Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Gift Of The 2003 Tigers

Where do we go from here?

The collective sigh of Kansas fans could be felt in Folsom Field as the final pass dropped to the turf and Buffalo fans began storming the field.  First and foremost for those of you who have been around for awhile I want you to reread that last sentence.  Yes, that's right...Buffalo fans STORMED THE FIELD.  Stormed the field for a victory against our Kansas Jayhawks and while no one likes to lose and there are a whole lot of things that need to be improved upon after last night, I could not help but think how far we've come.  It was bittersweet but let's remember that as recently as 2005 no one would have stormed the field for beating Kansas.  In fact Kansas fans themselves stormed the field and tore down goalposts a ridiculous 5 times between 2005 and 2006. 

Most teams don't go from relative obscurity to a BCS bowl in one season, it typically takes time.  Kansas caught lightening in a bottle and what we're a part of now is the growing pains that likely should have gradually developed us into a respectable program had a more normal course of events taken shape.  2007 was a major shot in the arm and I truly feel that it has progressed us tremendously but there's still plenty of work to be done.

Last night against Colorado there were signs early on that we were in for a fight.  The defense seemed to be in desperation mode from the start.  Position changes, offensive players on defense and players not seen all year thrust into action.  In all honesty though it seemed much worse than it was.  The position changes and new players were all fairly effective in their play and it could be argued in a few cases that they were upgrades.  Kansas ultimately held Colorado to only 322 yards of offense, a minimal 3.4 yards per rush and took the ball away three times from the Buffalo offense.  In the final five possessions the Kansas defense turned Colorado over twice, stopped them twice and allowed one touchdown.  Perhaps what made things seem worse was the fact that Colorado seems to have found there own Todd Reesing as Tyler Hansen kept a number of potential game changing plays alive and found a way to get it done.  34 points total put up by the Colorado Buffaloes, but only 20 of those can I put on the shoulders of the defense. 

The offense on the other hand which is the staple of Kansas football over the past two seasons was in disarray and unproductive amassing only 55 yards through the first 28 minutes of football.  A team that put up 500+ a week ago needed an under 2 minute drive for a score to surpass 100 yards in the first half.  The running game was nonexistent, Toben Opurum remained curiously on the sideline for much of the game and turnovers which have rarely hurt the Jayhawks blew up in their faces.  Two drives inside the five setup by turnovers led to fourteen Colorado points. 

Now fortunately as bad as the offense was in the first half, they were that good in the second.  Kansas mounted a furious comeback but once again came up short twice on Colorado turnovers settling for three on both occasions when fourteen could have completely demoralized a fragile Buffalo squad. 

Ultimately this is a loss for the team.  It isn't about the offense and it isn't about the defense, the Jayhawks lost and there were struggles on both sides.  It's a tough pill to swallow losing to Colorado but since day one I've felt this was going to be a potential stumbling block in the schedule. 

The positive is that the North looks like it's absolutely wide open.  Kansas State currently holds the number one spot and with 6 games to go there isn't one on the schedule that I look at and say..."Kansas wins" or "Kansas loses."  We're going to learn something about this team and this program this year. 

Hopefully the Jayhawks pull a couple of surprises, take care of business at home and make this another successful season in a mid to upper tier bowl that we can enjoy, all the while remembering that we used to charge the field, but now it appears the view of Kansas football might be changing and others are storming the field when they beat us. 

Time to keep the foot on the gas and remember it's about the journey and not the destination.  Kansas has come a long way.  Years ago 6 wins would have been a god send, now the expectations are higher but there's no shame in the team we are putting on the field.  They will compete in every game, every Saturday, whether it's as well as we want or not...they'll be in the fight.

Lastly, kudos to the Colorado team and staff for finally letting the talent play and staying out of the way.  They're a better team then the record shows and in the last 4 half's of football against Texas and Kansas the Buffaloes have been dangerous.  Dan Hawkins as a person is hard not to like and as a coach he seems to have one of these per year. Question is whether this win is enough to turn the fortunes and save Dan Hawkins for another day.

