goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: MixBerryCrunch on December 03, 2016, 05:33:31 PM
-
I think so. Thoughts?
-
Yes. I feel like we limited ourselves from getting to 10-2 (WVU and OSU), but overall it was a good season with a very bright future.
-
Literally two plays from being 10-2. There are two ways of looking at that.
-
Absolutely.
-
8-4 should be seen as something we can achieve regularly. We got the minimum marker of success, so yes, it was.
-
Literally two plays from being 10-2. There are two ways of looking at that.
Also literally two plays from being 6-6.
-
If this would have been the rebuilding year after 2014, I'd feel better. But we had last year's 6-7 lost year stinker wedged in there. If we finish it off 9-4, I'm more than pleased.
-
Literally two plays from being 10-2. There are two ways of looking at that.
Also literally two plays from being 6-6.
:rolleyes:
-
yes. although the stanford trip was fun, i wish we wouldn't have scheduled them. wvu/okst were infuriating. but, i will absolutely take 8-4 particularly with what we have coming back. hard not to be excited about what could be in 2017. need ertz's shoulder hernia to heal if that is what is causing him to suck most of the time throwing the ball.
-
Yes it was a success. Yes the way the season shook out we should have done better. Yes there were many frustrating aspects from this season, but 8-4 is 100% a successful season.
-
i don't like that this is our ceiling but i guess it's better than losing 8 games
-
Win bowl game then yes
-
It's not our ceiling tho. This should have been a 10 win team. Very young and they weren't confident at Stanford to start the year. Watch out Big 12. This team is going places in the next two years.
-
should have been!!
-
it's good to know that we're the only b12 team that's going to get better next year
-
Yes
-
it's good to know that we're the only b12 team that's going to get better next year
We also were the only team that played young talent and are returning their QB.
-
it's good to know that we're the only b12 team that's going to get better next year
We also were the only team that played young talent and are returning their QB.
Um, OU gets Baker back.
Damn! He trippin' so hard fans are gonna think he done fell off!
-
Nope. And Mason Rudolph isn't going to be back next year either
-
I love the condescending tone from my friends and pals, but we pretty much went 8-4 with Sophomore's, a shitty Barnett (who?), and Willis (who the big 12 figured out and started passing quick against us). :excited:
-
it's probably a good thing that we return basically our entire team next year.
-
Will miss Will-is
-
Will also miss Moore, and Starks, but Cre has been solid the last two games at NB.
-
Cre is an adorable twitter follow, or was until his dui
-
is sizelove ready to whip some ass yet? Someone named Jayd Kirby is on the two deep.
-
I thought with our schedule we would be a better team than last year but with an equal or worse record...so a success methinks!
-
At Vanderbilt instead of at Stanford. :dunno:
Squawks, isu, tech should be locks to repeat Ws. Baylor too barring something super weird.
Repeat Ws vs. texas and tcu? You'd think they wouldn't both continue to suck. :dunno:
Will western virginia and osu continue to be adequate? Possible opportunities to flip Ls to Ws there. :dunno:
OU's good.
:dunno:
-
Yes to the OP
Anything short of Arlington next year and it wont mean crap
-
@osu will be very tough and ou owns the cats in manhattan
-
it's good to know that we're the only b12 team that's going to get better next year
We also were the only team that played young talent and are returning their QB.
TCU, FWIW.
-
I'm happy with the way this season ended and legitimately excited about the future of the program for the first time in a while.
-
it's good to know that we're the only b12 team that's going to get better next year
We also were the only team that played young talent and are returning their QB.
TCU, FWIW.
I was being very sarcastic in that post and my post about QBs
-
@osu will be very tough and ou owns the cats in manhattan
This.
-
Also, finishing with 5 wins in our last 6 games and a nice bowl win puts us in position to have a nice 15-20 ranking to start next season. If we want to dream of being in playoff contention, starting ranked would be a really good thing for us.
-
Also, finishing with 5 wins in our last 6 games and a nice bowl win puts us in position to have a nice 15-20 ranking to start next season. If we want to dream of being in playoff contention, starting ranked would be a really good thing for us.
Eh if we go 12-1 or 13-0 which we would have to to get in, being ranked to start the season won't matter. In 2011 we made it all the way from unranked to 12th before we lost to OU, and then after losing to OSU we battled from 17th back to 11th before the bowl game.
