goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: kso_FAN on October 18, 2016, 03:27:16 PM

Title: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 18, 2016, 03:27:16 PM
The match-up according to those Big 12 stats I posted yesterday.

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F10%2F2016-KSU-vs-Texas.png&hash=8e1230f1ea290a0dd4ad89333abe33440a9c575a)

YPP = yards per play
PPP = points per play
PPD = points per drive
PPD<40 = points per drive inside the opponent's 40 yardline
AFP = average starting field position
Succ% = Offensive success percentage (Success = 50% of the yards to gain on first, 70% on 2nd down, and 100% on 3rd/4th down)
TO Margin = Turnover margin per game

KSU games = @WVU, Tech, @OU
UT games = @OSU, OU, ISU

The match up is even on paper.
We've played a slightly tougher schedule.
We are at home.

Cats 38 - Horns 30
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: cfbandyman on October 18, 2016, 03:38:04 PM
I think we got this, probably will follow a similar script to the TT game, fairly close and shootout at HT, after half we clamp down on D and pull out a close victory.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 18, 2016, 03:40:22 PM
Maybe our defense won't bother to read Robinett's garbage this week and we come out strong in the first half.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: CHONGS on October 18, 2016, 03:40:53 PM
maybe something else to look at:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.stack.imgur.com%2F5zqN3.png&hash=682695f6446fb39d2644c9196e3244ebeaccef24)

I fear Texas successfully grinding out long (in terms of yardage not time) drives against our defense and our offense stalling on long drives. We will likely need at least one non-offensive TD to win.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 03:48:20 PM
maybe something else to look at:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.stack.imgur.com%2F5zqN3.png&hash=682695f6446fb39d2644c9196e3244ebeaccef24)

I fear Texas successfully grinding out long (in terms of yardage not time) drives against our defense and our offense stalling on long drives. We will likely need at least one non-offensive TD to win.

Their offense is scarier than Tech's because they can run and because their defense is not as garbage as tech's.  They aren't as good as WVU, but this game might play out similarly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: CNS on October 18, 2016, 04:09:14 PM
Vegas should offer a 3pt advantage due to home field, and another 7pt advantage because KSU, when it comes to this game.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 18, 2016, 05:41:35 PM
maybe something else to look at:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.stack.imgur.com%2F5zqN3.png&hash=682695f6446fb39d2644c9196e3244ebeaccef24)

I fear Texas successfully grinding out long (in terms of yardage not time) drives against our defense and our offense stalling on long drives. We will likely need at least one non-offensive TD to win.

Their offense is scarier than Tech's because they can run and because their defense is not as garbage as tech's.  They aren't as good as WVU, but this game might play out similarly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think their ability/willingness to run makes them a better matchup for us. I also think the type of running attack they have also helps us. They don't do as much to get Forman in space as OU does with their backs. Texas will make this a battle of fronts and we have a very good front. UT has been tested on the road plenty so Buechele should be fine on that account but this will be the first good defense he'll see on the road. I think we jump out early, for once and keep UT at arms length. 31-21
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kim carnes on October 18, 2016, 07:49:50 PM
It's going to be hard to root for us in this one
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 18, 2016, 09:30:42 PM
maybe something else to look at:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.stack.imgur.com%2F5zqN3.png&hash=682695f6446fb39d2644c9196e3244ebeaccef24)

I fear Texas successfully grinding out long (in terms of yardage not time) drives against our defense and our offense stalling on long drives. We will likely need at least one non-offensive TD to win.

Their offense is scarier than Tech's because they can run and because their defense is not as garbage as tech's.  They aren't as good as WVU, but this game might play out similarly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think their ability/willingness to run makes them a better matchup for us. I also think the type of running attack they have also helps us. They don't do as much to get Forman in space as OU does with their backs. Texas will make this a battle of fronts and we have a very good front. UT has been tested on the road plenty so Buechele should be fine on that account but this will be the first good defense he'll see on the road. I think we jump out early, for once and keep UT at arms length. 31-21

This. We're solid against a run heavy offense, and their frosh qb isnt capable of carrying them. Their defense is white hot garbage. We'll win by 17.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kim carnes on October 18, 2016, 09:48:48 PM
Guys, we aren't good at defense.  Stop saying that we are.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 19, 2016, 08:13:05 AM
bcftoys.com says Cats 32-Horns 26 with a .665 chance of winning.

Also projected to finish 7-5 or 6-6. Very likely wins over ISU and KU and a toss up vs OSU slightly in our favor.

http://www.bcftoys.com/2016-game-projections/
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: PurpleOil on October 19, 2016, 08:40:12 AM
I can see this game going either way. I'd like to believe my cats will pull out the W but I can see us making costly mistakes and poor play calling like against WVU as well.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 19, 2016, 08:45:44 AM
I can see us making costly mistakes and poor play calling like against WVU as well.

