goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 08:19:23 AM

Title: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 08:19:23 AM
Probably one of my favorite tard talking points ever.



Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 08, 2010, 08:27:08 AM
 It's one thing to get beat physically, it's a whole other things to get absolutely clowned formation and scheme wise.   


Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 08, 2010, 08:32:12 AM
Still a lot of season left to play.

But Illinois finished in the 90's last year in both total defense and scoring defense.

So far this season they are in the Top 40 in both categories.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: W.Churchill on October 08, 2010, 09:51:12 AM
Still a lot of season left to play.

But Illinois finished in the 90's last year in both total defense and scoring defense.

So far this season they are in the Top 40 in both categories.



Number 20 in 2007
Number 23 in 2008

Those are the Rivals recruiting rankings for the Illinois Seniors and Juniors.  They ought to be in the top 40. 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 08, 2010, 09:59:24 AM
Sound good recruiting and good coaching . . . is a good thing then??

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2010, 10:04:29 AM
remember when koenning promised us that 4 star DE?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 10:11:39 AM
remember when koenning promised us that 4 star DE?

Damn, that man had some swagger. 

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: EllToPay on October 08, 2010, 10:13:17 AM
remember when koenning promised us that 4 star DE?

or when snyd's was gonna get some usc rejects from carroll? :love:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: kso_FAN on October 08, 2010, 10:14:11 AM
remember when koenning promised us that 4 star DE?

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg508.imageshack.us%2Fimg508%2F1754%2Fbanditcopy.jpg&hash=9faea0e01a2a3ba47077b4ff2a62db0bc3bac185)
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2010, 10:15:49 AM
or when snyd's was gonna get some usc rejects from carroll? :love:

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi26.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc131%2Frlj4794%2FBFF.jpg&hash=d96bcdff70ebecc34ceec1ad64bf3dcd1a2a852f)

I thought Urban would give us his young sexy OC, too.  :frown:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 10:24:22 AM
We need to hire Jim Leavitt immediately.*

*Serious post.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 08, 2010, 11:24:13 AM
We need to hire Jim Leavitt immediately.*

*Serious post.

+1

Mo retires, Leavitt is hired as co-DC.

Andy by co-DC, I mean rough ridin' make Cosh stand on the sidelines and not touch crap.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 08, 2010, 11:26:09 AM
We need to hire Jim Leavitt immediately.*

*Serious post.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 08, 2010, 11:27:14 AM
We need to hire Jim Leavitt immediately.*

*Serious post.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Why? He would not be a terrible DC.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 08, 2010, 11:27:32 AM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

well maybe as long as it is written in blood he CANNOT be the next head coach.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 08, 2010, 11:28:17 AM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

well maybe as long as it is written in blood he CANNOT be the next head coach.
I can get down with that.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 11:48:48 AM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

well maybe as long as it is written in blood he CANNOT be the next head coach.
I can get down with that.

Me too.  Does it have to be blood or could we just work something up on a napkin or something?





 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: yoga-like_abana on October 08, 2010, 11:59:20 AM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

well maybe as long as it is written in blood he CANNOT be the next head coach.
I can get down with that.

Me to.  Does it have to be blood or could we just work something up on a napkin or something?


 
what did you have in mind  :fatty:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 08, 2010, 12:02:03 PM
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

well maybe as long as it is written in blood he CANNOT be the next head coach.
I can get down with that.

Me to.  Does it have to be blood or could we just work something up on a napkin or something?


 
what did you have in mind  :fatty:

$3.8 million dollars with payment starting in 2015.   I've set up my own LLC.  It's called In Pursuit of Mediocrity

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: MadCat on October 08, 2010, 01:04:28 PM
What a coincidence...I happen to have a whole stack of napkins with "Memorandum of Understanding" printed on them.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 08, 2010, 01:07:28 PM
You remember when that badass Koening defense got ass raped by a mediocre TTU team last year?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2010, 01:10:19 PM
You remember when that badass Koening defense got ass raped by a mediocre TTU team last year?

Yep.  only 1/2 way through his fist season here and with shitty RP recruits.  Don't be Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 08, 2010, 01:39:33 PM
You remember when that badass Koening defense got ass raped by a mediocre TTU team last year?


Damn, dude, you have like every single powerespect talking point nailed to a tee.  Can't get anything passed you! 




Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 08, 2010, 02:44:10 PM
JT is such a powerespect like OMG

he just doesn't get it so since i'm a young hipster EMAWin former sec17er i'll lay it out for him

LHC Bill Snyder (OB's, Snyds, and various other euphemisms) has no ability to manage a qb situation and clearly plays CCQ (that means Carson Coffman for you powertards, clever huh) because he is a racist (so what if he has recruited two african american qb's this year) and has no understanding of what it takes to win a football game.

Vic Koening is like a god and was destined to be the savior of all things K-STATEO (god it is so cool to be condescending) until he betrayed us and left for a roster with actual DI football players.   Sure he was only our co-coordinator but he clearly like did all the good stuff and like Cosh clearly was responsible for all the bad junk, duh.  Sure TT scored 63 points but that was like way early and all the players fault and stuff.  I mean sure both games were played in week 6 and Nebraska scored less points and is in the top 10 but what happened yesterday was all like scheme and formation (i'm not sure what this means but Dax said it so it's true). 

Chris Cosh is like totally sucky sure he has worked for some great programs and coaches but like i'm pretty sure that fat guy from Maryland said something bad about him onetime, so he sucks.  Furthermore unlike Vik (as CNS so astutely pointed out) Cosh doesn't have to play with crapty (is this proper hipster spelling i get confused and really really want to fit in) RP players, you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (sorry Mrs. Palin).  Cosh's D is loaded with like great players and stuff but is hamstrung by all the schemey formation stuff.  Sure were 4-1 but our defense like has nothing to with it and stuff.