-
Yes to the OP
Anything short of Arlington next year and it wont mean crap
We have three conference championships and three championship game appearances in the history of the program. Its 50/50 whether we'll even finish this year in the top 25. Who the hell do you think we are? I was going to say that there are three programs in the country who can view not appearing in a CCG as a failed season but one of those three didn't make it this year but they're going to the CFP.
-
of course this season was a success. no question.
-
Considering this team is arguably (or is) the youngest team under HCBS, and to go from 3-3 to 8-4?
That's pretty damned good if you tell me. Sets up a nice run for 2017 and 2018.
-
Some potential stars started to emerge (Barnes, Pringle, Reed), overall units looked stronger as the year progressed (WR, RB, OL, DL, LB), and Ertz quietly amassed one of the best statistical seasons in the last 25 years of the program.
I would have liked to see them win ten games, but given the youth, and the fact that this staff didn't really know what they wanted this team to be until about seven games in, it was a very successful year.
If we get A&M in Houston, that's a very winnable game. It would be great exposure for the program, as odd as that is to say.
-
Yes to the OP
Anything short of Arlington next year and it wont mean crap
We have three conference championships and three championship game appearances in the history of the program. Its 50/50 whether we'll even finish this year in the top 25. Who the hell 5do you think we are? I was going to say that there are three programs in the country who can view not appearing in a CCG as a failed season but one of those three didn't make it this year but they're going to the CFP.
i think we are a very talented young team that potentially will have a crap load of momentum going into the season. Our schedule sets up nicely to make a real run next year. Sorry if i put the bar higher than others but time is running out
-
I hope the coaches learned or at least were reminded how to finish a game. I think they did. gotta fix our kicker.
-
Also, finishing with 5 wins in our last 6 games and a nice bowl win puts us in position to have a nice 15-20 ranking to start next season. If we want to dream of being in playoff contention, starting ranked would be a really good thing for us.
Eh if we go 12-1 or 13-0 which we would have to to get in, being ranked to start the season won't matter. In 2011 we made it all the way from unranked to 12th before we lost to OU, and then after losing to OSU we battled from 17th back to 11th before the bowl game.
It matters a lot when you have multiple one loss teams.
-
Also, of course this season was a success. The fact that this is even a question seems bizarre.
Also, please stop complaining about scheduling Stanford and stop insinuating this is practically a 10 win team. Thanks.
-
Also, finishing with 5 wins in our last 6 games and a nice bowl win puts us in position to have a nice 15-20 ranking to start next season. If we want to dream of being in playoff contention, starting ranked would be a really good thing for us.
Eh if we go 12-1 or 13-0 which we would have to to get in, being ranked to start the season won't matter. In 2011 we made it all the way from unranked to 12th before we lost to OU, and then after losing to OSU we battled from 17th back to 11th before the bowl game.
It matters a lot when you have multiple one loss teams.
We'll see. I hope we have a good enough season that we have a discussion about preseason ranking or lack there of hurts or helps our spot in the CFP.
-
Yes to the OP
Anything short of Arlington next year and it wont mean crap
We have three conference championships and three championship game appearances in the history of the program. Its 50/50 whether we'll even finish this year in the top 25. Who the hell 5do you think we are? I was going to say that there are three programs in the country who can view not appearing in a CCG as a failed season but one of those three didn't make it this year but they're going to the CFP.
i think we are a very talented young team that potentially will have a crap load of momentum going into the season. Our schedule sets up nicely to make a real run next year. Sorry if i put the bar higher than others but time is running out
The "schedule sets up nicely" talking point is so weird to me. What about it is substantially better outside of an assumed easier road noncon game in Nashville instead of Palo Alto and an extra home conference game? We don't even no the order or dates yet.
-
Well scott these games at home make it easier imo. Vandy is not that good.
Isu
Ou
Tcu
Wvu
Baylor (yes the will probably suck)
-
Also, of course this season was a success. The fact that this is even a question seems bizarre.
Also, please stop complaining about scheduling Stanford and stop insinuating this is practically a 10 win team. Thanks.
Like
-
No doubt it was a successful season. No bad losses, a good win.
Not sure it means much for next year. IMHO a playoff run seems very fanciful.
