The KU Rayhawks are NOT going through a rough patch. They make Raytown, Missouri proud!

[mocat]

Iowa State is ranked 60th in the Sagarin ratings, and basically beat Texas (minus Big 12 officiating).  They're not as bad as they were in 2007 and 2008.  You guys are horrible at this.

oh jfc 

[GoodForAnother]

ksu doesn't face half as many challenges as it did in 1989.  it doesn't face half as many challenges as ku does in 2013.  the chances of us going back to pre-snyder after he leaves are laughably small and the only people that think it could actually happen are the same weird phog.net guys who think that people care about the setting of a football stadium.

[DQ12]

You need to take a statistics course.  It is completely possible for teams at the top of a conference to be worse, while the teams at the bottom have improved.  They are not mutually exclusive. 

I know they're not mutually exclusive.  That's why I phrased the question to include the word "substantial" (in fact, I underlined it actually).  It was a reasonable question.  Do you think it was equal?

Is Iowa State substantially better than the RP days?  They're going to win one or two games this season.  Is WVU substantially better than those A&M/Nebraska teams you listed?  I honestly don't know and that's my point.  The difference is difficult to tell at the bottom because there's a billion variables.  So looking at the records for the bottom half of the conference doesn't tell the whole story.

As for the "shifted paradigm at Kansas State," what a load of crap.  You guys are 2-4 (0-3) right now.  K-State still faces most of the same challenges that they always have.  Snyder has been able to overcome those challenges for the most part and build a legacy, but it's very difficult to continue to sustain success at a program like K-State.  Perhaps this is a moment where you reflect on just how much built-in bias and delusion you have established when it comes to K-State football.

You really think it's a load of crap that K-State doesn't and won't face the same institutional challenges it did in the pre-Snyder era?

Let's glance at the Futility U article: 

The "it's impossible to win at k-state" stigma has vanished. 

The "tradition" talking point is gone.

The "fan interest" talking point is gone.

The "money" talking point is gone.  (stan parish made 90k a year)

Literally, the only still-applicable portion of the SI article is the following, which the author admits, was pretty weak even back in 1989:

Location. Manhattan, which fancies itself The Little Apple, is located somewhere to the west of Topeka and north of Wichita. Wildcat quarterback Paul Watson says players from outside the state think of Kansas as "flat and nothing." Players from inside the state are mostly hoping to leave. In truth, Manhattan is a wonderful little town in which cars still angle-park on Poyntz Ave., the main thoroughfare. And, yes, they have electricity and talking movies. In fact, for charm and personality, Manhattan has it all over places like State College, Stillwater, Columbia, Tuscaloosa, and South Bend. Says former coach Gibson, "The one thing Kansas has got is great people, but it's hard to sell people."

So yeah, unless one day in the future K-State and its fans suddenly decide that having a respectable football program isn't fun anymore, K-State's not going to have to face the same challenges they faced pre-Snyder.  The paradigm has shifted in the last 25 years.  K-State cares about football and for as long as college football is a thing, K-State will continue to care about it.

[Dugout DickStone]

Iowa State is ranked 60th in the Sagarin ratings, and basically beat Texas (minus Big 12 officiating).  They're not as bad as they were in 2007 and 2008.  You guys are horrible at this.

oh jfc 

 

[OregonSmock]

dlew, those "paradigm shifts" have all occurred at KU as well.  In fact, it wasn't until we got really good that things started to crumble.  KU started the 2009 season 5-0 and ranked in the top 15, and then something changed and the program collapsed.  It can happen overnight if you hire the wrong coach.  It's very short-sighted to think that just because Snyder has been successful at K-State, the next coach will be successful. 

And for the record, KU fans have not accepted losing, which is why we've had three different coaches in the past five years.  Once a coach digs a program into a hole, it's tough to get out, though, especially when you're digging yourself out in a league where nine of ten teams were bowling last year. 