Also Folsom was a great place to see the game as always, Kansas fans were out in pretty good numbers but if there is one thing that will kill you in Boulder it's letting that student section get into the game.  Kansas allowed them to get into it and stay into it for four quarters.  At times the Colorado crowd has the feeling of a European soccer match with their chants and cheers and they do a tremendous job getting loud in the right moments.  After Kansas went up by 3 you could sense that if Kansas could get a stop and punch in another 7 we were about to witness a mass exodus from the Buffalo crowd.  That obviously didn't happen.  Tyler Hansen led a touchdown drive, it clearly reignited the confidence in the Buffalo players and reignited the fire in the Buffalo fans.

Tough pill to swallow, tough loss and time to turn the page.

Comment 52 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Storming the field means you are publicly recognizing you

feel inferior to your opponent. Good to know that, Colorado fans.

lol can't have a CKC without KC - Nicholai Khabibulin (LN21)

by Andy Edwards on Oct 18, 2009 8:06 PM CDT reply actions  

If that makes you feel better, dude, then by all means.

I thought it was definitely embarrassing to see and commented as such over at TRR, but it’s been an extremely embarrassing season thus far and we came up with a big win so I don’t totally blame them for being excited.

In short, you’re welcome for the recognition. See you in Lawrence next season.

I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.

by A.J. Haefele on Oct 18, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

See you in AFH this season

can’t wait to have you back on the side of good Slam.

Wait. Sarah Palin's in Hong Kong? But who's watching Russia?

by labbadabba on Oct 19, 2009 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions  

Lolz at thought of that

I can always take solace in a KU vs. CU hoops game. Line can’t be high enough. Sorry I’m bitter about football lately and have daydreamed about hoops recently some…

Time to get focused for OU…

by Andrew Clark on Oct 19, 2009 12:08 AM CDT up reply actions  

eh...

not sure it means you feel inferior…I think it just signifies that you feel the win was in someway significant. Whether it’s a rival, a bowl clinching win, a major upset or a sign of hope.

In Colorado’s case this year, as Slam says it’s been a tough start for the Buffs and this was just a much needed boost for the team and fans. I’d put it as a sign of hope. They pulled Tyler Hansen’s redshirt and he’s given a sign of life once again. Keep in mind KC that Colorado was a team many expected to compete for the Big 12 North at the beginning of the year. They stumbled big time out of the gate, but as of today they’re as in it as everyone else.

They needed something and beating us was it this year. Make no mistake though Colorado is a good program, just on hard times right now. I was just happy to see that we were deemed worth of storming the field over. Not a slight against Colorado, more a silver lining after a tough loss.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 18, 2009 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

I thought the storming of the field

was more a release from their awful season so far. They were given a shot to be a solid team by a lot of people, and Hawkins bumbling has prevented that so far. Once he got out of the way and let the athletes take over(with a major assist from us) they showed more of their true ability. The fans seemed happy that the athletes were the story rather than their coach for a change, and I don’t blame them for celebrating.

by hunter s. royal on Oct 18, 2009 9:24 PM CDT up reply actions  

so when kansas stormed the field after beating mizzou in "05

that says that kansas is inferior to mzzou? Or was that different?

"The field mouse is fast but the owl sees at night"

by pinkelposse on Oct 19, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions  

That would fall under the rival category...

of course I wasn’t the one who claimed it meant you are inferior, just my opinion though.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

touche

hadn’t read you’re comment. Good point

"The field mouse is fast but the owl sees at night"

by pinkelposse on Oct 19, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

I second the motion...

Missouri took a more gradual steady rise to the program they are now. Kansas took a more meteoric jump due to some good fortune in 2007. Meaning in 2005 Kansas certainly did feel like an inferior program.