Dana Dimel is like totally crapty too and stuff.  Like he is such a powerespect and not good at coaching and things.  I mean so what if he had a better record at Wyoming than Vik, big deal that doesn't mean anything.  I mean Dana never once did anything near as sweet as Vik, hell Dana doesn't even have the balls to make up false promises of commitment from imaginary unnamed players (cause like that is what great coaches do silly powerespect).

Del Miller is like old and junk and so he must be bad and stuff.

In conclusion maybe JT you just need to pull your head out and realize that our coaching staff is like really bad at their jobs (i mean like duh they are totally getting pwned on the bbs's by a bunch of accoutants, middle management, and twentysomethings).  I mean sure while we are 4-1 and are still in position to make a bowl game with a roster full of RP's crapty players that's like not the point man.

crap piss ass eff *

(* fixed for Michigan Cat's approval :crossfingers:)
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 08, 2010, 02:46:41 PM
:DNR:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 08, 2010, 02:53:35 PM
not reading is like so powerespect
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2010, 02:55:56 PM
lick's post was actually pretty decent.  He needs to turn off the swear filter, though.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 08, 2010, 03:01:44 PM
lick's post was actually pretty decent.  He needs to turn off the swear filter, though.
:DNR:
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Katpappy on October 09, 2010, 01:00:47 AM
JT is such a powerespect like OMG

he just doesn't get it so since i'm a young hipster EMAWin former sec17er i'll lay it out for him

LHC Bill Snyder (OB's, Snyds, and various other euphemisms) has no ability to manage a qb situation and clearly plays CCQ (that means Carson Coffman for you powertards, clever huh) because he is a racist (so what if he has recruited two african american qb's this year) and has no understanding of what it takes to win a football game.

Vic Koening is like a god and was destined to be the savior of all things K-STATEO (god it is so cool to be condescending) until he betrayed us and left for a roster with actual DI football players.   Sure he was only our co-coordinator but he clearly like did all the good stuff and like Cosh clearly was responsible for all the bad junk, duh.  Sure TT scored 63 points but that was like way early and all the players fault and stuff.  I mean sure both games were played in week 6 and Nebraska scored less points and is in the top 10 but what happened yesterday was all like scheme and formation (i'm not sure what this means but Dax said it so it's true). 

Chris Cosh is like totally sucky sure he has worked for some great programs and coaches but like i'm pretty sure that fat guy from Maryland said something bad about him onetime, so he sucks.  Furthermore unlike Vik (as CNS so astutely pointed out) Cosh doesn't have to play with crapty (is this proper hipster spelling i get confused and really really want to fit in) RP players, you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (sorry Mrs. Palin).  Cosh's D is loaded with like great players and stuff but is hamstrung by all the schemey formation stuff.  Sure were 4-1 but our defense like has nothing to with it and stuff.

Dana Dimel is like totally crapty too and stuff.  Like he is such a powerespect and not good at coaching and things.  I mean so what if he had a better record at Wyoming than Vik, big deal that doesn't mean anything.  I mean Dana never once did anything near as sweet as Vik, hell Dana doesn't even have the balls to make up false promises of commitment from imaginary unnamed players (cause like that is what great coaches do silly powerespect).

Del Miller is like old and junk and so he must be bad and stuff.

In conclusion maybe JT you just need to pull your head out and realize that our coaching staff is like really bad at their jobs (i mean like duh they are totally getting pwned on the bbs's by a bunch of accoutants, middle management, and twentysomethings).  I mean sure while we are 4-1 and are still in position to make a bowl game with a roster full of RP's crapty players that's like not the point man.

crap piss ass foooock *

(* fixed for Michigan Cat's approval :crossfingers:)

OMG...are u calling out the great and almighty MC, OK Cat & Kouger or whatever?
this could get interesting. :woot:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 09, 2010, 01:06:25 AM
JT is such a powerespect like OMG

he just doesn't get it so since i'm a young hipster EMAWin former sec17er i'll lay it out for him

LHC Bill Snyder (OB's, Snyds, and various other euphemisms) has no ability to manage a qb situation and clearly plays CCQ (that means Carson Coffman for you powertards, clever huh) because he is a racist (so what if he has recruited two african american qb's this year) and has no understanding of what it takes to win a football game.

Vic Koening is like a god and was destined to be the savior of all things K-STATEO (god it is so cool to be condescending) until he betrayed us and left for a roster with actual DI football players.   Sure he was only our co-coordinator but he clearly like did all the good stuff and like Cosh clearly was responsible for all the bad junk, duh.  Sure TT scored 63 points but that was like way early and all the players fault and stuff.  I mean sure both games were played in week 6 and Nebraska scored less points and is in the top 10 but what happened yesterday was all like scheme and formation (i'm not sure what this means but Dax said it so it's true). 

Chris Cosh is like totally sucky sure he has worked for some great programs and coaches but like i'm pretty sure that fat guy from Maryland said something bad about him onetime, so he sucks.  Furthermore unlike Vik (as CNS so astutely pointed out) Cosh doesn't have to play with crapty (is this proper hipster spelling i get confused and really really want to fit in) RP players, you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (sorry Mrs. Palin).  Cosh's D is loaded with like great players and stuff but is hamstrung by all the schemey formation stuff.  Sure were 4-1 but our defense like has nothing to with it and stuff.

Dana Dimel is like totally crapty too and stuff.  Like he is such a powerespect and not good at coaching and things.  I mean so what if he had a better record at Wyoming than Vik, big deal that doesn't mean anything.  I mean Dana never once did anything near as sweet as Vik, hell Dana doesn't even have the balls to make up false promises of commitment from imaginary unnamed players (cause like that is what great coaches do silly powerespect).

Del Miller is like old and junk and so he must be bad and stuff.