Last but not least, it's really mind-boggling how anyone who has been a K-State fan for more than two years can just pretend like the program is on cruise control, especially in the midst of a 2-4 (0-3) season.  But then again, most K-State fans didn't follow football until 1993, so it's easy to overlook history when you don't really know anything about it.

[timhawk]

Beems look at this.....73 pages about KU on a KSU board....they are butthurt. there are no 73 page discussions about ksu on any KU forums.

[KITNfury]

dlew, those "paradigm shifts" have all occurred at KU as well.  In fact, it wasn't until we got really good that things starting to crumble.  KU started the 2009 season 5-0 and ranked in the top 15, and then something changed and the program collapsed.  It can happen overnight if you hire the wrong coach.  It's very short-sighted to think that just because Snyder has been successful at K-State, the next coach will be successful. 

And for the record, KU fans have not accepted losing, which is why we've had three different coaches in the past five years.  Once a coach digs a program into a hole, it's tough to get out, though, especially when you're digging yourself out in a league where nine of ten teams were bowling last year. 

Last but not least, it's really mind-boggling how anyone who has been a K-State fan for more than two years can just pretend like the program is on cruise control, especially in the midst of a 2-4 (0-3) season.  But then again, most K-State fans didn't follow football until 1993, so it's easy to overlook history when you don't really know anything about it.

Nobody said cruise control, just that Futility U is long gone.

[KITNfury]

Beems look at this.....73 pages about KU on a KSU board....they are butthurt. there are no 73 page discussions about ksu on any KU forums.

No, just a bunch of different threads that your mods delete posts from and then lock.

[ChiComCat]

Beems look at this.....73 pages about KU on a KSU board....they are butthurt. there are no 73 page discussions about ksu on any KU forums.

There are no 73 page threads about KU football on any KU board because you have a crap fanbase.

[Mixed-Nutz]

dlew, those "paradigm shifts" have all occurred at KU as well.  In fact, it wasn't until we got really good that things starting to crumble.  KU started the 2009 season 5-0 and ranked in the top 15, and then something changed and the program collapsed.  It can happen overnight if you hire the wrong coach.  It's very short-sighted to think that just because Snyder has been successful at K-State, the next coach will be successful. 

And for the record, KU fans have not accepted losing, which is why we've had three different coaches in the past five years.  Once a coach digs a program into a hole, it's tough to get out, though, especially when you're digging yourself out in a league where nine of ten teams were bowling last year. 

Last but not least, it's really mind-boggling how anyone who has been a K-State fan for more than two years can just pretend like the program is on cruise control, especially in the midst of a 2-4 (0-3) season.  But then again, most K-State fans didn't follow football until 1993, so it's easy to overlook history when you don't really know anything about it.

Nothing in the KU program changed overnight. It was clearly a perfect storm for KU in 2007 that bleed in to 2008. You had your easiest schedule at the same time you had you greatest amount of talent in the last 20 years.

[ChiComCat]

And you're beating a straw man, Beems.  Nobody is saying our next coach is guaranteed to be successful.  Dlew is saying that there is no reason to expect our next coach to be as shitty as the ones previous to Snyder.

[kst8cat]

Dang it, dlew.  Looks like we're back to square one.  You just can't admit that the Big 12 used to be weaker at the bottom, can you?  As for Ron Prince, he is the 2nd-best football coach in K-State history.  K-State has done, and can do, much worse than Ron Prince.

Why do you idiots keep posting this over and over again after it has been proven to be false?  Is it the latest phog talking point?  You and Tim sound like a broken record at times.

[420seriouscat69]

Dang it, dlew.  Looks like we're back to square one.  You just can't admit that the Big 12 used to be weaker at the bottom, can you?  As for Ron Prince, he is the 2nd-best football coach in K-State history.  K-State has done, and can do, much worse than Ron Prince.

Why do you idiots keep posting this over and over again after it has been proven to be false?  Is it the latest phog talking point?  You and Tim sound like a broken record all the time.

FYP

[timhawk]

Dang it, dlew.  Looks like we're back to square one.  You just can't admit that the Big 12 used to be weaker at the bottom, can you?  As for Ron Prince, he is the 2nd-best football coach in K-State history.  K-State has done, and can do, much worse than Ron Prince.