Would you schedule your classes around Schooner night at Louise's West...well hell yes!!!

by Drunk at Louise's West on Oct 19, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

All I got to say is

Stucky finally showed up last game. His help in run support and playing center field on D was big time. Otherwise, apart from some decent DLine pressure…blech.

I mean freaking ANGUS QUIGLY was getting serious PT, and he was burried on the depth chart.

Here is my stance for the rest of the year: If our D is going to struggle, why not let the young kids get PT? If they can do almost/as well as seasoned guys lets let them get the green out of him. I dunno what your guys take is, but it seemed like Lubbock Smith and few others showed some promise.

If young guys show up and get some awesome experience…could really help for next year. Look at the experience our 2006 D got, they came back in 07 and almost the same group played infinitely better against arguably better talent the next year (same schedule sure but it seems like most of the teams we lost to in 06 and beat in 07 were just as good or not better the next year).

So heck, throw em in the fire? I dunno…

by Andrew Clark on Oct 18, 2009 9:53 PM CDT reply actions  

as an FYI...

fairly sure Stuckey’s early season struggles were due to a dislocated elbow. Not an easy injury to play with and is often cause for some time on the sidelines. Seems as though he’s kept plugging away despite playing in pain. That said this week was definitely a good week for him and it felt like he was his old self again.

As far as Angus…other than the fact that he seemed a little confused on where to line up a couple times I felt like he flew around and made some plays. I almost think he needs to see more time. He was the most athletic looking guy out there at linebacker. That and Arist Wright really struggled so if things aren’t working, try something new.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 8:54 AM CDT up reply actions  

great post

on perspective that’s needed. for me, i was/still am hoping for big things as it’s Todd and Kerry’s last season, so I think it’s a feeling of opportunity lost if we muddle our way to 6-6, but in the big picture we’ve come a LOOOOOONG way.

i would vehemently disagree that any of our remaining games are winnable…i think the chances of beating texas or texas tech are less than 1%, near zero really. we don’t have the athletes to match up with either team and we have struggled mightily with tech in the past.

nebraska and/or missouri are probably our best chances, but even then i would put either of those as no better than a coin flip, maybe a little better against mizzou.

the truth is, since the UTEP game this team has been steadily getting worse, not better. reesing is under too much pressure and/or holding onto the ball too long, and our run game has been exposed. the defense hasn’t really looked good in several weeks and our return games have not given us any really big plays.

sure, they can turn it around, but will they? we’ve got a desperate OU team coming in here that i can’t see us beating (we’re getting 7 points), then the beatdown at tech. suddenly, we’re 5-3 and going to play a rejuvenated K-State team that will be looking for a bowl bid.

we really really needed this one…

Kansas City Royals - rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic since 1994.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Oct 18, 2009 10:05 PM CDT reply actions  

OU's mistortune a Jayhawk gain?

I’m not trying to suggest I even THINK Kansas will beat Oklahoma, but I think it’s at least feasible. You have a freshman QB in Jones who has a near 2-to-1 TD/INT ratio right now, so again on the road forcing turnovers is going to be possible. LG Brian Simmons has been banged up, and the RT position for the Sooners has been a nightmare. If the defensive front maintains pressure, the secondary can focus on the passing game and limiting large gains.

Without Bradford, this is possible. If they can somehow pull this out, it would be a huge coup for the program. It’s not far-fetched.

FakeTeams.com - SBNation's Fantasy Source
The Royalty of Roto Blog

by Bryan Everson (The Royalty of Roto) on Oct 19, 2009 2:35 AM CDT reply actions  

Haven't been able to look at anything for a couple days

This loss hurt. I said all week that the game scared the crap out of me because of where CU was at. I feel the same way about OU. Coming in 3-3, a loss would put OU at 3-4? I don’t like the way that sounds and they could be very very inspired this week.

