 08:23:21 PM
BKCat, tnuss, hjfklmor, wollam and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.


wow. a literal who's who.

Cats by 60, rick daris.

 :ksu:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2013, 08:24:12 PM
If there is anyone who knows how to dig themselves out of a hole, it's miners, guys.  This one may be tough.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 08:26:00 PM
BKCat, tnuss, hjfklmor, wollam and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.


wow. a literal who's who.


yes, BKCat! yes!  :Woohoo:
Cats by 60, rick daris.

 :ksu:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:26:49 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:28:40 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:30:29 PM
We're 23-9 over our last 30 and about to win 6 straight
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:32:02 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them. 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 20, 2013, 08:33:22 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

I think it is 3-6 in our 9.  If this doesn't make a cat fan confident I don't know what will.  Best 3-6 team in the country.  Can't wait for the DVD.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:35:06 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:39:46 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:41:33 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: AndrewVonLintel on October 20, 2013, 08:41:54 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses


Our worst loss is at home to North Dakota State. Sagarin Rankings says NDSU is 42nd in the country. Other Notable losses include: 
@Texas (31st), @OSU (21), @Baylor (18, 2012) , Baylor (4,  2013), Oregon (2, 2012).

I am eagerly awaiting the Thursday Howevers from Clams but in the meantime I will take the Cats by 17 at home.
 :thumbs:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:45:20 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:47:33 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good

What kind of an idiot says "I'm not sure I believe that"?

Just rechecked and its actually 11-7.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:51:35 PM
We're 3-6 in our last nine with wins against Texas (last season), Umass, and ULL.  I mean, if that doesn't make you confident, I don't know what will.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 20, 2013, 08:54:07 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good

One of the teams we lost to is also one of the teams we beat (Texas).  I suspect they are helping that record quite a bit.  Also la la might be winning some they were picked to win their league. 

Regardless the 3-6 talking point is about the dumbest of the dumb.  Never mind we won the 10 prior to that stretch they don't count.  Schedules don't eb and flow at all and no stretches are any harder then any others.  You are just always measured by how you did in your last 9 even when it crosses seasons. 
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 08:55:34 PM
We're 3-6 in our last nine with wins against Texas (last season), Umass, and ULL.  I mean, if that doesn't make you confident, I don't know what will.

That's not what this is about
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kim carnes on October 20, 2013, 08:58:40 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good

One of the teams we lost to is also one of the teams we beat (Texas).  I suspect they are helping that record quite a bit.  Also la la might be winning some they were picked to win their league. 

Regardless the 3-6 talking point is about the dumbest of the dumb.  Never mind we won the 10 prior to that stretch they don't count.  Schedules don't eb and flow at all and no stretches are any harder then any others.  You are just always measured by how you did in your last 9 even when it crosses seasons.

So talking about winning 10 straight with an entirely different roster is a better talking point?
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 09:00:44 PM
we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good

One of the teams we lost to is also one of the teams we beat (Texas).  I suspect they are helping that record quite a bit.  Also la la might be winning some they were picked to win their league. 

Regardless the 3-6 talking point is about the dumbest of the dumb.  Never mind we won the 10 prior to that stretch they don't count.  Schedules don't eb and flow at all and no stretches are any harder then any others.  You are just always measured by how you did in your last 9 even when it crosses seasons.

yeah. obvious for those of us with IQ's over 90 but not so much for others. you end the year with ku, wvu and iowa state and then start the conference with those same schools and every one is calling for a forty point blow out this weekend.

but you end the year with baylor, texas and oregon and start the year with the teams we did and now all of the sudden, pansy/dumbass wvu is going to walk into mhk and take it to us. it would be funny if it wasn't so stupid. oh well.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: GoodForAnother on October 20, 2013, 09:18:59 PM
#team9and4 is predicting a #blowoutforthecats
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 20, 2013, 09:29:07 PM
hey guys remember last year when we beat them by a kabillion million at night on national tv in morgantown?

they had geno smith and that receiver that got drafted in the first round and the other that got drafted in the third round? but as a team they were such huge, gigantic, horribly coached pussies that they could not deal w/ us? remember that?
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 20, 2013, 09:34:23 PM
hey guys remember last year when we beat them by a kabillion million at night on national tv in morgantown?

they had geno smith and that receiver that got drafted in the first round and the other that got drafted in the third round? but as a team they were such huge, gigantic, horribly coached pussies that they could not deal w/ us? remember that?