Why do you idiots keep posting this over and over again after it has been proven to be false?  Is it the latest phog talking point?  You and Tim sound like a broken record all the time.

All the time.

all the time

[Dugout DickStone]

Beems look at this.....73 pages about KU on a KSU board....they are butthurt. there are no 73 page discussions about ksu on any KU forums.

There are no 73 page threads about KU football on any KU board because you have a crap fanbase.

[lopakman]

I never really understood the squawks argument of pointing out how many pages there are to a thread that mentions KU in it means we are obsessed with them.  It seems ironic because they're the ones posting on goEMAW.  Also 50% or more of all posts involving KU as a topic of discussion are from beems and timfuck. 

Mocat, please verify my numbers.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Dang it, dlew.  Looks like we're back to square one.  You just can't admit that the Big 12 used to be weaker at the bottom, can you?   

I'm saying it's difficult to tell the difference in the relative quality of the bottom half of the conference because this is a zero sum game.  Necessarily, when the top half becomes better, the bottom half looks worse and vice versa: When the bottom gets better, the top looks worse.  Not every team in the conference can win 9 games. 

So, with the current situation, which was the substantial influence: did the top get worse (and make the bottom look better) or did the bottom get better (and make the top look worse)?  I'd bet most would say the former (i would), but the latter would certainly be a great compliment to the 2012 champs. 

As for Ron Prince, he is the 2nd-best football coach in K-State history.  K-State has done, and can do, much worse than Ron Prince.

Please.  Snyder shifted the paradigm at Kansas State.  If you read the Futility U article, you should be well aware of the inherent institutional challenges that K-State faced prior to Snyder/Wefald and the absurdity of the notion that K-State will ever have to face those challenges again.

The bottom has gotten much better. Just look at last season when a West Virginia team returned nearly everybody from a BCS bowl-winning team that just demolished Clemson and was one of the worst teams in the league. Just take a look at how bad teams like Baylor, and Oklahoma State used to be and how good they are now. Texas and OU aren't quite as good as they were, but it's not like they are as bad as Baylor and OSU used to be, either. You have your eyes closed if you think the Big 12 is an easier league for a bad team to get bowl eligible than it was in the early 2000s.

[Dugout DickStone]

Dang it, dlew.  Looks like we're back to square one.  You just can't admit that the Big 12 used to be weaker at the bottom, can you?   

I'm saying it's difficult to tell the difference in the relative quality of the bottom half of the conference because this is a zero sum game.  Necessarily, when the top half becomes better, the bottom half looks worse and vice versa: When the bottom gets better, the top looks worse.  Not every team in the conference can win 9 games. 

So, with the current situation, which was the substantial influence: did the top get worse (and make the bottom look better) or did the bottom get better (and make the top look worse)?  I'd bet most would say the former (i would), but the latter would certainly be a great compliment to the 2012 champs. 

As for Ron Prince, he is the 2nd-best football coach in K-State history.  K-State has done, and can do, much worse than Ron Prince.

Please.  Snyder shifted the paradigm at Kansas State.  If you read the Futility U article, you should be well aware of the inherent institutional challenges that K-State faced prior to Snyder/Wefald and the absurdity of the notion that K-State will ever have to face those challenges again.

The bottom has gotten much better. Just look at last season when a West Virginia team returned nearly everybody from a BCS bowl-winning team that just demolished Clemson and was one of the worst teams in the league. Just take a look at how bad teams like Baylor, and Oklahoma State used to be and how good they are now. Texas and OU aren't quite as good as they were, but it's not like they are as bad as Baylor and OSU used to be, either. You have your eyes closed if you think the Big 12 is an easier league for a bad team to get bowl eligible than it was in the early 2000s.

