Author Topic: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .  (Read 6737 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20997
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #25 on: September 02, 2012, 02:39:36 PM »
:foottappingguy:  Maybe it could be a part of Nancy Negs......


Or are those just for basketball

I could probably do one, but I didn't chart the game or anything or pay much attention for that matter.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38007
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2012, 02:47:22 PM »
I heard that LHCBS talked about the shitty defense in postgame presser. Probably should have thought about the shitty defense 8 months ago when he hired Retread McGee.

To be fair, didn't Snyder try to hire Leavitt but Currie vetoed the hire?

Unless leavitt had some stud d tackles in tow I'm not sure it would have mattered

That's true, but I don't think he could have recruited any worse.

Offline ew2x4

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2012, 02:49:03 PM »
I'm more concerned about Chapman not being a great corner and Zimmerman falling into the Watts/Tetuan lineage.

Offline eastcat

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2502
  • Labeled by children.
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2012, 03:51:21 PM »
The star of the secondary was Milo.

Called it.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88568
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2012, 03:55:18 PM »
The star of the secondary was Milo.

Called it.

He looked good

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2012, 05:18:07 PM »
I think we're really going to miss Kibble and Guidry this year.

Offline The Manhatter

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1100
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2012, 05:46:09 PM »
against an FCS opponent who dropped back to pass 51 times, and who rushed another 26 times.

Now, for some of you, try to avoid allowing your inner Wabash from coming out, and explain this.   


our "inner wabash"?  What in the hell does that mean?  Oh, I know what it means but if I don't dive off a cliff holding your hand will I be channeling this spirit?

I look at it more like this...we didn't have many TFLs last season and the run defense was sound.  We faced a Mo. State offense that did return 4 offensive line starters and the TE.  Last year they surrendered 2 sacks each to Oregon and Arkansas, both had very good pass rushers.  The bears gave up 18 sacks in 11 games a year ago so not many got to their QB.

Now, I have bitched about our pass rush for several years.  It is what it is and we need better pass rushers.  But regardless of how good of pass rushers we have we would not have knocked their QB around much anyway.

I think we all know we need some better athletes along the DL and in the secondary (also part of the issue). 

The lack of pass rush and TFLs would be part scheme, part their scheme, and part the lack of necessary athletes.

We know what we have so I really don't need to channel an inner wabash to draw that realization.
Academics is a stupid word.

Academic schools are synonymous for being rich, powerful and exclusive, three things Kansas State is not.

So when people throw the word "academics" around, that's really what they are referencing.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38007
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2012, 05:50:20 PM »
Most sacks have a whole lot more to do with a QB holding onto the football too long than it does the quality of a team's pass rush. The number of pass attempts is pretty irrelevant, and I thought both MSU QB's did a pretty good job of getting rid of the ball quickly. That said, I would love to have better pass rushers.

Offline ZmoneyKSU

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 795
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2012, 06:11:14 PM »
and Zimmerman falling into the Watts/Tetuan lineage.

I refuse to believe Ty will end up like those two... I refuse... it can't happen again. Tysyn broke that curse, two Y's wasn't great, and I didn't like him at times over the last few years, but he made an NFL squad. Granted the Chiefs are a joke, but still. Ty is destined to be McGraw 2.0!

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2012, 06:37:54 PM »
Fair points made all around.

1st, we weren't completely vanilla defensively; we ran some stunts, played some different coverages, etc. However, we didn't really put in full prep or a complete game-plan for Mo State. We could've put in some things to take away their strengths, but we really didn't do that, we simply made due with what we have in, probably much of it prep for better opponents like Miami (and Miami runs a completely different scheme than Mo State). So I'm not super concerned with the coverages.

2nd, Mo State's offense did get the ball out quick. Its valid to say despite the number of pass attempts, its difficult to get sacks. Throw in we didn't really put in a bunch of coverages to defend against their strengths, and you aren't going to get coverage sacks.

All that said, its disappointing not only to not get sacks (or TFLs), but we also didn't get a lot of pressure/hits on the Mo State QBs. I don't think its a huge concern, but its valid to be a bit concerned by the defense in this game. The defensive line will be the key for this defense to be decent, or at least good enough to win. There is no reason to panic, but there is also no reason to believe this defense will be a lot better than last year. To equal last year's success on the field we probably need that to happen, and based on Mo State there is no reason to believe we're a lot better on defense at this point.

Offline ew2x4

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2012, 06:41:24 PM »
and Zimmerman falling into the Watts/Tetuan lineage.

I refuse to believe Ty will end up like those two... I refuse... it can't happen again. Tysyn broke that curse, two Y's wasn't great, and I didn't like him at times over the last few years, but he made an NFL squad. Granted the Chiefs are a joke, but still. Ty is destined to be McGraw 2.0!
It's gonna happen, man. He already looks super slow and he's avoiding big hits.

Offline Gooch

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #36 on: September 02, 2012, 07:02:13 PM »
and Zimmerman falling into the Watts/Tetuan lineage.

I refuse to believe Ty will end up like those two... I refuse... it can't happen again. Tysyn broke that curse, two Y's wasn't great, and I didn't like him at times over the last few years, but he made an NFL squad. Granted the Chiefs are a joke, but still. Ty is destined to be McGraw 2.0!
It's gonna happen, man. He already looks super slow and he's avoiding big hits.
Wut?

Offline deputy dawg

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4210
  • Wait, wait....what?
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2012, 06:14:18 AM »
OT, but rumor has it that Terry Allen twisted off on LHCBS after the game.  Can anyone confirm?

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2012, 08:01:57 AM »
OT, but rumor has it that Terry Allen twisted off on LHCBS after the game.  Can anyone confirm?
he looked like he was trying to make out with his ear at midfield.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38007
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2012, 04:26:49 PM »
I think Terry Allen has a lot of respect for LHC Bill Snyder and was just telling Coach how great the Cats looked in the second half.

Offline GoodForAnother

  • It was all a scheme I used to read emaw magazine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6045
  • You hate to see this Mike
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #40 on: September 08, 2012, 05:06:49 PM »
 :lynchmob:
emaw

Offline Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20631
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #41 on: September 08, 2012, 05:34:01 PM »
clearly the mo state quick throws were the key.  good pressure today.  however our lack of secondary speed is evident when we don't get pressure.

Offline hemmy

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6676
  • RIP The After Party
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #42 on: September 08, 2012, 05:37:30 PM »
clearly the mo state quick throws were the key.  good pressure today.  however our lack of secondary speed is evident when we don't get pressure.

Slow secondary has been evident for many years in a row.

Offline ew2x4

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: No Sacks, 2 TFL's . . .
« Reply #43 on: September 08, 2012, 09:35:33 PM »
and Zimmerman falling into the Watts/Tetuan lineage.

I refuse to believe Ty will end up like those two... I refuse... it can't happen again. Tysyn broke that curse, two Y's wasn't great, and I didn't like him at times over the last few years, but he made an NFL squad. Granted the Chiefs are a joke, but still. Ty is destined to be McGraw 2.0!
It's gonna happen, man. He already looks super slow and he's avoiding big hits.
Wut?

He pulled up on a couple opportunities to lay a guy out last week. Very 2y's esque.