It's a simple question really. The Jayhawks opened the season last week against South Dakota and much of what fans witnessed left something to be desired. The offense wasn't nearly as improved as some were hoping, defensively Kansas struggled at times and while the special teams seemed to be the most notable improvement, fans were hoping for something more convincing against South Dakota.
After the dust settled and everyone cooled off from the near triple digit day in the stadium the suggestion started popping up indicating the perception that Kansas held back. Specifically that Charlie Weis expected to win the game against South Dakota based solely on the fact that Kansas should beat South Dakota every day of the week. Kansas has more talent and should find a way to impose their will on an inferior opponent, at least to some extent.
With that in mind, did Charlie Weis hold back in favor of keeping things close to the vest for upcoming opponents? Those that watched and witnessed the game in person noted a pretty vanilla set both offensively and defensively. It was also noted that some players that had been expected to contribute were held back either due to injury or some other reason left unsaid. At the end of the day I think we only need to look to last year and Charlie Weis historically to see that this 'holding back' mentality has happened all the way back to his days at Notre Dame.
One thing that constantly impressed me last year when watching this Jayhawk team work was the fact that there always seemed to be a new wrinkle or a unique approach to a specific game. That didn't turn into wins, but it certainly felt like Dave Campo and Weis were putting together solid gameplans each week, Kansas just didn't have the horses to get over the hump. At this point we're left to speculate and hope. Saturday against a solid Rice team on the road we'll learn a little more. But if you had to say, do you think we held back? And do you approve of that approach given the opponent?