I think if we play a similar game against WVU at home we win. Plus Texas isn't nearly as good as WVU.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on October 19, 2016, 08:53:48 AM
Two more factors in our favor...

1) Homecoming

2) "Cold" weather

It should be about 55 degrees when the teams come out for warmups and to Texans, that is "cold".   

I crap you not, I went to a HS game last week that was 64 degrees at kickoff and people were bundled up and complaining like it was last years Iowa State game weather.

:lol:
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 19, 2016, 10:23:40 AM
Guys hate to say it but Mack Brown isn't running out of that tunnel.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 19, 2016, 10:29:55 AM
Guys hate to say it but Mack Brown isn't running out of that tunnel.

True, the dominant Charlie Strong is now running things (with his .451 winning percentage while in Austin).
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 19, 2016, 10:34:56 AM
Guys hate to say it but Mack Brown isn't running out of that tunnel.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=400547878
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on October 19, 2016, 11:31:04 AM
 :cheese:
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 19, 2016, 11:43:20 AM
Here is Mack's "bad" stretch at Texas his last 4 years:

2010   Texas   5–7   2–6   6th (South)         
2011   Texas   8–5   4–5   T–6th   W Holiday      
2012   Texas   9–4   5–4   T–3rd   W Alamo   18   19
2013   Texas   8–5   7–2   T–2nd   L Alamo

Here is Charlie Strong:

2014   Texas   6–7   5–4   T–4th   L Texas      
2015   Texas   5–7   4–5   T–5th         
2016   Texas   3–3   1–2
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 19, 2016, 11:48:01 AM
Guys hate to say it but Mack Brown isn't running out of that tunnel.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=400547878

Waters/Lockett aren't running out, either.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 19, 2016, 12:34:07 PM
Oh, we'll have success in one facet of the game on offense, and then blam . . . SYSTEM OVERRIDE kicks in and demands balance in the calling of plays to indicate balance, because the SYSTEM demands balance.

I also foresee a lot of Insta-Mono, like DM rips off a nice run, and then heads to the sideline with Insta-Mono.


 
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Katpappy on October 19, 2016, 12:45:49 PM
It's going to be hard to root for us in this one
Birds of a feather all fly in the same direction.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 19, 2016, 12:52:29 PM
Oh, we'll have success in one facet of the game on offense, and then blam . . . SYSTEM OVERRIDE kicks in and demands balance in the calling of plays to indicate balance, because the SYSTEM demands balance.

I also foresee a lot of Insta-Mono, like DM rips off a nice run, and then heads to the sideline with Insta-Mono.

There will be several moments where it will appear we are throwing the game like the time we actually did throw the game for Mack.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: Prince McJunkins on October 19, 2016, 01:17:52 PM
bcftoys.com says Cats 32-Horns 26 with a .665 chance of winning.

Also projected to finish 7-5 or 6-6. Very likely wins over ISU and KU and a toss up vs OSU slightly in our favor.

http://www.bcftoys.com/2016-game-projections/

I think we'll lose to ISU.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 22, 2016, 04:06:17 PM
maybe something else to look at:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.stack.imgur.com%2F5zqN3.png&hash=682695f6446fb39d2644c9196e3244ebeaccef24)

I fear Texas successfully grinding out long (in terms of yardage not time) drives against our defense and our offense stalling on long drives. We will likely need at least one non-offensive TD to win.

Their offense is scarier than Tech's because they can run and because their defense is not as garbage as tech's.  They aren't as good as WVU, but this game might play out similarly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think their ability/willingness to run makes them a better matchup for us. I also think the type of running attack they have also helps us. They don't do as much to get Forman in space as OU does with their backs. Texas will make this a battle of fronts and we have a very good front. UT has been tested on the road plenty so Buechele should be fine on that account but this will be the first good defense he'll see on the road. I think we jump out early, for once and keep UT at arms length. 31-21

Damn you Charles Jones
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 22, 2016, 04:41:45 PM
I really think it's a blow out if Jones scores there. Like 38-14.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 22, 2016, 05:37:11 PM
I really think you're ugly
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: pvegs on October 22, 2016, 05:41:49 PM
I really think it's a blow out if Jones scores there. Like 38-14.

i actually agree with Fan, even tho overall i think we are all kinds of ugly, boring, horrorshow.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 22, 2016, 05:47:51 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 22, 2016, 06:08:01 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.

That's fair.