In conclusion maybe JT you just need to pull your head out and realize that our coaching staff is like really bad at their jobs (i mean like duh they are totally getting pwned on the bbs's by a bunch of accoutants, middle management, and twentysomethings).  I mean sure while we are 4-1 and are still in position to make a bowl game with a roster full of RP's crapty players that's like not the point man.

crap piss ass foooock *

(* fixed for Michigan Cat's approval :crossfingers:)

OMG...are u calling out the great and almighty MC, OK Cat & Kouger or whatever?
this could get interesting. :woot:

making up jobs for people who bbs is my favorite "go to" for people who don't have an actual opinion on things. very lol. it was decent until that.  :flush:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: chum1 on October 09, 2010, 07:11:45 AM
Who wants to stick up for anyone on the team at this point or for jt ever?  Both are just indefensible.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 09, 2010, 11:47:35 AM
Yeah i'm with chum supporting or sticking up for a team that can't pull off a MAJOR upset is like so  :powerespect:

 :bang:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 09, 2010, 11:53:21 AM
Yeah i'm with chum supporting or sticking up for a team that can't pull off a MAJOR upset is like so  :powerespect:

 :bang:
You know damn well that's not what people are complaining about.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: chum1 on October 09, 2010, 12:00:14 PM
Yeah i'm with chum supporting or sticking up for a team that can't pull off a MAJOR upset is like so  :powerespect:

 :bang:
You know damn well that's not what people are complaining about.

No one would be going apeshit if the team had been remotely competitive.  They were thoroughly inept.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 09, 2010, 12:05:34 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 09, 2010, 12:08:41 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU
Again missing the point.  Sometimes how you lose matters.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wetwillie on October 09, 2010, 12:15:41 PM
JT is such a powerespect like OMG

he just doesn't get it so since i'm a young hipster EMAWin former sec17er i'll lay it out for him

LHC Bill Snyder (OB's, Snyds, and various other euphemisms) has no ability to manage a qb situation and clearly plays CCQ (that means Carson Coffman for you powertards, clever huh) because he is a racist (so what if he has recruited two african american qb's this year) and has no understanding of what it takes to win a football game.

Vic Koening is like a god and was destined to be the savior of all things K-STATEO (god it is so cool to be condescending) until he betrayed us and left for a roster with actual DI football players.   Sure he was only our co-coordinator but he clearly like did all the good stuff and like Cosh clearly was responsible for all the bad junk, duh.  Sure TT scored 63 points but that was like way early and all the players fault and stuff.  I mean sure both games were played in week 6 and Nebraska scored less points and is in the top 10 but what happened yesterday was all like scheme and formation (i'm not sure what this means but Dax said it so it's true). 

Chris Cosh is like totally sucky sure he has worked for some great programs and coaches but like i'm pretty sure that fat guy from Maryland said something bad about him onetime, so he sucks.  Furthermore unlike Vik (as CNS so astutely pointed out) Cosh doesn't have to play with crapty (is this proper hipster spelling i get confused and really really want to fit in) RP players, you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (sorry Mrs. Palin).  Cosh's D is loaded with like great players and stuff but is hamstrung by all the schemey formation stuff.  Sure were 4-1 but our defense like has nothing to with it and stuff.

Dana Dimel is like totally crapty too and stuff.  Like he is such a powerespect and not good at coaching and things.  I mean so what if he had a better record at Wyoming than Vik, big deal that doesn't mean anything.  I mean Dana never once did anything near as sweet as Vik, hell Dana doesn't even have the balls to make up false promises of commitment from imaginary unnamed players (cause like that is what great coaches do silly powerespect).

Del Miller is like old and junk and so he must be bad and stuff.

In conclusion maybe JT you just need to pull your head out and realize that our coaching staff is like really bad at their jobs (i mean like duh they are totally getting pwned on the bbs's by a bunch of accoutants, middle management, and twentysomethings).  I mean sure while we are 4-1 and are still in position to make a bowl game with a roster full of RP's crapty players that's like not the point man.

crap piss ass foooock *

(* fixed for Michigan Cat's approval :crossfingers:)

OMG...are u calling out the great and almighty MC, OK Cat & Kouger or whatever?
this could get interesting. :woot:

making up jobs for people who bbs is my favorite "go to" for people who don't have an actual opinion on things. very lol. it was decent until that.  :flush:

Damn, BSAC is Big Shot Accountant Cat?  I felt like the theme at this place was ATTORNEY driven. 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: monumentcat on October 09, 2010, 12:27:27 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU
Again missing the point.  Sometimes how you lose matters.

^^^This.

Looking like total dog crap on offense and especially on defense.  What makes it really great was a national  ESPN audience got to see it too.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wes mantooth on October 09, 2010, 12:39:31 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU

so basically better than we would have expected before the season started?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: mcmwcat on October 09, 2010, 01:32:32 PM
Koenning's defense shutting down Penn St through 3rd quarter in Happy Valley  :blank: 

49 yards allowed on the ground  :goodbyecruelworld:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 02:26:28 PM
Koenning's defense shutting down Penn St through 3rd quarter in Happy Valley  :blank: 

49 yards allowed on the ground  :goodbyecruelworld:


Gotta feel good for Koenning.  He obviously really hated Snyder and Cosh and it's nice to see a coach of his caliber make a lateral move after one year to Illinois and have it work out so well for him.

13 points to Penn State on their home field.  WOW!!!!!   :drool:




Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 09, 2010, 02:30:40 PM
Koenning's defense shutting down Penn St through 3rd quarter in Happy Valley  :blank: 

49 yards allowed on the ground  :goodbyecruelworld:


Gotta feel good for Koenning.  He obviously really hated Snyder and Cosh and it's nice to see a coach of his caliber make a lateral move after one year to Illinois and have it work out so well for him.

13 points to Penn State on their home field.  WOW!!!!!   :drool:






he's getting paid three times as much. not really lateral. what i don't get is why snyder won't give up a little bit of money to retain great coaches like koenning. make 1.5 million and have a great staff or make 2.0 million and have the one you have. when does he start thinking quality of lite type stuff?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 09, 2010, 02:36:59 PM
VK is making about $475K a year at Illinois, that's not triple what K-State was paying.

 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 02:43:03 PM
Koenning's defense shutting down Penn St through 3rd quarter in Happy Valley  :blank: 

49 yards allowed on the ground  :goodbyecruelworld:


Gotta feel good for Koenning.  He obviously really hated Snyder and Cosh and it's nice to see a coach of his caliber make a lateral move after one year to Illinois and have it work out so well for him.

