Let's hear more about all the walk ons

[meow meow]

does TCU even have enough fans to have a message board?  small timey.

[TCUHornedFrog]

does TCU even have enough fans to have a message board?  small timey.

I don't apologize for my school having decent admission standards. 

[Cire]

lack of depth. we are beat up and worn out.

[kso_FAN]

lack of depth. we are beat up and worn out.

This is the biggest issue with Snyder 2. And it was highlighted this past Saturday.

But overall I can't complain. This staff has put together teams that have finished 2nd, 1st, 5th, and (at worst) 3rd over the last 4 seasons. We have been in the national conversation for 3 of the past 4 seasons. We are back to the mid-90s style team, one that beats almost every team we "should" and occasionally gets whipped by teams with superior talent.

Yes, having so many walk ons and grey shirts that become major contributors is a mixed bag; it highlights the ability of this staff to find and develop players no one else wants (especially local/KS talent). But it also shows that recruiting isn't great and even among what "should" be decent 3 star talent, we are missing often. JUCOs are a mixed bag, and often guys we hope to be stars take a year to develop, or they never develop at all. That said, I think the mentality that we are playing inferior players to teach more talented guys lessons is stupid at best. This staff is paid to win games and they are flat out playing the best possibly 22 guys they can. If guys that recruiting services (and our fans) think are super talented really were better options, they would be on the field.

IMO this staff has done a fantastic job putting together game plans and personnel to compete at a very high level, but when a guy goes down or can't play (see Dakorey) or gets dinged (see Waters) it shows up in how we play and our ability to compete. We simply don't have a 2nd guy at most positions that can step in and make up the difference and often there is a pretty big gap. Still, we keep plugging away and winning games at a high rate (75% the last 4 seasons) and this is what K-State football is right now. As long as Snyder is here, this will continue to be what K-State football is. Perhaps some day we'll have a dynamic staff that is better at recruiting (I have no delusions that we'll ever be Texas or Oklahoma) and still manage to win games at a high rate, but I'll gladly take what we have right now. In fact, I'm sure there will be a point in the next 10-15 years where I'll want to go back to this era of football for K-State.

[8manpick]

It would be really cool if we could at least be Oklahoma State, recruiting-wise

[Cire]

lack of depth. we are beat up and worn out.

This is the biggest issue with Snyder 2. And it was highlighted this past Saturday.

But overall I can't complain. This staff has put together teams that have finished 2nd, 1st, 5th, and (at worst) 3rd over the last 4 seasons. We have been in the national conversation for 3 of the past 4 seasons. We are back to the mid-90s style team, one that beats almost every team we "should" and occasionally gets whipped by teams with superior talent.

Yes, having so many walk ons and grey shirts that become major contributors is a mixed bag; it highlights the ability of this staff to find and develop players no one else wants (especially local/KS talent). But it also shows that recruiting isn't great and even among what "should" be decent 3 star talent, we are missing often. JUCOs are a mixed bag, and often guys we hope to be stars take a year to develop, or they never develop at all. That said, I think the mentality that we are playing inferior players to teach more talented guys lessons is stupid at best. This staff is paid to win games and they are flat out playing the best possibly 22 guys they can. If guys that recruiting services (and our fans) think are super talented really were better options, they would be on the field.

IMO this staff has done a fantastic job putting together game plans and personnel to compete at a very high level, but when a guy goes down or can't play (see Dakorey) or gets dinged (see Waters) it shows up in how we play and our ability to compete. We simply don't have a 2nd guy at most positions that can step in and make up the difference and often there is a pretty big gap. Still, we keep plugging away and winning games at a high rate (75% the last 4 seasons) and this is what K-State football is right now. As long as Snyder is here, this will continue to be what K-State football is. Perhaps some day we'll have a dynamic staff that is better at recruiting (I have no delusions that we'll ever be Texas or Oklahoma) and still manage to win games at a high rate, but I'll gladly take what we have right now. In fact, I'm sure there will be a point in the next 10-15 years where I'll want to go back to this era of football for K-State.

Do you think that our team is more physical on a day to day practice basis than other programs?

Are there new rules about how much/often guys can do full contact in college?

[meow meow]

I think a lot of schools don't go full contact everyday, and K-State does, or I remember reading/hearing something to that effect a few years ago.

[kso_FAN]

Do you think that our team is more physical on a day to day practice basis than other programs?