It looked like they were on the verge of packing it in on that drive. We held them to 3 and out to start and Jones was gashing them. While Silmon had some nice runs later, the other effect was that Jones didn't play again. He was having one of his better games and I bet he finishes with 150 on the ground and a couple scores if he doesn't cough that. Purely hindsight, but that's the feel I had before the fumble. Charlie might have been able to get a little more fight from his guys at 28-7, but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: _33 on October 22, 2016, 06:17:04 PM
Every time my wife schedules a kids bday party exactly during a KSU cats football game, we win.    ;)
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 22, 2016, 06:21:35 PM
Game totals:
50% offensive success rate (including the final 2 garbage plays)
5.19 yards per play (5.75 Big 12 ave before today, 3.77 K-State ave before today)
.31 points per play (.41 Big 12 ave, .37 K-State ave)
2.4 points per drive (2.4 Big 12 ave, 2.26 K-State ave)

1st half:
59% success rate
5.3 YPP
.46 PPP
4.2 PPD

2nd half:
38% success rate
5.03 YPP
.09 PPP
0.6 PPD
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 22, 2016, 06:29:14 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.

That's fair.

It looked like they were on the verge of packing it in on that drive. We held them to 3 and out to start and Jones was gashing them. While Silmon had some nice runs later, the other effect was that Jones didn't play again. He was having one of his better games and I bet he finishes with 150 on the ground and a couple scores if he doesn't cough that. Purely hindsight, but that's the feel I had before the fumble. Charlie might have been able to get a little more fight from his guys at 28-7, but I'm not sure.

Taking him out for fumbling there is stupid. Especially him, he doesn't need any lessons on taking care of the ball. Jones is amazingly good at keeping the ball secure.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: pvegs on October 22, 2016, 06:30:53 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.

That's fair.

It looked like they were on the verge of packing it in on that drive. We held them to 3 and out to start and Jones was gashing them. While Silmon had some nice runs later, the other effect was that Jones didn't play again. He was having one of his better games and I bet he finishes with 150 on the ground and a couple scores if he doesn't cough that. Purely hindsight, but that's the feel I had before the fumble. Charlie might have been able to get a little more fight from his guys at 28-7, but I'm not sure.

Taking him out for fumbling there is stupid. Especially him, he doesn't need any lessons on taking care of the ball. Jones is amazingly good at keeping the ball secure.

this is correct. jones rarely fumbles. dumb move.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: michigancat on October 22, 2016, 06:31:30 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.

That's fair.

It looked like they were on the verge of packing it in on that drive. We held them to 3 and out to start and Jones was gashing them. While Silmon had some nice runs later, the other effect was that Jones didn't play again. He was having one of his better games and I bet he finishes with 150 on the ground and a couple scores if he doesn't cough that. Purely hindsight, but that's the feel I had before the fumble. Charlie might have been able to get a little more fight from his guys at 28-7, but I'm not sure.

Taking him out for fumbling there is stupid. Especially him, he doesn't need any lessons on taking care of the ball. Jones is amazingly good at keeping the ball secure.
Yep, I was pissed about it, too. It's not like he benched Ertz for that terrible INT.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: kso_FAN on October 22, 2016, 06:32:58 PM
Kidding about fan looking like Shaka Smart aside, I don't know how that second half plays out differently if Jones scored. We certainly played that second half like we were up three scores anyway and UT played that second half pretty wide open. There was only one punt between both teams after the fumble.

That's fair.

It looked like they were on the verge of packing it in on that drive. We held them to 3 and out to start and Jones was gashing them. While Silmon had some nice runs later, the other effect was that Jones didn't play again. He was having one of his better games and I bet he finishes with 150 on the ground and a couple scores if he doesn't cough that. Purely hindsight, but that's the feel I had before the fumble. Charlie might have been able to get a little more fight from his guys at 28-7, but I'm not sure.

Taking him out for fumbling there is stupid. Especially him, he doesn't need any lessons on taking care of the ball. Jones is amazingly good at keeping the ball secure.

I agree completely. I could see one series, but he's your most consistent back and a senior leader. He should have absolutely been back on the field.
Title: Re: Chisholm victory?
Post by: cfbandyman on October 22, 2016, 06:33:49 PM
I really think it's a blow out if Jones scores there. Like 38-14.

Agreed, it really changed the outlook of the game. We were actually fairly proficient in the first half on offense, which was nice to see. Not amazing by any stretch but some of the best I've seen this year, and even that drive to get to Jones' fumble was going pretty good, and then it happened, and the rest of the game was unnecessarily close. The defense did well for the most part especially once we began to turn the ball over again and again.