13 points to Penn State on their home field.  WOW!!!!!   :drool:


he's getting paid three times as much. not really lateral. what i don't get is why snyder won't give up a little bit of money to retain great coaches like koenning. make 1.5 million and have a great staff or make 2.0 million and have the one you have. when does he start thinking quality of lite type stuff?

Great point, Rick Daris.

The whole not paying our coaches commensurate salaries sure is a repeating pattern than seems to never be addressed.  Weird how this repeating patterns continues to repeat itself over and over though.

Seems to have started with the mass exodus in 1998.  Could have retained Venables with a substantial salary increase, but watched him trot off to Okie land with the rest of the bunch for bigger salaries.

Of course the most titanic failure that ultimately cost Snyder his program was letting Bielema slip away to Wisky following the Big XII Title in 2003, and allowing Bobby Elliot to run the ship aground.

Then allowing Koenning to depart to Illinois last year without even putting up a fight was just the most recent example of the revolving door for our best assistants.

It's weird how Frank makes paying his assistants a top priority but Snyder apparently does not.  Is it greed?  Hyper-conservatism?  Very weird indeed.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 09, 2010, 02:45:39 PM
VK is making about $475K a year at Illinois, that's not triple what K-State was paying.

 

fair enough. double though. still not lateral.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 09, 2010, 02:49:14 PM
I don't think I am going too far out on a limb by saying that I doubt Vic appreciated the "Co" next to his title.   He's never been a "Co" anything as far as I know.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 09, 2010, 02:49:17 PM
Venzy wasn't staying at KSU, no matter what we paid him.  And Snyds didn't let Bielema go, Bielema left to take the HCIW job at a great football school.  Snyder had a ton of very good assistants.  Very good assistants eventually leave, they either get better cooridinator slots or HC jobs.  I'm certainly not content with the current staff but acting like all those assistants left because we wouldn't pay them is beyond Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), even for the retards on this board.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 02:51:40 PM
Venzy wasn't staying at KSU, no matter what we paid him.  And Snyds didn't let Bielema go, Bielema left to take the HCIW job at a great football school.  Snyder had a ton of very good assistants.  Very good assistants eventually leave, they either get better cooridinator slots or HC jobs.  I'm certainly not content with the current staff but acting like all those assistants left because we wouldn't pay them is beyond Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), even for the retards on this board.


Nailed it!

 :powerespect:




Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on October 09, 2010, 02:54:49 PM
Koenning's defense shutting down Penn St through 3rd quarter in Happy Valley  :blank: 

49 yards allowed on the ground  :goodbyecruelworld:


Gotta feel good for Koenning.  He obviously really hated Snyder and Cosh and it's nice to see a coach of his caliber make a lateral move after one year to Illinois and have it work out so well for him.

13 points to Penn State on their home field.  WOW!!!!!   :drool:


he's getting paid three times as much. not really lateral. what i don't get is why snyder won't give up a little bit of money to retain great coaches like koenning. make 1.5 million and have a great staff or make 2.0 million and have the one you have. when does he start thinking quality of lite type stuff?

Great point, Rick Daris.

The whole not paying our coaches commensurate salaries sure is a repeating pattern than seems to never be addressed.  Weird how this repeating patterns continues to repeat itself over and over though.

Seems to have started with the mass exodus in 1998.  Could have retained Venables with a substantial salary increase, but watched him trot off to Okie land with the rest of the bunch for bigger salaries.

Of course the most titanic failure that ultimately cost Snyder his program was letting Bielema slip away to Wisky following the Big XII Title in 2003, and allowing Bobby Elliot to run the ship aground.

Then allowing Koenning to depart to Illinois last year without even putting up a fight was just the most recent example of the revolving door for our best assistants.

It's weird how Frank makes paying his assistants a top priority but Snyder apparently does not.  Is it greed?  Hyper-conservatism?  Very weird indeed.



yeah man. it's like frank realizes that getting a good staff and keeping them happy is good for him in the long run or something. strange indeed. probably better to hire a bunch of people. pay them crappily. let the good ones leave for higher paying jobs and never fire the ones that can't get higher paying jobs. those are the ones you want to roll with. they're certainly going to make your life easier/more fun. and seriously, at his age and stuff snyder is still coaching because he likes it or something, right? i mean, snyder isn't just collecting a paycheck is he? would he do that to us? did he gamble all of his previous earnings away at the casinos via the free bus that picks you up at the kmart parking lot? is that why he came back?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 09, 2010, 03:05:13 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU
Again missing the point.  Sometimes how you lose matters.

^^^This.

Looking like total dog crap on offense and especially on defense.  What makes it really great was a national  ESPN audience got to see it too.



No chicken little i'm not missing the point.  

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

The point is one game does not define a season.  Overdramatic douchebags were proclaiming the demise of K-State Basketball and the obvious flaws of Frank Martin following the Ft. Hays game last year.  Now it is Cosh and the fact that he obviously can't coach football.  However Cosh somehow managed to hold UCLA to less points with less talent than Will Muschamp at Texas.  So why don't all of you Beano Cook's run over to the Texas board and tell them to fire their HCIW.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 09, 2010, 03:30:01 PM
4-1 with a loss to a top 10 team that people consider a title contender.

STFU
Again missing the point.  Sometimes how you lose matters.

^^^This.

Looking like total dog crap on offense and especially on defense.  What makes it really great was a national  ESPN audience got to see it too.



No chicken little i'm not missing the point. 

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

The point is one game does not define a season.  Overdramatic douchebags were proclaiming the demise of K-State Basketball and the obvious flaws of Frank Martin following the Ft. Hays game last year.  Now it is Cosh and the fact that he obviously can't coach football.  However Cosh somehow managed to hold UCLA to less points with less talent than Will Muschamp at Texas.  So why don't all of you Beano Cook's run over to the Texas board and tell them to fire their HCIW.