As for our last game, you win as a team and you lose as a team, but if you have to put it on a unit I give it to the offense. The D played pretty well in the 1st half while the offense sputtered and gave the ball away resulting in points. They brought us back in the 2nd but it was too late. Really hard to believe.

by I need more Esteban on Oct 19, 2009 9:31 AM CDT reply actions  

Call me crazy, but Todd Reesing hasn't appeared "sharp" to me all season

Maybe I expected too much out of his Senior year, but the kid has made some poor decisions this season much more often than I expected him to.

I almost feel like we should roll Kale Pick into the rotation a bit (maybe a drive in the 1st and another in the 3rd). But that could be my deep depression talking.

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 19, 2009 11:39 AM CDT reply actions  

The first four games it was a product of the defenses thrown at him. Teams were dropping 8 in coverage against him. Also as a whole, teams are adjusting to the spread better…hiding blitzes and coverages. It used to be the check down from the sideline pretty much made the decision for Todd, we aren’t getting that same decisiveness that we used to. I agree that Todd hasn’t looked as sharp but he’s put up some huge numbers and the difficulty in making plays isn’t entirely his fault.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions  

also food for thought...

through the first 6 he is statistically having his best year in a Jayhawk uniform.

Averaging 330/game
67% completion percentage
152.6 QB rating
8.15 YPA (2nd only to his minimal snaps his freshman year)

Don’t get me wrong I feel the same way you do, but the more I look at it…the more I think maybe our expectations were nearly impossible for Todd to live up to in some ways.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions  

Yes, I'd agree that expectations are the culprit here.

He’s spoiled us with near-perfection for so long, we figured…hey he’s a Senior he’ll be perfect!

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 19, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions  

Interesting to note is

We scored the exact same point total against CU this year as we did last year (30). Last year’s game we had zero turnovers though, was that the difference? Just something that popped in my mind thats interesting. At least to me.

by Andrew Clark on Oct 19, 2009 12:27 PM CDT reply actions  

I don't think there is any doubt...

that turnovers setting up drives that started inside the five on two occasions was the reason for this one. The CU offense wasn’t that effective to have won without it I don’t think.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

To force a team to drive five total yards

but reward them with 14 points is a bad recipe for success.

Credit to CU, though. When they had to drive to score late in the game, they did. When they had to stop throws into the end zone to save the game, they did.

by JayhawkTom on Oct 19, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

Can somebody who's more familiar with BCS conference football

Please find me another ranked football team that is moving players from offense to defense (in a blatant sign of desperation – in my opinion)? I’ve asked around and no one has heard of any other team doing this.

John Williams, Bradley McDougald……hell if we’re only going to give TO three frickin carries we might as well move him to LB.

I’m just baffled at how we got to this point.

At the beginning of the season I looked at the depth chart and saw 6 DTs that I though would all battle for playing time. Dorsey, Greene, Stephans, Zlatnik, Blakesly, Johnson Jr……how the hell do all these guys not pan out? Same argument in the secondary (Thornton, Harris, Davis, Rubles, Murphy, Stuckey, Patterson, Stozier). All that talent (?) and we have to resort to pulling the shirt off DJ Brashears and moving a starting WR to DB?!?!? Sh*t, at this point let’s just yank the shirt off Kande too.

Argh. It’s obvious I didn’t drink enough this weekend………..

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 19, 2009 3:44 PM CDT reply actions  

I think there is some validity in what you say...

although at the same time if something isn’t working as a coach…you have to try and fix it. I felt pretty good by the end of things with all the moves that were made, but I to wish they weren’t necessary.

We definitely looked like we had the depth early to be able to avoid these types of leaps but maybe not.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions  

That’s what I’m sayin man…it seems a little wild. Hell, wasn’t Pat Dorsey starting earlier this year, and weren’t there rumors that Zlatnik was having a great spring or Stephens would make an impact? This seems all for not.

I’m sure we’re balancing redshirts, injuries and lack of experience but at some point you’d have to think this program will get to the point where we aren’t juggling the bowling pins mid year.

As I said in my fanpost I thought they worked for the most part this week, but it’s still a little bothersome. Who know…maybe we’re making to much of it.

