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

[OregonSmock]

 

[8manpick]

dlew, perhaps you could explain your line of reasoning there.  My whole point comes down to the fact that there were more shitty teams to win against during the Prince era than there are now.  You seem to be fixating on strength of schedule, which I would still argue has been more difficult from top to bottom over the last few years.

It depended quite a bit on which 3 from the south you got. KU hit the jackpot in 07.

[Trogdor]

Hugs are in order

[Bqqkie Pimp]

We should be about due for Timmay to give us a thread page count update... I get a little nervous when he misses a page.

 

 

[timhawk]

wackysquawks child....pretty sure it's burning the skin.

[DQ12]

Perhaps you could explain your line of reasoning there.  My whole point comes down to the fact that there were more shitty teams to win against during the Prince era than there are now.  You seem to be fixating on strength of schedule, which I would still argue has been harder from top to bottom over the past couple of years.

I don't think there were more shitty teams back then.  I think there's more parity now, but that's only because the ceiling has been lowered so much.  And even so, you only listed 4 "shitty" (losing conference record) teams that K-State beat over Prince's three years.  Over the last three years, KU has played 6 "shitty" teams, by your definition of "shitty."  But the whole thing is such a crap shoot, because i think the parity (i.e. the entire downgrade in terms of teams within the conference) really mask the shittiness of most teams (besides KU) because the teams a shitty team plays haven't been so tough.  You may disagree.

At worst, the difference is basically negligible and regardless of the schedule, wins speak for themselves (just like KU's did in 2007) and tangible results matter.  Tangibly, dumbshit, bold and daring scary smart Ron Prince went to a bowl game and his worst season was 5 wins and he got fired for it at Kansas State. 

Ron Prince was, and is K-State's worst case scenario. And it really wasn't all that bad.

[MadCat]

Let's not get creepy now, cement guy.

[timhawk]

Let's not get creepy now, cement guy.

amazing

[OregonSmock]

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. 

[EMAWmeister]

wackysquawks child....pretty sure it's burning the skin.

Wackycat has never seen pictures of his child, so you may or may not be correct.

[kslim]

dlew, perhaps you could explain your line of reasoning there.  My whole point comes down to the fact that there were more shitty teams to win against during the Prince era than there are now.  You seem to be fixating on strength of schedule, which I would still argue has been more difficult from top to bottom over the last few years.

hi, not dlew here but i think i can say after 5/6 games the good teams will separate themselves and the shitty ones will show their true colors.

 i bet this years big 12 has just as many equally bad teams in it as there was in 07/08

[#LIFE]

We should be about due for Timmay to give us a thread page count update... I get a little nervous when he misses a page.

 

 

[DQ12]

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.

[GoodForAnother]

unless snyder blows up the stadium, gets rid of the powercat and switches the uniforms back to light purple when he retires, we should be ok

[mocat]

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.

 

[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?  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.

The worst case scenario at ku is Weis?

[OregonSmock]

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.

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. 

All you have to do is look at teams like Baylor and Iowa State.  They are significantly better than they were during the Ron Prince days.  Also, programs that were down at one point (Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Colorado) are no longer in the conference.  That hurts teams that are looking to find wins on the schedule. 

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. 

[kslim]

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.

The worst case scenario at ku is Weis?

the ku think group will say gill because......well.....you know........

[Dugout DickStone]

Pepperjax sure is obsessed with K-state

[kslim]

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.

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. 

All you have to do is look at teams like Baylor and Iowa State.  They are significantly better than they were during the Ron Prince days.  Also, programs that were down at one point (Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Colorado) are no longer in the conference.  That hurts teams that are looking to find wins on the schedule. 

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.

have you not followed kstate in the last 20 years? we have had what 4 bad years under snyder? with what like 12 10 win seasons in there, you dont see ksu fans questioning the dominance of ku in basketball even though you didnt fair so well in the majority of the tournaments. Apparently you hold the bar for kstate higher than we do, we all knew this would be a down year and we can still win 9 games. If that doesnt tell you that you have a strong program nothing will

[wabash909]

I like it when Beems uses terms like "mutually exclusive" and then doesn't really know what it means.

[XocolateThundarr]

So in short, KU football is in better shape than KSU football.  Is that what our friends from the east are claiming?

[mocat]

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.

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. 

All you have to do is look at teams like Baylor and Iowa State.  They are significantly better than they were during the Ron Prince days.  Also, programs that were down at one point (Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Colorado) are no longer in the conference.  That hurts teams that are looking to find wins on the schedule. 

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.

When has Iowa State been worse than right now? at least 2006 ISU beat Northern Iowa. sheesh

[OregonSmock]

I like it when Beems uses terms like "mutually exclusive" and then doesn't really know what it means.

That's interesting.  Perhaps you could explain.  I was under the impression that two events were mutually exclusive if they could not occur at the same time. 

The top teams in a conference being worse, and the bottom teams being better, can both occur at the same time.  Therefore, they are not mutually exclusive.  No? 

[OregonSmock]

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.