Still not getting it.  This is not a one game issue. But hey go ahead and keep slaying those strawmen.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 09, 2010, 03:37:01 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 09, 2010, 03:42:15 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.
The issue is a very soft defense.  A soft defense that has been a problem at KSU for the last 6 years. Last Thursday was a monumental defensive failure on all levels.  I don't care who we were playing, giving up 10 yards a play (and almost a point per play) should not be acceptable.  Or have you lost all expectations beyond just being better than Ron Prince (which the team last night was most definitely not)?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 09, 2010, 04:03:49 PM
i'm not happy about our defensive performance

i don't think it is where we want to be or what we aspire to be

if you listen to the comments from Bill he agrees

but....  roster turnover doesn't happen overnight.  defections (j. moore) and injuries (adam davis) have strained what was a thin depth chart. 

thursday we were gouged defensively due to a lack of team speed.  Nebraska was able to exploit seams and hit homeruns.  Defensively if you watch the film players were in position to make plays and had angles to the ball carrier but lacked the speed to make plays.  I mean seriously how many times did you see Martinez (who clearly possesses elite speed) in the open field definitively outrunning our defense.  Our Corners and safeties were unable to even gain ground on the kid, that's not scheme.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 09, 2010, 04:13:57 PM
i'm not happy about our defensive performance

i don't think it is where we want to be or what we aspire to be

if you listen to the comments from Bill he agrees

but....  roster turnover doesn't happen overnight.  defections (j. moore) and injuries (adam davis) have strained what was a thin depth chart. 

thursday we were gouged defensively due to a lack of team speed.  Nebraska was able to exploit seams and hit homeruns.  Defensively if you watch the film players were in position to make plays and had angles to the ball carrier but lacked the speed to make plays.  I mean seriously how many times did you see Martinez (who clearly possesses elite speed) in the open field definitively outrunning our defense.  Our Corners and safeties were unable to even gain ground on the kid, that's not scheme.

A QB (or RB) running untouched up the middle for 70 yards in not just about lack of speed.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Gooch on October 09, 2010, 04:18:06 PM
Can't we all just agree that Cosh needs to be killed?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 04:42:05 PM
Can't we all just agree that Cosh needs to be killed?

I wish we could all come together on this.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: WillieWatanabe on October 09, 2010, 04:59:08 PM
I feel like all these threads on Home of Lukewarm water are all about the same thing. Can we just merge them into a Master Turn out the Lights thread??
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Bill Clarahan on October 09, 2010, 05:04:27 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

Yea, I think Lick has it right( also liked your first post) < I'm really hanging from this Lick guys cod sack now , hope he's important, bit I digress.  You pretty much kicked old Chingon in his cod sack, no offense Ching I usually like your ideas but, you bunch of drama queens always jump on the chitty coach bandwagon, this time it looks a lot like, chitty players.
ching
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 05:10:05 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

Yea, I think Lick has it right( also liked your first post) < I'm really hanging from this Lick guys cod sack now , hope he's important, bit I digress.  You pretty much kicked old Chingon in his cod sack, no offense Ching I usually like your ideas but, you bunch of drama queens always jump on the chitty coach bandwagon, this time it looks a lot like, chitty players.
ching


At what point is the head coach/assistant coaches held accountable for the shitty players in their program?  TIA.

Like not having a single D-1 linebacker on the team.  Who do we blame for that.  TIA.



Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 09, 2010, 05:13:39 PM
Our defense has enough talent to be competitive at the FCS level. SDSU is 0-3 against FCS teams this year and held Nebraska to 17 points. Maybe we should just hire their defensive coordinator. :dunno:

It's not like we were trying to stop a high powered offense like Texas Tech with Mike Leach. It is not hard to stop the run when you know the other team is not going to pass. Chris Cosh should save LHC Bill Snyder the trouble and just resign.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 09, 2010, 05:14:26 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

Yea, I think Lick has it right( also liked your first post) < I'm really hanging from this Lick guys cod sack now , hope he's important, bit I digress.  You pretty much kicked old Chingon in his cod sack, no offense Ching I usually like your ideas but, you bunch of drama queens always jump on the chitty coach bandwagon, this time it looks a lot like, chitty players.
ching


At what point is the head coach/assistant coaches held accountable for the shitty players in their program?  TIA.

Like not having a single D-1 linebacker on the team.  Who do we blame for that.  TIA.





IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 09, 2010, 08:38:38 PM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

Yea, I think Lick has it right( also liked your first post) < I'm really hanging from this Lick guys cod sack now , hope he's important, bit I digress.  You pretty much kicked old Chingon in his cod sack, no offense Ching I usually like your ideas but, you bunch of drama queens always jump on the chitty coach bandwagon, this time it looks a lot like, chitty players.
ching


At what point is the head coach/assistant coaches held accountable for the crapty players in their program?  TIA.

Like not having a single D-1 linebacker on the team.  Who do we blame for that.  TIA.


IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.


Interesting philosophy.

One might place some accountability on a coaching staff that has neither a competent Division 1 quarterback or Division 1 linebacker on the roster to address that immediate need in the JUCO ranks possibly.

Say, a linebacker like a JCUO LaVonte David that played in our back yard at Fort Scott and had like 16 tackles last Thursday for Nebraska against us.

Again, recruiting, positions of immediate need.  At some point maybe, as a fan base, we might want to consider stop passing the buck and coming to grips that it's kind of part of being a head coach.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 09, 2010, 09:11:45 PM
2 Full Recruiting classes . . . not one serviceable JC linebacker, not one serviceable JC QB. 

You know like Dominique Davis, the kid with the 130 QB rating at ECU, who played at Ft. Scott who we couldn't even work up enough gumption to offer a scholarship. 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 09, 2010, 11:16:10 PM
How much time did OB and Co. Have to assemble a recruiting class for 2009?  And you consider that a full class?  Also, we have no idea if people like Tre or Cosh are good or not yet cause they're freaking freshman.  There are very, very few players that make significant contributions during their freshman year.  I guess I should have known that the retards on this board know next to nothing about recruiting.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 09, 2010, 11:18:54 PM
Just 1 serviceable JC QB, just 2 serviceable JC LB's . . . that's not asking for much for a Big 12 BCS conference school in 2 recruiting classes.   