-
Playoff run is way out there. I just want a run at the pepper and i think its doable
-
Well scott these games at home make it easier imo. Vandy is not that good.
Isu
Ou
Tcu
Wvu
Baylor (yes the will probably suck)
I think we would be better served to be playing Tech Oklahoma State and UT at home than OU TCU and WV. If we are playing late in the season at UT that is a recipe for disaster. Like wise if we have to open up at Tech without giving them time to quit on the season could also be bad, and we would be favored to beat Oklahoma State at home next year, not on the road.
-
Well scott these games at home make it easier imo. Vandy is not that good.
Isu
Ou
Tcu
Wvu
Baylor (yes the will probably suck)
Vandy next season will be as good as Stanford was this year, if not better.
-
Yes. Winning the bowl game and nine games would change successful into very successful
9-4, possible top 25 finish, and a bowl victory.
-
should see a nice bump in recruiting from our on the field success this year.
-
lol
-
Also, finishing with 5 wins in our last 6 games and a nice bowl win puts us in position to have a nice 15-20 ranking to start next season. If we want to dream of being in playoff contention, starting ranked would be a really good thing for us.
Eh if we go 12-1 or 13-0 which we would have to to get in, being ranked to start the season won't matter. In 2011 we made it all the way from unranked to 12th before we lost to OU, and then after losing to OSU we battled from 17th back to 11th before the bowl game.
It matters a lot when you have multiple one loss teams.
It will always matter when perception factors into playoff decisions. Imagine if Western Michigan had started the season ranked #10.
-
Well scott these games at home make it easier imo. Vandy is not that good.
Isu
Ou
Tcu
Wvu
Baylor (yes the will probably suck)
Vandy next season will be as good as Stanford was this year, if not better.
watched them play this year a couple of times. Hard disagree on this one
-
I'm optimistic and super excited to see what Snyder can do next year after this successful year. As for the bowl game, 1-6 in Snyder 2.0 Bowls helps remind me to look forward to next year.
-
The coaching staff was probably the biggest glaring weakness.
-
Yes. Winning the bowl game and nine games would change successful into very successful
9-4, possible top 25 finish, and a bowl victory.
I agree. A 9-4 season is a great metric for this program. 9+ is a success and anything below needs improvement. Not making a bowl game is a complete failure of a season.
-
The coaching staff was probably the biggest glaring weakness.
They are only going to be worse next year. Hopefully the team can improve enough to counteract that.
-
No doubt I get really mad at the coaching at times, but honestly, how often do we lose to teams w/ lower athletic talent? It's not often.
-
No doubt I get really mad at the coaching at times, but honestly, how often do we lose to teams w/ lower athletic talent? It's not often.
but honestly, how many conference schools are stocked w/ lower athletic talent?
-
Our conference is a joke... so no
-
I'll tell you what wasn't a success, the continuation of our fans bitching all year and under appreciating this team. Looks like our LFIQ fan base continues to regress. :frown: :cry:
-
No doubt I get really mad at the coaching at times, but honestly, how often do we lose to teams w/ lower athletic talent? It's not often.
but honestly, how many conference schools are stocked w/ lower athletic talent?
We never lose to teams with "lower athletic talent" because there's usually only two of those in the conference and a handful nationwide in the P5.
-
No doubt I get really mad at the coaching at times, but honestly, how often do we lose to teams w/ lower athletic talent? It's not often.
but honestly, how many conference schools are stocked w/ lower athletic talent?
Thank you for making my point. Our coaching is frustrating at times, but we pretty much always beat those with less talent, and often beat teams w/ more. There's a point where the talent level simply wins out. So I guess my point is that it's fair to criticize the coaches for their generally crappy recruiting, but development and play calling isn't really a legitimate gripe. It (usually) works for the chess pieces we have on the board.
-
I think most of the conference teams we are beating (maybe all of them) have less talent than we do.
-
I think most of the conference teams we are beating (maybe all of them) have less talent than we do.
Rivals disagrees
-
I think most of the conference teams we are beating (maybe all of them) have less talent than we do.
Rivals disagrees
The product on the field agrees.
-
And that's because of the coaches and their development of them. It's OK to admit this, guys.