Yeah, but this will be a road game for them and they've looked good on the road this year (@bu 56-0, @Maryland 37-0, @ou 16-7)
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Kelsey_Grammar on October 20, 2013, 09:40:34 PM

we're like 3-8 in our last 11 games, and all the wins were against bad teams  :cry:

You have to ho back like three years to get to 8 losses

ok.  we're 3-6.  that is god awful and cause for concern.  we played 2 good teams during that stretch and were physically destroyed by both of them.

The teams we've lost to over that stretch are a collective 167-13 over their last 30 games, including 33-3 this season.

what is the record of the teams we beat during that stretch?  thats what i want to know
10-8.

i'm not sure i believe that, but either way, its not good

Schedules don't eb and flow at all and no stretches are any harder then any others.

I believe you meant to say that schedules don't *ebb and flow at all and no stretches are harder *than any others...
Title: Re: -9
Post by: PowercatPat on October 20, 2013, 10:06:38 PM
Steve Dave is exposing a lot of dumbasses in this thread.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 20, 2013, 10:28:56 PM
#team9and4 is predicting a #blowoutforthecats
:woot:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: TownieCat on October 21, 2013, 09:16:42 AM
Up to -10 on most sites now... America knows this is going to be a good ol' fashioned ass kicking at the coal aggies' expense. Wouldn't be surprised to see the line close at 12 or 13. Either way it won't be enough.

#team9and4  :emawkid:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: slimz on October 21, 2013, 10:30:25 AM
There is a lot for KSU to be confident about in the midst of this 3 game losing streak.  Turnovers, penalties, poor play calling....yep, a lot of momentum.

I'd like to add to this by saying that our defense has toppled like a house of cards whenever we need a stop in the final minutes of a close game.  Further, I'd like to add that our offense has looked completely incompetent whenever we need to score in the final minutes of a close game.  Also, our receivers and running backs suck.

While these have been legitimate points of concern, I think they'll be remedied by the bye week. After all, history has shown that Snyder can put extra practice time to excellent use. Just look at how well the team played with a month to prepare for Arkansas and Oregon...not to mention the thrashing they gave NDSU after having a full offseason to prepare. And after our most recent bye week, we really gave the Cowboys a scare! Clear sailing this week, boys.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 21, 2013, 10:32:02 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 21, 2013, 10:57:23 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 21, 2013, 10:58:12 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.
and homecoming, game blouses
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 21, 2013, 10:58:54 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

Bill has struggled with that goal so far this season, but by and large, he's abided by it fairly well over the course of his career.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on October 21, 2013, 11:18:44 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.
:thumbs:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: TownieCat on October 21, 2013, 11:20:14 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

Bill has struggled with that goal so far this season, but by and large, he's abided by it fairly well over the course of his career.

 :thumbs:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kso_FAN on October 21, 2013, 11:27:42 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 21, 2013, 11:43:44 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kslim on October 21, 2013, 11:45:19 AM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

lol and USC and Baylor 11' and OU last year and every texas team ever and lol
Title: Re: -9
Post by: catzacker on October 21, 2013, 12:18:45 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

lol and USC and Baylor 11' and OU last year and every texas team ever and lol

USC was an equal team (I believe they finished with the same record as we did).  OU was an equal team to us last year (we tied for the conference).  Baylor was not as good as us in '11 (hence our conference standing).

Look, it really isn't rocket science.  What defines you as a good team is also what defines you as a bad team.  Wins and Losses.  And when you don't win - you're a crappy team, which probably means you lost to all the teams above you and probably a few "equal" crappy teams.  When you're a good team, you've probably beaten all the teams below you and most of the teams of the "equal" good teams.  Of course there are the exceptions to both sides (crappy teams beating good teams).

We are 2-4.  We suck.  I'm sorry this is a problem for everyone to grasp.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: TownieCat on October 21, 2013, 12:26:19 PM

USC was an equal team (I believe they finished with the same record as we did).  OU was an equal team to us last year (we tied for the conference).  Baylor was not as good as us in '11 (hence our conference standing).