Time for another damn schooner!!

Would you schedule your classes around Schooner night at Louise's West...well hell yes!!!

by Drunk at Louise's West on Oct 19, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

we're getting there...

2008 was the first recruiting class where we saw an uptick in the talent level signed due to the Orange Bowl victory. That means 2008 and 2009 are two of the better classes to arrive on KU’s campus with Mangino.

Basically the talent at the top while pleasantly surprising with guys like Reesing, Briscoe and Meier…it still isn’t all the way through a deep and talented group. There are a lot of guys not even here anymore from those classes. We will return our entire line next year and the year after that we’ll be replacing only two and it will be with upperclassmen.

Just one example of how the depth is slowly coming up through the ranks.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

Drink one fer me.

My question remains……someone please find me another ranked BCS school scrambling like we are. It will help my psyche if I can point to another school and say: “see…they’re doing it too!”

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 19, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions  

Although we're not a ranked team (or even close for that matter), K-State's been doing a little of that.

Our 3rd-5th Quarterbacks, and yes I said quarterbacks, are seeing some good playing time at other positions. Klein is seeing time at WR, Kassanovoid is playing quite a bit at DE (!), and our starting safety (Hartman) is an ex-QB.

Introducing the new 2008 Big 12 Football Champions: OU, UT*, TT*, and MU*!
Now Introducing the new 2009 Big 12 Baseball Tournament Champions: UT, KSU*, BU*, and MU*!

by mystman995 on Oct 20, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions  

maybe it's a Bill Snyder coaching tree thing then...

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 20, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions  

I think it has more to do with

of how crappy Ron Prince was at recruiting…..

Introducing the new 2008 Big 12 Football Champions: OU, UT*, TT*, and MU*!
Now Introducing the new 2009 Big 12 Baseball Tournament Champions: UT, KSU*, BU*, and MU*!

by mystman995 on Oct 20, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions  

What is really starting to irk me

Is everyone says “We’ll we got to keep Bowen because he is a great recruiter.” If he is such a good recruiter, why aren’t any of these kids producing out there? In the past we had much better Ds with supposed lesser talent.

On know offenses in the Big12 have continuously gotten better and better, but still. I agree with you, the offensive players going in, etc etc, me no likey.

by Andrew Clark on Oct 19, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

don't get me started on my favorite coach.

Wait. Sarah Palin's in Hong Kong? But who's watching Russia?

by labbadabba on Oct 19, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions  

KU Grad...

I think you bring up an interesting point and I’ve heard that argument often as well, but it would be worth a look to see how well these kids he’s brought in have produced.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 19, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I mean I'm not trying to be too critical

And a lot of it is a knee jerk reaction to a disastrous loss, so keep that in mind with anything I’m posting lately (I’m growing grumpier, I almost want to delete my reaction to the game post because 2/3rds of it was positive haha).

I guess there are two things to look at here. First, is our defensive recruiting just missing a bit? We always prided ourselves on a good D with players no one wanted back in the 05-07 area, bowl game in 05 and Orange Bowl 07 had a D with a lot of guys who slipped under the radar.

Now with more highly ranked talent its not getting it done. Are Big12 O’s that scary. I don’t think its THAT bad. I think our D is lacking in some overall talent, AND we look like chickens with their head cut off out there a lot of the time too.

Here is another interesting thought…I think the 4-2-5 sucks. I think in theory its a good idea, but you need two really good anchors at LB to make it work, and a pass rush. Pass rush was pretty good saturday, but I don’t think we have anywhere close the skill at LB to only have two out there. Instead of using our strength – depth in the secondary, I feel like our D looks more confused than ever, and our LBs just get beat a lot. Arist Wright for example towards the end of last year looked like a machine, a fast, mean OLB. Now he looks…not good. Lets say he kept a 4-3 base, with Springer at MLB (his true position) Arist outside, and Tharp, Quigly, whoever at the other outside. Just something to think about. Thats how those guys (minus angus) have played and practice since they got here. Now they all looked lost and on an island.