-
I think their development of players is enough to overcome the recruiting. But goddamn this staff sucks at in-game coaching and play calling. It was a hindrance no doubt when it used to be a strength.
-
I do think it was pretty clear that we were bigger, faster, and stronger than West Virginia and we did manage to lose that game through poor play calling and special teams.
-
I think their development of players is enough to overcome the recruiting. But goddamn this staff sucks at in-game coaching and play calling. It was a hindrance no doubt when it used to be a strength.
Yes. They are very good at finding/developing players but not good at strategy. Although both units improved significantly over the season. (And of course a ton of that is related to a front-loaded conference schedule).
-
We literally didn't beat a good team this year u losers
-
I think most of the conference teams we are beating (maybe all of them) have less talent than we do.
Rivals disagrees
we have been over this time and time again. Rivals is bullshit and using it in any argument makes you look Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)
-
It's all we have for talent evaluation before they get on the field, kslim. Sorry if ppl use it for checks and balances from time to time.
-
It's all we have for talent evaluation before they get on the field, kslim. Sorry if ppl use it for checks and balances from time to time.
1st off no its not. 247 does a much better job as well as espn. 2nd if you are using a source thats wrong more than its right maybe get a new source
-
It's all we have for talent evaluation before they get on the field, kslim. Sorry if ppl use it for checks and balances from time to time.
1st off no its not. 247 does a much better job as well as espn. 2nd if you are using a source thats wrong more than its right maybe get a new source
You're contradicting yourself now, but whatever. So you do use these outlets then?
-
No i havent followed recruiting in 5 years unless i know the kid or a coach tells me about them.
-
Interesting. How would you know those other sites are "better" then?
-
Interesting. How would you know those other sites are "better" than?
DJamer wally is our lead source on rivals. Anymore brain busters?
-
:rolleyes: So he grades these kids out nationally? That's more of a hit on GPC and not rivals, that Fitz is willing to pay Wally to make up stories from his cubicle here in KC.
-
I thought Trent Tanking looked great in his limited time. He's been very good/physical on kick coverage. Did not look out of place athletically. Needs some biscuits.
-
:rolleyes: So he grades these kids out nationally? That's more of a hit on GPC and not rivals, that Fitz is willing to pay Wally to make up stories from his cubicle here in KC.
to an extent yes. Rivals/yahoo bounce info off each other. Thats why guys like mike farrell and the like have names. But trust me they are wrong all the time. Quick question 5 star qb sure fire 1st round draft pick vs 3 star juco route that the same team recruited. Who had more success?
-
There's exceptions all of the time, 'slim. I don't think you're Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) tho if you use recruiting sites for a way to judge "who's bringing in talent?" It's crazy how a kids body changes from 16-17 to 22-23. There's a reason why Alabama and Ohio State rank high every year on rivals and contend for a national championship. Of course, Johnny Manziel can be a 3* and win a heisman as well, and then suck complete crap at the next level.
-
My scenario was jake waters and christian hackenburg
And you are right its not an exact science but rivals (especially ours) rough ridin' suck and its proven time and time again
-
There's exceptions all of the time, 'slim. I don't think you're Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) tho if you use recruiting sites for a way to judge "who's bringing in talent?" It's crazy how a kids body changes from 16-17 to 22-23. There's a reason why Alabama and Ohio State rank high every year on rivals and contend for a national championship. Of course, Johnny Manziel can be a 3* and win a heisman as well, and then suck complete crap at the next level.
Manziel was the last browns QB to win a game.
-
(https://media.tenor.co/images/8d05336c72c1793df37e5cc37f9c4afe/tenor.gif)
-
This thread is aids
-
Well scott these games at home make it easier imo. Vandy is not that good.
Isu
Ou
Tcu
Wvu
Baylor (yes the will probably suck)
I think we would be better served to be playing Tech Oklahoma State and UT at home than OU TCU and WV. If we are playing late in the season at UT that is a recipe for disaster. Like wise if we have to open up at Tech without giving them time to quit on the season could also be bad, and we would be favored to beat Oklahoma State at home next year, not on the road.
I'd rather have next year's home slate. Tech doesn't need to fall apart - they already have and won't have Mahomes. OSU will lose Rudolph and James Washington most likely. I know we always play close but never win in Stillwater but won't be a better time to break that than next year.
-
OSU isn't losing Rudolph.