I know for a fact that they do, especially in the preseason. I don't think its that much different during the season than most teams, but there is certainly a mentality from the top that being physical is conditioned. I think there are some benefits to the mentality that this creates in most of our players, but it also leads to guys getting more beat up as the season goes along.

[ednksu]

lack of depth. we are beat up and worn out.

This is the biggest issue with Snyder 2. And it was highlighted this past Saturday.

But overall I can't complain. This staff has put together teams that have finished 2nd, 1st, 5th, and (at worst) 3rd over the last 4 seasons. We have been in the national conversation for 3 of the past 4 seasons. We are back to the mid-90s style team, one that beats almost every team we "should" and occasionally gets whipped by teams with superior talent.

Yes, having so many walk ons and grey shirts that become major contributors is a mixed bag; it highlights the ability of this staff to find and develop players no one else wants (especially local/KS talent). But it also shows that recruiting isn't great and even among what "should" be decent 3 star talent, we are missing often. JUCOs are a mixed bag, and often guys we hope to be stars take a year to develop, or they never develop at all. That said, I think the mentality that we are playing inferior players to teach more talented guys lessons is stupid at best. This staff is paid to win games and they are flat out playing the best possibly 22 guys they can. If guys that recruiting services (and our fans) think are super talented really were better options, they would be on the field.

IMO this staff has done a fantastic job putting together game plans and personnel to compete at a very high level, but when a guy goes down or can't play (see Dakorey) or gets dinged (see Waters) it shows up in how we play and our ability to compete. We simply don't have a 2nd guy at most positions that can step in and make up the difference and often there is a pretty big gap. Still, we keep plugging away and winning games at a high rate (75% the last 4 seasons) and this is what K-State football is right now. As long as Snyder is here, this will continue to be what K-State football is. Perhaps some day we'll have a dynamic staff that is better at recruiting (I have no delusions that we'll ever be Texas or Oklahoma) and still manage to win games at a high rate, but I'll gladly take what we have right now. In fact, I'm sure there will be a point in the next 10-15 years where I'll want to go back to this era of football for K-State.

A lot of people jumped off the Patterson bandwagon here with the results of his first few years in the Big 12 falling flat.  Your points about depth are something which he has addressed specifically for his failures to maintain a BCS bowl program transitioning to the Big 12.  Its a shame that we don't have a coaching staff that has figured out the aspects which Patterson has learned so quickly.  Its obvious they don't want to or don't care to create a team with long term (season level and program level) success. 

[kso_FAN]

A lot of people jumped off the Patterson bandwagon here with the results of his first few years in the Big 12 falling flat.  Your points about depth are something which he has addressed specifically for his failures to maintain a BCS bowl program transitioning to the Big 12.  Its a shame that we don't have a coaching staff that has figured out the aspects which Patterson has learned so quickly.  Its obvious they don't want to or don't care to create a team with long term (season level and program level) success. 

Patterson's biggest lesson was that he had to change to an offense that could compete in this league, it had very little to do with recruiting or creating depth in his program. The talent was there; he didn't all of a sudden learn that he was in one of the most talent rich cities in one of the most talent rich states in the country. I mean anyone who knew football could see that his 12 and 13 teams had plenty of talent and that showed up on defense, he just was way too conservative on offense and this year he changed that.

[TCUHornedFrog]

A lot of people jumped off the Patterson bandwagon here with the results of his first few years in the Big 12 falling flat.  Your points about depth are something which he has addressed specifically for his failures to maintain a BCS bowl program transitioning to the Big 12.  Its a shame that we don't have a coaching staff that has figured out the aspects which Patterson has learned so quickly.  Its obvious they don't want to or don't care to create a team with long term (season level and program level) success.

Patterson prepared TCU fans pretty well.  He said the biggest change in jumping to the Big 12 would be that we needed more size and depth and that it would take at least 2-3 years to develop that and return the team to the competitive level that TCU fans had grown accustomed to.

[TCUHornedFrog]

Patterson's biggest lesson was that he had to change to an offense that could compete in this league, it had very little to do with recruiting or creating depth in his program. The talent was there; he didn't all of a sudden learn that he was in one of the most talent rich cities in one of the most talent rich states in the country. I mean anyone who knew football could see that his 12 and 13 teams had plenty of talent and that showed up on defense, he just was way too conservative on offense and this year he changed that.

There is definitely an element of this as well.  But, he has slightly altered his team's approach respective of the conference that we've played in over the years.

That being said, our depth and size (in particular OL) was not up to par when we joined the Big 12 and we suffered during the first two years as a result.

[kso_FAN]

Patterson's biggest lesson was that he had to change to an offense that could compete in this league, it had very little to do with recruiting or creating depth in his program. The talent was there; he didn't all of a sudden learn that he was in one of the most talent rich cities in one of the most talent rich states in the country. I mean anyone who knew football could see that his 12 and 13 teams had plenty of talent and that showed up on defense, he just was way too conservative on offense and this year he changed that.

There is definitely an element of this as well.  But, he has slightly altered his team's approach respective of the conference that we've played in over the years.

That being said, our depth and size (in particular OL) was not up to par when we joined the Big 12 and we suffered during the first two years as a result.

Yes, but its clear the new offense has helped. Granted, I'm not sure they would've been as effective as this year, but last year your offense was #95 (nationally) and the year before it was #71 while this year it is #19. Meanwhile your defense this year is #6 after being #12 and #11 the first two years in this league. The biggest change here is hiring Meachum and Cumbie while having a guy with experience at QB that earned his spot back.

[420seriouscat69]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

[Winters]

Our program is in a great position. I think we all agree we don't care how it happens we just want the best team out there. Historically speaking, talented HS kids get you more long-term success than say Walk-ons probably do. If K-State could somehow win with deaf kids, I wouldn't care.

[sonofdaxjones]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

Lives on the phog?  LOL, the only reason I occassionally look at the phog is to see what dumbass K-State fans like you are posting over there and read what the usual suspect Phogistians have to say.   

[meow meow]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

you sure that's the argument you want to make?

[Emo EMAW]

Swing your sword wacky haters gonna hate.

[TCUHornedFrog]

Yes, but its clear the new offense has helped. Granted, I'm not sure they would've been as effective as this year, but last year your offense was #95 (nationally) and the year before it was #71 while this year it is #19. Meanwhile your defense this year is #6 after being #12 and #11 the first two years in this league. The biggest change here is hiring Meachum and Cumbie while having a guy with experience at QB that earned his spot back.

Yes, our offense the last two years had been a train wreck.  You had the Casey Pachall crap in the first year of Big 12 membership.  Boykin stepped up and played well during that year.  The following year Boykin played like absolute ass. 

I think we would have seen improvement regardless but Meachum and Cumbie have made a huge impact.

[420seriouscat69]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

Lives on the phog?  LOL, the only reason I occassionally look at the phog is to see what dumbass K-State fans like you are posting over there and read what the usual suspect Phogistians have to say.

Lol. You have real estate there, dumb eff. What? Since Beems is gone, you're coming after me now? Are you that rough ridin' bored?

[sonofdaxjones]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

Lives on the phog?  LOL, the only reason I occassionally look at the phog is to see what dumbass K-State fans like you are posting over there and read what the usual suspect Phogistians have to say.

Lol. You have real estate there, dumb eff. What? Since Beems is gone, you're coming after me now? Are you that rough ridin' bored?

I haven't posted there in years.  Yeah, is this really the angle you want to take?   Let's just say I am bit surprised how much inner tuck you have.   You really would be a great fit for the 'bash.

[420seriouscat69]

Wacky is probably the best fit for the Wabash out of anyone on this board.

Sad, but true.

Says the butthurt old man who lives on the phog cause they're making fun of his school.

Lives on the phog?  LOL, the only reason I occassionally look at the phog is to see what dumbass K-State fans like you are posting over there and read what the usual suspect Phogistians have to say.

Lol. You have real estate there, dumb eff. What? Since Beems is gone, you're coming after me now? Are you that rough ridin' bored?

I haven't posted there in years.  Yeah, is this really the angle you want to take?   Let's just say I am bit surprised how much inner tuck you have.   You really would be a great fit for the 'bash.

It would take a lifetime of posting for me to equal the amount of time you've spent over there. I've never seen Beems live inside someone's dome as much as yours. The amount of small dick syndrome you have is appalling. "Stop being mean about K-state! We've got this and this and this and we're doing this and this and this". eff off old timer.

[meow meow]

 

[sonofdaxjones]

I'll just consider the source on "living inside somone's dome" and get back to why you're such a tuck when it comes to most if not all perceived criticism of K-State.

That's okay though, don't be mad.

[OK_Cat]

Wow, this seems like the bbs fight we've all been waiting for