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: swish1 on October 10, 2010, 03:31:11 AM
Just 1 serviceable JC QB, just 2 serviceable JC LB's . . . that's not asking for much for a Big 12 BCS conference school in 2 recruiting classes.   



why is everyone focusing on the LB's?  Do we have a serviceable safety?  how about a serviceable DT?  the qb situation appears to be fixed for next year but none of the above have...
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: AzCat on October 10, 2010, 03:53:13 AM
IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.

Someone did the research on this when RP was floundering along.  The result: at a BCS level program you'll much more often than not see significant improvement by the new staff's second season or you'll never see it at all.  OB 1.0 pulled that off but OB 2.0 is looking a lot like RP 2.0.


 :goodbyecruelworld:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: ednksu on October 10, 2010, 05:13:33 AM
IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.

Someone did the research on this when RP was floundering along.  The result: at a BCS level program you'll much more often than not see significant improvement by the new staff's second season or you'll never see it at all.  OB 1.0 pulled that off but OB 2.0 is looking a lot like RP 2.0.


 :goodbyecruelworld:

I thought you were going to hit this out of the park, until your last sentence.  Then you killed your momentum.  Our defense right now is leaps and bounds better then Prince. 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: ednksu on October 10, 2010, 05:15:38 AM
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=273140158
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=283202306
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: catzacker on October 10, 2010, 08:14:15 AM
How much time did OB and Co. Have to assemble a recruiting class for 2009?  And you consider that a full class?  Also, we have no idea if people like Tre or Cosh are good or not yet cause they're freaking freshman.  There are very, very few players that make significant contributions during their freshman year.  I guess I should have known that the retards on this board know next to nothing about recruiting.

he had plenty of time in '09 and '010....check that, in '00, '01, '02, '03, '04, '05, '09 and '10...to get just an average big 12 QB and failed, miserably.  He's had '03, '04, '05, '09, '10 to get a DT and DE that's worth a sh*t and hasn't.  He's had the '09 and '10 to get ONE goddamn JC LB worth a sh*t and hasn't.  He managed to get an extremely talented Chris Harper to transfer and I've seen betamax players get more use than he has.  We're sitting in the goddamn hot bed for JUCO players and he's gotten nothing.  NOTHING.  And since we're talking about retards, how Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) is anyone to believe that basically the same bunch of ass clown assistants that wrecked a championship program were going to somehow magically not be Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and recruit better than they ever had?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: AzCat on October 10, 2010, 08:21:26 AM
IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.

Someone did the research on this when RP was floundering along.  The result: at a BCS level program you'll much more often than not see significant improvement by the new staff's second season or you'll never see it at all.  OB 1.0 pulled that off but OB 2.0 is looking a lot like RP 2.0.


 :goodbyecruelworld:

I thought you were going to hit this out of the park, until your last sentence.  Then you killed your momentum.  Our defense right now is leaps and bounds better then Prince. 

Pre-OB 1.0:
'86 2-9
'87 0-10-1
'88 0-11

OB 1.0:
'89 1-10
'90 5-6   <----- Note massive improvement from pre-OB 1.0
'91 7-4

Pre-RP:
'03 11-4
'04 4-7
'05 5-6

RP / Pre-OB 2.0:
'06 7-6
'07 5-7   <----- Note no improvement from OB 1.0
'08 5-7

OB 2.0:
'09 6-6
'10 ?-?

OB 1.0 fit the trend perfectly as did RP.  Will OB 2.0 also fit the trend?  Probably.  

 :users:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: michigancat on October 10, 2010, 08:25:59 AM
what is the issue

because again

The point is we are an average to above average team that is limited by our personel.  Reasonable expectations going into the season were achieving a winning record and making a bowl game, that hasn't changed.  In fact at this point in the season we have probably exceeded expectations.

Yea, I think Lick has it right( also liked your first post) < I'm really hanging from this Lick guys cod sack now , hope he's important, bit I digress.  You pretty much kicked old Chingon in his cod sack, no offense Ching I usually like your ideas but, you bunch of drama queens always jump on the chitty coach bandwagon, this time it looks a lot like, chitty players.
ching


At what point is the head coach/assistant coaches held accountable for the shitty players in their program?  TIA.

Like not having a single D-1 linebacker on the team.  Who do we blame for that.  TIA.





IMO, coaches should not be held accountable for the players on the roster until the players that they have recruited are at least juniors.

what's funny about this is last year's 5th year seniors were Snyder recruits.  :fatty:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: KSUTOMMY on October 10, 2010, 09:00:03 AM
How much time did OB and Co. Have to assemble a recruiting class for 2009?  And you consider that a full class?  Also, we have no idea if people like Tre or Cosh are good or not yet cause they're freaking freshman.  There are very, very few players that make significant contributions during their freshman year.  I guess I should have known that the retards on this board know next to nothing about recruiting.

he had plenty of time in '09 and '010....check that, in '00, '01, '02, '03, '04, '05, '09 and '10...to get just an average big 12 QB and failed, miserably.  He's had '03, '04, '05, '09, '10 to get a DT and DE that's worth a sh*t and hasn't.  He's had the '09 and '10 to get ONE goddamn JC LB worth a sh*t and hasn't.  He managed to get an extremely talented Chris Harper to transfer and I've seen betamax players get more use than he has.  We're sitting in the goddamn hot bed for JUCO players and he's gotten nothing.  NOTHING.  And since we're talking about retards, how Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) is anyone to believe that basically the same bunch of ass clown assistants that wrecked a championship program were going to somehow magically not be Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and recruit better than they ever had?

best post of this thread hands down, this staff is just an example of "getting the old band back together"! Does any rational thinking person really think that from what these ass clowns did previously on the recriuting trail was looked at as a good job? Not only is that a NO, it's a eff NO!!! These shitheads can be given 1000 seasons and it won't amount to a goddamned thing with regards to getting serviceable players! Until there's a changing of this staff, there won't be real success in Manhattan, hopefully Currie sees this.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 10, 2010, 09:12:55 AM
While it still has a long way to go . . . I will toss them a bone and say so far this recruiting class is looking better.