I guess we’ll just have to take a wait and see approach. And I also could be a billion percent wrong, so if anyone wants to give an opposing viewpoint please do, just adding some food for thought.

by Andrew Clark on Oct 19, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

Think I'm starting to agree with you

in the assessment of the 4-2-5.

In theory it should minimize our problem with LB depth but it also means that the to LB’s that are out there better know what they’re doing. Credit for thinking outside the box but our second level has been a real soft spot this year.

Wait. Sarah Palin's in Hong Kong? But who's watching Russia?

by labbadabba on Oct 19, 2009 11:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

I'm not sold on it either

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 20, 2009 5:25 AM CDT up reply actions  

I think basically we're fucked

we’ve played the two easiest teams on our schedule and are 1-1…5-3 and going to K-State…it’s not the one loss but the continuation of a trend after not one but two wake-up calls that has me concerned…perhaps we’re just not that good this year…win one of the next two and then we’ll see.

Kansas City Royals - rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic since 1994.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Oct 19, 2009 9:38 PM CDT reply actions  

Exactly...

In essence, what this loss did to us was force us to have to win one of these next two.

It’s going to take at least five wins to take the north and now we have to beat a south team to have any chance of getting there. Very concerning.

by hiphopopotamus on Oct 20, 2009 7:55 AM CDT up reply actions  

opponent selection?

Hi all,
 I realize alot of programs pad their schedule early in the season ,and I realize its supposedly to get everybody on the same page but I think its counter productive here is why:
1.You cannot honestly evaluate your teams talent,when playing what amounts to scrimmage games.
2.It gives fans a less than accurate view of there team going into conference play.
3.It helps to pad players stats and coaches effectiveness with inflated numbers and wins that don’t tell the whole story,I mean you pad your first four or five games get all Ws and only have to win 2 or three conference games and go to a bowl so the coaching staff looks good and everybodys happy right?
4. You here the old “there are no cupcakes on our schedule” the first four games were suppose to be realtively easy Ws except Duke was rude and played hard and if the S.Miss game is in Hattiesburg I don’t know that KU wins.

I say your first game could be tune up but after that play teams with as much talent or a little more,you may not have as many highlites or as many pats on the back but you will be honest to yourselves and your fans.

I can’t say enough about what Coach Mangino and his staff have done here at KU and Jayhawk fans will remember what players such as Reesing,Mierer,Briscoe,Stuckey,Sharp and former greats like Ried, Floodman,Whittemore have done for the program .
I just think we need to be a liitle more honest and aggressive in our scheduling.

by kansasdad on Oct 20, 2009 11:13 AM CDT reply actions  

welcome and well said...

I’d agree that it’s time to step it up in the scheduling arena. I do think we’re doing that with Georgia Tech next year but it’s definitely time for us to start having our team fully evaluated and adjustments made before we get two games deep into conference play.

They served their purpose in building things up but it’s time to get battle tested and ready to go earlier in the season. It seems these teams have always gotten better toward the end of the year and maybe it’s the lack of adversity early on that’s slowing things.

Again though, thanks for the comment…definitely a different angle on the struggles in conference play.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 20, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions  

I'm not sure

I think our scheduling is fine. We went to USF last year. We have Georgia Tech the next two years. If a road games at at a lower tier school (UTEP, So. Miss) is our 2nd toughest game then I’m ok with that. I don’t think it does Colorado any favors to schedule tougher and go into conference play 1-3 or 2-2 every year. Have a test or two and build some confidence.

That being said, we had every opportunity to figure out the personnel decisions during non-con and didn’t get it done and I think that’s part of the point you guys are making. If Mangino knew we were going to be exposed then he should have been tinkering before we got exposed not after and I didn’t see very much of that.

by kcgregory on Oct 20, 2009 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

I've always been a big fan

of Colorado’s scheduling. It’s fun to see them play teams from big conferences that normally aren’t ones we would have a shot at seeing unless it was a bowl game. We have an annual matchup with Colorado State that can serve as our lower tier matchup, but because of the rivalry it’s almost always a great test anyway. I don’t see the need to play the UTEP’s and Duke’s of the world every year. Every so often, cool, but not every year. I like that Colorado typically schedules “tough” teams.

I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.

by A.J. Haefele on Oct 20, 2009 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

I like it too..from afar

because I’m not a Colorado fan. I wouldn’t want KU to schedule that way because I don’t think it helps us.

by kcgregory on Oct 21, 2009 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

I say have one tough game, a 50-50 type (GTech next year)

And three winnable games. I think we did well this year, Duke is better, UTEP has looked real good since we mauled em, and So. Miss is pretty solid and likely will make a bowl.

by Andrew Clark on Oct 21, 2009 11:33 PM CDT up reply actions  

I believe the "tough" schedule

is the reason CU was play 3rd string D-lineman as starting O-linemen in 2008. Tough opponents have a higher frequency of game injuries.

Ya think OU and/or Sam Bradford wishes they would have played someone easier their first game this season?

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 22, 2009 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

good points

but I think our non-con schedule was a test and it was good because we are in the guantlet Big 12 schedule right now. Next year, when the schedule switches back to the easier South opponents, we have Georgia Tech and a road game against Southern Miss.

by I need more Esteban on Oct 20, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

I would consider next year a step in the right direction...

we need to be playing at least one BCS school in non-con to get a test under our belts and Duke doesn’t count. USF last year was a good one and had we won could have been big. Even though we lost though, I think we learned a lot from that game which helped us down the line.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 20, 2009 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ok, let's just go all in as a conference....

Everyone gets one powder puff…..and then play all 11 Big 12 opponents every season.

Keeps the $$$ in the conference!

Sawin' wood

by Rivethead on Oct 22, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

Haha that would be sweet.

I honestly would not mind that, as long as all the conferences did it. Just have the Big11 absorb Notre Dame finally, and the Pac10 can take two more schools in (Fresno State, some other school out there) and we all play 11 conference games. Separate the Men from the Boys fast.

Instead of one random non-con game and then 11 conference games, we just do 11 conference games and save a date for a tie break game if its necessary. Let the teams all do one preseason game against a 1-AA opponent. That way there isn’t "oh our one game was hard and yours wasn’t, etc).

by Andrew Clark on Oct 22, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions  

I like it....

We’d get a true conference champion every year and the North would at the very least have the opportunity to earn more respect.

Some people are like Slinkies...not really good for anything but they make you smile when pushed down the stairs.

by Owen on Oct 22, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Rock Chalk Talk is your independent source for Jayhawk sports news, information and conversation on the web. Our goal is to provide Kansas Jayhawk fans a diverse, fair and public forum to talk Kansas sports.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Esty_small
This doesn't feel as big to you?

Recent FanPosts

Small
Remaining Schedule
Scs_logo_small
LJW Poll and a PETITION to KU Leadership -- Do Not Schedule MU
Small
ND 5th yr players?
Small
What if Robert Griffin III had gone to Kansas?
Frances2_small
Twitter Suggestions
Rctfinalcircusstepdown_2_small
It's Friday, What Are You Listening To?
Cecil_small
Update on the "Low-% Runner/Floater/Layups" - KU vs OU
Cecil_small
Kansas Basketball: Are The Low-% Runner/Floater/Layups Really "Bad Shots"?
Scs_logo_small
Pay Recruiting Service recommendations requested

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Rock Chalk Talk on Facebook

Owen Kemp and Rock Chalk Talk on Twitter


Managing Editor

Rctfinalcircusstepdown_2_small Owen

Assistant Editor

Wardenhatcopy_small Warden11

Mario_small fetch9

Contributing Authors

Small hiphopopotamus

Me_small Andrew Clark

Todd_small ajanzen

David_stuff_small PenHawk