Look, it really isn't rocket science.  What defines you as a good team is also what defines you as a bad team.  Wins and Losses.  And when you don't win - you're a crappy team, which probably means you lost to all the teams above you and probably a few "equal" crappy teams.  When you're a good team, you've probably beaten all the teams below you and most of the teams of the "equal" good teams.  Of course there are the exceptions to both sides (crappy teams beating good teams).

We are 2-4.  We suck.  I'm sorry this is a problem for everyone to grasp.

We should have lost more games in '02, '11, and '12 to make the USC, Baylor*, and OU wins stand out more as good wins.

*Baylor finished 10-3 in 2011  :gocho:
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 21, 2013, 12:41:34 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.   

Title: Re: -9
Post by: Skipper44 on October 21, 2013, 02:45:44 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.
losing to this WVU team would be up there with the Snyder's worst home losses of all time.  Marshall in 03 was 8-4 (6-2 in the Mac), 05 A&M was 5-6 (3-5).

After looking at it, it would likely be the worst home loss since losing to a 2-9 (1-6) Missouri team in 89.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 21, 2013, 03:12:15 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.
losing to this WVU team would be up there with the Snyder's worst home losses of all time.  Marshall in 03 was 8-4 (6-2 in the Mac), 05 A&M was 5-6 (3-5).

After looking at it, it would likely be the worst home loss since losing to a 2-9 (1-6) Missouri team in 89.

I don't think losing to this WVU team would be nearly as bad as the loss to NDSU earlier this season.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kostakio on October 21, 2013, 03:29:20 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.
losing to this WVU team would be up there with the Snyder's worst home losses of all time.  Marshall in 03 was 8-4 (6-2 in the Mac), 05 A&M was 5-6 (3-5).

After looking at it, it would likely be the worst home loss since losing to a 2-9 (1-6) Missouri team in 89.

I don't think losing to this WVU team would be nearly as bad as the loss to NDSU earlier this season.

Hard to compare to the two because of the nature of the game.  It's a more shocking loss because they are an FCS team.  But as far as actually having to line up and play the game under those circumstances then it was a harder game then this WVA game is.

Title: Re: -9
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 21, 2013, 03:44:45 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.
losing to this WVU team would be up there with the Snyder's worst home losses of all time.  Marshall in 03 was 8-4 (6-2 in the Mac), 05 A&M was 5-6 (3-5).

After looking at it, it would likely be the worst home loss since losing to a 2-9 (1-6) Missouri team in 89.

I don't think losing to this WVU team would be nearly as bad as the loss to NDSU earlier this season.

Hard to compare to the two because of the nature of the game.  It's a more shocking loss because they are an FCS team.  But as far as actually having to line up and play the game under those circumstances then it was a harder game then this WVA game is.

Under what circumstances? WVU has more scholarships and better athletes than NDSU. I think we will blow out WVU but we should have blown out NDSU, too.
Title: Re: -9
Post by: kso_FAN on October 21, 2013, 03:51:32 PM
Snyder is really good against crappy teams coming off a bye week. He's pretty good against crappy teams without the bye week, too.

This needs to be the 17th goal:  Beat crappy teams, lose to the good ones.

By and large that has been the most consistent aspect of Snyder's program.

he usually beats equal to and lesser teams.  when he sucks, he loses to equal teams (which by default means we lose to crappy/sucky teams).  see: this year (and '04 and '05).  WVU is an equal team, no matter how many ChUMPs say differently.

even in 04 and 05 we pretty much beat the equal teams at home.
losing to this WVU team would be up there with the Snyder's worst home losses of all time.  Marshall in 03 was 8-4 (6-2 in the Mac), 05 A&M was 5-6 (3-5).

After looking at it, it would likely be the worst home loss since losing to a 2-9 (1-6) Missouri team in 89.

I don't think losing to this WVU team would be nearly as bad as the loss to NDSU earlier this season.

Hard to compare to the two because of the nature of the game.  It's a more shocking loss because they are an FCS team.  But as far as actually having to line up and play the game under those circumstances then it was a harder game then this WVA game is.

Under what circumstances? WVU has more scholarships and better athletes than NDSU. I think we will blow out WVU but we should have blown out NDSU, too.

First game, new quarterback, defensive personnel losses vs a team returning nearly everyone from teams that won a ton of games. Plus, Sams missed a significant amount of practice in the early part of fall camp.

Granted, there is no excuse to lose to a FCS school, but the circumstances going in were not great for us.