However, if they don't get several DT's and another LB that can step in and play right away than it's yet another fail.

As I always told the powertards, with every new development such as  :AA:  their litany of excuses and reasons why this or that can't happen at K-State takes a hit. 

I'll say it again, 2 recruiting classes to find 1 serviceable JC dual threat QB and 2 decent to slightly above average JC LB's . . . and . . . NOTHING.

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HeinBallz on October 10, 2010, 09:52:55 AM
Is there a single coach, coordinator, grad assistant, or whatever for KSU, that you think can or would be a halfway successful D1 head coach ever in their career? 

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 11, 2010, 11:13:06 AM
Dimel already has been, Dickey i believe could be

and for the VK lovers Keith Burns was just as succesful as a HC as Vic was (which means they sucked)

Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 11, 2010, 11:24:18 AM
Is there a single coach, coordinator, grad assistant, or whatever for KSU, that you think can or would be a halfway successful D1 head coach ever in their career? 



On this staff?  No, there isn't anyone worthy of being a head coach at an FCS school.

Snyder, if he's serious about handing this off to someone, will need to hire his HCIW when Mo or Dell Miller retire, or someone else on staff leaves for a new position.  Because Currie can't in good conscience hire anyone on this staff if he values his job.

Personally, I'm starting to warm up to throwing the kitchen sink and making a promise to Gus Malzahn at Auburn if and when Miller retires.  I think he'd make a fantastic HC in the Snyder/Leach vein.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 11, 2010, 01:19:47 PM
"In the Snyder/Leach vein?". WTF does that mean?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 11, 2010, 01:31:32 PM
"In the Snyder/Leach vein?". WTF does that mean?

Offensive genius.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: MadCat on October 11, 2010, 01:38:20 PM
"In the Snyder/Leach vein?". WTF does that mean?

It transports the blood away from the ancient testicles to the heARRRRRRRt.  It was dedicated after the LHC Bill Snyder highway, but before the LHC Bill Snyder Family Stadium.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HeinBallz on October 11, 2010, 11:12:51 PM
Dimel already has been,

yeah; and where is he now?  :users:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: LickNeckey on October 12, 2010, 08:33:14 AM
He was more succesful than the golden boy Vic
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: mcmwcat on October 12, 2010, 08:44:17 AM
this thread is now incomprehensible.  fucks  :blank:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: slimz on October 12, 2010, 11:15:57 AM
Let's not forget that not only do you get paid less here, you also get the privilege of working longer hours.  Isn't that a big part of why Koenning left?  I think it played a part with the Stoops exodus, as well.

Less money + insane hours + tough recruiting = Del Miller + Chris Cosh.

I guess the upside is that, as you're staring at film at 4 a.m., getting paid less than someone asleep in bed in Norman or Austin or Champagne/Urbana, you have the comfort of knowing that you're guaranteed to not be fired.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: OK_Cat on October 12, 2010, 11:17:10 AM
all coaches work insane hours.

working longer hours at ksu is a weird gopowertard myth.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: slimz on October 12, 2010, 11:20:09 AM
all coaches work insane hours.

working longer hours at ksu is a weird gopowertard myth.

Compared to most of us, yes.  But it's been cited enough outside of GPC that there appears to be some fire behind the smoke.  Certainly the perception is there, and if you're trying to hire and retain better coaches, perception probably plays a part.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: kso_FAN on October 13, 2010, 12:07:23 PM
all coaches work insane hours.

working longer hours at ksu is a weird gopowertard myth.

Compared to most of us, yes.  But it's been cited enough outside of GPC that there appears to be some fire behind the smoke.  Certainly the perception is there, and if you're trying to hire and retain better coaches, perception probably plays a part.

This.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HazKat on October 13, 2010, 02:23:48 PM
Frank Martin for DC
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: "storm"nut on October 13, 2010, 02:27:55 PM
Frank Martin for DC

Look at the way Colon ran on the court. Any coach that can do that would not have let the nubbs QB run us dry. It would not have happened.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HazKat on October 13, 2010, 02:35:35 PM
Hartman would end up going to the other team's locker room after the game so he wouldn't get killed
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: econocat on October 13, 2010, 04:17:50 PM
TOS reporting Jim Leavit (SP) to be named DC  :crossfingers:
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 13, 2010, 04:21:03 PM
I would literally give a pinkie toe for that to happen.  Hell, Leavitt is probably about the best we will be able to do for a HC, so might as well just name him the HCIW and he can take over after the bowl.  Can we fire Cosh and hire Leavitt in the middle of a season?!
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: OK_Cat on October 13, 2010, 04:23:33 PM
It's like the tards have forgotten that OB is loyal to a fault, and won't fire anybody in the middle of the season. 

Mods, please rename this thread "Retardville"  tia
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: KSUTOMMY on October 13, 2010, 04:26:53 PM
I would literally give a pinkie toe for that to happen.  Hell, Leavitt is probably about the best we will be able to do for a HC, so might as well just name him the HCIW and he can take over after the bowl.  Can we fire Cosh and hire Leavitt in the middle of a season?!

HELL YES WE CAN KICK COSH TO THE CURB (and his little sonnyboy too) AND HIRE LEAVITT!!!

OK_Tard - unwind, sometimes we need to dream... DONT KILL THE DREAM!!!
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Paul Moscow on October 13, 2010, 04:32:36 PM
I would literally give a pinkie toe for that to happen.  Hell, Leavitt is probably about the best we will be able to do for a HC, so might as well just name him the HCIW and he can take over after the bowl.  Can we fire Cosh and hire Leavitt in the middle of a season?!