MU and ATM teams that couldn't win the league are over in the SEC bossing like studs.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

Guys all of your points are of no value because they are all completely subjective.  Sure wins/losses is not subjective but I think it's fair to say "the team with the better record is the better team" is an invalid argument (unless ku/kstate only play against each other, and not counting the spring game).  The only thing that has stayed consistent is that the field is 100 yards long (although i guess they shortened it by moving up the line of scrimmage on a touchback) and there are 60 minutes of playing time in regulation.  The only way to even come close to providing an objective comparo is advanced stats...can someone get _FAN in here to put this to bed?

[wabash909]

I think what we can all agree upon is KU being Futility U now is far worse than K-State being Futility U way back when.

[kostakio]

Nobody has said KSU is on cruise control or anything close to that.  All they say is that the futulity U crap is long gone.  They had no tradition 25 years ago but more than 20 years of mosly winning often at a high level to changes that.  KSU now has far more football tradition then KU does and it's not close.  I dont' care what the head to head records say.  KU has never had a period of football success that remotely resembles what K-State  has had under Snyder.  It's not just some one or two year thing it's prolonged success with a double digit number of 10 win seasons.

 KU had never even gone to a bowl in back to back years until Mangino did it a few years ago and they've still just done it the one time.  Snyder went to what 11 straight bowls or something like that which is probably as many bowl games as KU has gone to in it's entire history of the program.   

[ChiComCat]

I think what we can all agree upon is KU being Futility U now is far worse than K-State being Futility U way back when.

The speed and effort to follow a stretch of 25-6 with a stretch of 8-40 is making it seem like KU was trying to take the title

[mocat]

Lopakman I checked the numbers, and, roughly 2% of posts on goEMAW reference KU, whereas 100% of beems' posts on goEMAW are on a ksu message board

[wabash909]

I think what we can all agree upon is KU being Futility U now is far worse than K-State being Futility U way back when.

The speed and effort to follow a stretch of 25-6 with a stretch of 8-40 is making it seem like KU was trying to take the title

Taking into account context and mutual exclusivity, I would agree with this statement.

[DQ12]

dlew, those "paradigm shifts" have all occurred at KU as well.  In fact, it wasn't until we got really good that things started to crumble.  KU started the 2009 season 5-0 and ranked in the top 15, and then something changed and the program collapsed.  It can happen overnight if you hire the wrong coach.  It's very short-sighted to think that just because Snyder has been successful at K-State, the next coach will be successful. 

And for the record, KU fans have not accepted losing, which is why we've had three different coaches in the past five years.  Once a coach digs a program into a hole, it's tough to get out, though, especially when you're digging yourself out in a league where nine of ten teams were bowling last year. 

Last but not least, it's really mind-boggling how anyone who has been a K-State fan for more than two years can just pretend like the program is on cruise control, especially in the midst of a 2-4 (0-3) season.  But then again, most K-State fans didn't follow football until 1993, so it's easy to overlook history when you don't really know anything about it.

I never said KU kids accepted losing.  All the decent KU football fans of which I'm aware are pissed and wish it was possible to fire Weis yesterday, as they should, because he's a complete loser who isn't helping to clean up the mess that Gill left.  They need to hire a non-loser who can win football games.

The K-State program is fragile, but no more fragile than any other above average football program.  It's certainly not on "cruise control" but I'd bet that speedometer will never fall below 4 wins.  Which, admittedly, isn't saying much.  It's really pretty rare to win fewer than four games.  Usually only there's only one or two conference teams that manage it in a given year.

The bottom has gotten much better. Just look at last season when a West Virginia team returned nearly everybody from a BCS bowl-winning team that just demolished Clemson and was one of the worst teams in the league. Just take a look at how bad teams like Baylor, and Oklahoma State used to be and how good they are now. Texas and OU aren't quite as good as they were, but it's not like they are as bad as Baylor and OSU used to be, either. You have your eyes closed if you think the Big 12 is an easier league for a bad team to get bowl eligible than it was in the early 2000s.

When was OSU a bad team?  They've won fewer than seven games once since 2001.   

Also, nobody is talking about the early 2000s.  Only the Prince years ('06-08).