HELL YES WE CAN KICK COSH TO THE CURB (and his little sonnyboy too) AND HIRE LEAVITT!!!

OK_Tard - unwind, sometimes we need to dream... DONT KILL THE DREAM!!!

Was the word interim ever attached to Cosh when Vic left? That could have been a nice stroke of genius - leaving a seat to be filled.

Although, I'll go ahead and presume we gave Cosh a full on promotion and it would take his resigning or agreeing to take the Co-DC/Linebackers coach again to get Leavitt in.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 13, 2010, 04:34:33 PM
There had better be a no HCIW clause for Leavitt if this is true.  I don't want that deranged looking muppet (no offense chicat) anywhere near the HC position.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: michigancat on October 13, 2010, 04:34:58 PM
Why not just make Leavitt HC?
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: CHONGS on October 13, 2010, 04:35:47 PM
Why not just make Leavitt HC?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: DILLIGAF on October 13, 2010, 04:45:06 PM
Coming in under the consultant tag for this year, moves to DC next, who knows what happens with Cosh from there.   WTH happened to cause Ching to jump the shark? 
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: chum1 on October 13, 2010, 04:49:38 PM
Gotta go with the family now because no established coach will come knowing that we'll soon be a mid major.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: catsdo on October 13, 2010, 05:05:04 PM
Why not just make Leavitt HC?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Do you really think we'll do better?  We've had two chances lately and couldn't find anyone but OB and some loser from Virginia.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: jtksu on October 13, 2010, 05:21:45 PM
Leavitt certainly isn't the sexiest option as our next HC but he's probably the best we are going to get.  Might as well lock him up when we have the chance.  Dude has demonstrated the ability to win a lot of games at the BCS level.  Plus, what happens if we pass on him, whiff on GP and whatever other targets we may have, and end up with someone like Ronny again- a mediocre coordinator from some mediocre BCS team?  Especially when Leavitt finds another job and starts producing better records and teams than the dood we get stuck with?  We're not getting Miles or Richt so you may as well just forget about those guys, they're not even an option.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: wabash909 on October 24, 2010, 08:30:23 AM
In response to the tard idiocy that it's only about a lack of talent, this dude basically nails.

If VK could take the pile of horse cac of personnel that Prince left behind and could mold it into a top 40 defense, there are NO excuses for the debacle in year two with Cosh.

--------------------------------------

stemo


Re: I have to believe w/ VK we would ....   


I don't buy your argument. Cosh is a decent LB coach, but not a DC. Do you know why we went with the 4-2-5? Do you think it was because we wanted to get more speed on the field? Do you think it was intended to defend the spread? The reality is it was likely neither. The 4-2-5 was brought in because Vic and Cosh knew it pretty well. But most importantly because it's a very straight forward defense to pick up and teach. It let's athletes be athletes, which reduces the amount of thinking needed, which in turn makes the defense play faster. When Cosh/VK came in, so much work needed to be done to teach the basics again, they needed to simplify the defense to speed them back up after using a lot of the time re-teaching basics. Right now, it seems like we are losing those basics again, not to mention being out of position.

I also took some time to look up the defensive resume of Cosh versus VK prior to their time at KSU.

Cosh was the DC at MD from 2006-2008. In 2005, the defense was #43. Then in 06-08 under CC, the defense went 84, 40, and 64 - avg of 64 and inconsistent as hell. Then in 2009 after CC left MD, the defense finished #83. Kind of all over the place, but the defense got worse overall under CC at MD with his best finish being #40 - which was kind of an outlying stat IMO.

Let's look at VK at Clemson/IL. Before he arrives, Clemson finished #26 in the country in total defense. In 2005-2008 under VK, Clemson finished 20, 13, 9, and 18 (avg defense 15th in the country) with consistent improvement overall. After VK left, they were back up to #20 - not far off, but worse than what they were under VK. Right now, Clemson is #51 in total defense. Not a good trend for the Clemson defense. I'd say the Clemson defense was better under VK than before and after. Right now, IL is the #23 rated defense. The year before VK got there in 2008, they were #56. I see a trend that follows VK - and trend of defenses that consistently improve and perform well under his coaching. I don't see that with Cosh.



Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: hemmy on October 24, 2010, 08:58:29 AM
We run the 4-2-5 because we don't have 3 real LBs on roster
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Kat Kid on October 24, 2010, 09:09:33 AM
We run the 4-2-5 because we don't have 3 real LBs on roster

We don't have any.  2 is less than 3 though.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: catzacker on October 24, 2010, 09:15:11 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogcdn.com%2Fncaafootball.fanhouse.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F11%2F395747.jpg&hash=1b50786da0d0b1ed97b77b68e9669a9376dd6f8a)

this solves all of our problems.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: Andy on October 25, 2010, 08:22:41 PM
We run the 4-2-5 because we don't have 3 real LBs on roster

but we don't have good safeties either...
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HeinBallz on October 25, 2010, 09:11:49 PM
Not to mention our safeties... that were on the rost last year, have somehow became worse this year.   How can coaching take a raw athlete that didn't know crap about a position and make him worse.  Not that ksu safeties haven't trended in that direction.  But honestly, I don't remember hartman taking such horrible angles last year.
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: unleashthemob on October 25, 2010, 09:19:50 PM
Had same safeties as last year and we played better d.....bottom line, cosh is responsible, and bill is ultimately the one to blame....maybe we can pass a collection plate around at the last 2 home games. Just think if everyone pitched in ten bucks each we'd have quite a bit of money to shitcan cosh and bring in someone who can restore the mob
Title: Re: We'll be fine without Koenning.
Post by: HeinBallz on October 25, 2010, 09:30:50 PM
Had same safeties as last year and we played better d.....bottom line, cosh is responsible, and bill is ultimately the one to blame....maybe we can pass a collection plate around at the last 2 home games. Just think if everyone pitched in ten bucks each we'd have quite a bit of money to shitcan cosh and bring in someone who can restore the mob

yeah.... that's my point.   they've become worse....   we're complaining about coaching....      :flush: