BIG 12 NORTH PRESEASON FORECAST

[jayhawker]

how come your newcomers can improve your team, but ridiculous that our will help us?

 

Here is how our average D line compared stat wise to your "best in the big12 d line"

 

Rushing D

#21 Nebraska 3.62 ypc

#28 KU 3.94 ypc

 

Tackles for Loss

#40 Nebraska 6.31 p/g

#40 KU 6.31 p/g

 

Sacks

#14 Nebraska 35 total

#40 KU 29 total

 

Wow, guess your D Line was pretty average last year. Hopefully you guys can improve that.

 

Maybe this is why we are optimistic:

 

points/game . . . . . .2007 . . . . . . . . . .2008

NU . . . . . . . . . . 37.9 (12th)------> 29.2 (6th)

KU . . . . . . . . . . 16.0 (1st)--------> 29.5 (9th)

 

yards/game

NU . . . . . . . . . .476.8 (12th)------> 361.5 (3rd)

KU . . . . . . . . . .318.3 (1st)--------> 402.2 (8th)

 

Rivals.com

 

Do you see any trends?

 

Hey mods, what is up with spacing/tabbing?

Best argument yet. I do not think that KU's D last year was anything but average to below average on the L. But we also played the 3 high scoring O's from the south. I do look for major improvements on the D, especially with the new co-dc KU hired. I'm thinking the d will be average on the line this year on paper. With the O we have returning we should be able to score more than we give up, even against UNL. The running game is great, but you will run into games that you have to pass, what will happen then, and this is how I think we beat UNL in Lawrence. There is no answer about our OL. I can just say they can't be worse than last season. If our OL does learn how to pass/run block, and our if our DL learns to get pressure and to hit people, the entire B12 should be wary of playing KU. I know it's a big IF, but it is very possible with the coaches we have.

[MVPujols]

Jayhawker, the argument of having to play those 3 South teams should be void, because the year before last, you played 3 cupcakes from the South, which paded your stats. In my opinion, there is no way to know just how good KUs defense actually is, since every year they are either playing and easy schedule our a tough one, nothing in between. However, next year (after this season) when you play the other 3 South teams, OSU, Baylor and aTm it should be telling, since Baylor is improving and OSU isn't a slouch by any means.

[jayhawker]

Jayhawker, the argument of having to play those 3 South teams should be void, because the year before last, you played 3 cupcakes from the South, which paded your stats. In my opinion, there is no way to know just how good KUs defense actually is, since every year they are either playing and easy schedule our a tough one, nothing in between. However, next year (after this season) when you play the other 3 South teams, OSU, Baylor and aTm it should be telling, since Baylor is improving and OSU isn't a slouch by any means.

Not to mention we lose Meier, Reesing, and possibly (probably) Briscoe. That year will really tell us what the coaches at KU are made of. I still remember a ton of fans wanting Mangino gone after 2006 season.

[MVPujols]

IMO even after those players leave, KU will still be a decent team. People forget where this KU program was when Terry Allen was fired. Mangino built it to what it is.

[jayhawker]

IMO even after those players leave, KU will still be a decent team. People forget where this KU program was when Terry Allen was fired. Mangino built it to what it is.

Oh, I try to forget that stretch of football. Nothing like watching DII players getting creamed in every game.

[knapplc]

Mangino is VERY good for the Big XII North. I think we should take up a collection from Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, KState and Iowa State to keep him around. Any coach who can lend legitimacy and respect to this division should be held onto with both hands.

[SOCALHUSKER]

Mangino is VERY good for the Big XII North. I think we should take up a collection from Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, KState and Iowa State to keep him around. Any coach who can lend legitimacy and respect to this division should be held onto with both hands.

 

No, let the Kansas fans pay for that. If respect and legitimacy is what we are aiming for, we should instead collect money to rid the division of Bill Snyder and Dan Hawkins (As a rookie, I'll give Paul Rhoads a one year pass). For as long as those two nads are allowed to walk the sidelines, there's no hope of legitimacy or respect for the North.

[jayhawker]

Mangino is VERY good for the Big XII North. I think we should take up a collection from Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, KState and Iowa State to keep him around. Any coach who can lend legitimacy and respect to this division should be held onto with both hands.

 

No, let the Kansas fans pay for that. If respect and legitimacy is what we are aiming for, we should instead collect money to rid the division of Bill Snyder and Dan Hawkins (As a rookie, I'll give Paul Rhoads a one year pass). For as long as those two nads are allowed to walk the sidelines, there's no hope of legitimacy or respect for the North.

LOL. Nice.

[huKSer]

Mangino is VERY good for the Big XII North. I think we should take up a collection from Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, KState and Iowa State to keep him around. Any coach who can lend legitimacy and respect to this division should be held onto with both hands.

 

No, let the Kansas fans pay for that. If respect and legitimacy is what we are aiming for, we should instead collect money to rid the division of Bill Snyder and Dan Hawkins (As a rookie, I'll give Paul Rhoads a one year pass). For as long as those two nads are allowed to walk the sidelines, there's no hope of legitimacy or respect for the North.

Or K-Satan fans - they will pay any ex-coach any money - just like that weird guy at any strip club you might "drop in to ask directions".

[MVPujols]

IMO the whole Big XII North vs South thing is dumb. If the North would just beat the South team in the CCG when they play, it would make the North look better, no? But insted, the North team usually get dominated.

[Bear1979]

No way KU beats two from Texas, Texas Tech or Oklahoma. I don't see a win there at all. No matter how improved you are on DEF, you still gave up nearly 50 points a game to these three teams, and two of those games were at home. You play Tech and the Horns on the road this year.

 

Kansas ended the season 89th in Total Defense and you're replacing all three linebackers. Yes, you have a solid D-Line and experience in the DEF backfield, but let's be honest here - two wins? Not happening, not with those offenses playing that defense.

how come your newcomers can improve your team, but ridiculous that our will help us?

Because Nebraska is better, that's why!!

 

The reason Nebraska will improve is because the majority of our newcomers are more talented, faster, and more well-coached than the guys they are replacing. Most of the guys lost were not what we would consider stars. Regardless, the team ended up pretty well last year, tying for 1st in the North and beating Clemson in their bowl game. It is only logical to say that if a team plays well and replaces a few ok players with players who are better, the team will improve.

 

By the way, nobody said your newcomers wouldn't improve your team. It has only been said that they still won't be as good as Nebraska. Kansas is banking on the returning stars, who still only managed to snag 3rd place in North last year, to lead the team to a championship. If that's the case, where is the improvement coming from? I haven't heard you mention anybody besides Reesing and your receivers as reasons for your optimism. Where is the improvement on your defense and where is it on your O-line? Even if your newcomers are an improvement, do you really believe it'll be enough to surpass the improvements made by Nebraska?

 

The jayhawk has a point. You can't simply say that all the 8 new replacements on offense are immediately going to be better than the players that left. Especially your receivers replacements. I've tried to make this arguement in the past, and it's not that simple. Not all players are going to develop to perfection.

 

Examples: Oklahoma: Rhett Bomar vs Sam Bradford. Bomar was the #1 QB recruit in the nation. Bradford was not even closely considered as such a high recruit. Bradford developed, Bomar didn't. Baylor's #2 NFL draft pick, Jason Smith, and our other tackle from last year, Dan Gay, are both now in the NFL. Both were just 2 star recruits. We just replaced them both with 4 star recruits. Does that mean our O-line will be better? Not immediately, I don't care who's developing the players. You just don't find those kind of players everyday no matter what caliber star they are.

 

Kansas and Nebraska will both be good next year. From the outside looking in....neither team can boast to be better than the other yet. Both have questions....just different one's. Kansas does have one big plus that Nebraska doesn't though....a stud at QB with proven experience.

This is a horrible example to cite for your case. First of all Bomar was a 2004 recruit and Brafford was a 2006 recruit. In 2006 Bomar was in line to be the starter until he got caught in that whole Car Dealership paying him scandal. Brafford was just barely on campus. Had Bomar stayed out of trouble, he most likely would be the stud at OU over Brafford in 2007. Don't forget that Bomar leaving caused OU to put in a Sr. WR back into the QB position that year. It wasn't until 2007 that Brafford as a RFr. got the starting nod. Instead Bomar got in trouble and left and his development was stunted because of that.

 

 

It doesn't matter who was at the school at what time. The measurement here between Bomar and Bradford is that Bomar didn't amount to half as much as Bradford has. Bomar was a bigger recruit than Bradford. It doesn't matter that Bomar left the school either. Bomar left just before his junior season. Bradfor is just starting his junior season.

 

I'm just stating that there is huge uncertainty in new players taking the field until they show they can play on game day. My second example is a great example. No one in their right mind will say the talent stepping in for Baylor's Jason Smith at Tackle is better. It doesn't matter how many stars the new replacement has. The same goes for Swift's, Lucky's, and maybe even Ganz's replacements. That's why I say the previous arguement is purely personal belief and not fact. If the coaches say there doesn't seem to be a problem with the replacement players, then that puts my mind at ease somewhat. But 8 replacements on offense? They can't all be prodigies and wunderkins as the other poster above is implying.

 

Again, I know Nebraska will be bowl bound and ya'll are headed in the right direction...I'm just questioning the offense and the offense alone next year.

[caveman99]

No way KU beats two from Texas, Texas Tech or Oklahoma. I don't see a win there at all. No matter how improved you are on DEF, you still gave up nearly 50 points a game to these three teams, and two of those games were at home. You play Tech and the Horns on the road this year.

 

Kansas ended the season 89th in Total Defense and you're replacing all three linebackers. Yes, you have a solid D-Line and experience in the DEF backfield, but let's be honest here - two wins? Not happening, not with those offenses playing that defense.

how come your newcomers can improve your team, but ridiculous that our will help us?

Because Nebraska is better, that's why!!

 

The reason Nebraska will improve is because the majority of our newcomers are more talented, faster, and more well-coached than the guys they are replacing. Most of the guys lost were not what we would consider stars. Regardless, the team ended up pretty well last year, tying for 1st in the North and beating Clemson in their bowl game. It is only logical to say that if a team plays well and replaces a few ok players with players who are better, the team will improve.

 

By the way, nobody said your newcomers wouldn't improve your team. It has only been said that they still won't be as good as Nebraska. Kansas is banking on the returning stars, who still only managed to snag 3rd place in North last year, to lead the team to a championship. If that's the case, where is the improvement coming from? I haven't heard you mention anybody besides Reesing and your receivers as reasons for your optimism. Where is the improvement on your defense and where is it on your O-line? Even if your newcomers are an improvement, do you really believe it'll be enough to surpass the improvements made by Nebraska?

 

The jayhawk has a point. You can't simply say that all the 8 new replacements on offense are immediately going to be better than the players that left. Especially your receivers replacements. I've tried to make this arguement in the past, and it's not that simple. Not all players are going to develop to perfection.

 

Examples: Oklahoma: Rhett Bomar vs Sam Bradford. Bomar was the #1 QB recruit in the nation. Bradford was not even closely considered as such a high recruit. Bradford developed, Bomar didn't. Baylor's #2 NFL draft pick, Jason Smith, and our other tackle from last year, Dan Gay, are both now in the NFL. Both were just 2 star recruits. We just replaced them both with 4 star recruits. Does that mean our O-line will be better? Not immediately, I don't care who's developing the players. You just don't find those kind of players everyday no matter what caliber star they are.

 

Kansas and Nebraska will both be good next year. From the outside looking in....neither team can boast to be better than the other yet. Both have questions....just different one's. Kansas does have one big plus that Nebraska doesn't though....a stud at QB with proven experience.

This is a horrible example to cite for your case. First of all Bomar was a 2004 recruit and Brafford was a 2006 recruit. In 2006 Bomar was in line to be the starter until he got caught in that whole Car Dealership paying him scandal. Brafford was just barely on campus. Had Bomar stayed out of trouble, he most likely would be the stud at OU over Brafford in 2007. Don't forget that Bomar leaving caused OU to put in a Sr. WR back into the QB position that year. It wasn't until 2007 that Brafford as a RFr. got the starting nod. Instead Bomar got in trouble and left and his development was stunted because of that.

 

 

It doesn't matter who was at the school at what time. The measurement here between Bomar and Bradford is that Bomar didn't amount to half as much as Bradford has. Bomar was a bigger recruit than Bradford. It doesn't matter that Bomar left the school either. Bomar left just before his junior season. Bradfor is just starting his junior season.

 

I'm just stating that there is huge uncertainty in new players taking the field until they show they can play on game day. My second example is a great example. No one in their right mind will say the talent stepping in for Baylor's Jason Smith at Tackle is better. It doesn't matter how many stars the new replacement has. The same goes for Swift's, Lucky's, and maybe even Ganz's replacements. That's why I say the previous arguement is purely personal belief and not fact. If the coaches say there doesn't seem to be a problem with the replacement players, then that puts my mind at ease somewhat. But 8 replacements on offense? They can't all be prodigies and wunderkins as the other poster above is implying.

 

Again, I know Nebraska will be bowl bound and ya'll are headed in the right direction...I'm just questioning the offense and the offense alone next year.

Actually Bomar leaving has everything to do with it. He ended up at a D1AA school vs. getting full development under the OU staff. He was also just entering his RSo. year when he left, not as a Junior as you implied. Fact is if Bomar stayed, chances are he is a pretty good player. You can't imply that Bomar leaving one of the top programs in the country and one of the best staffs in the country to a lower level school and lesser staff had nothing to do with his development. He was good enough at OU to earn the starting job until he got in trouble. I do agree that stars don't always tell the story, but this example doesn't do your argument any good.

 

As far as replacing 8 players, I would put more creedence to lost starters. From the team that was starting over the last 4 games last year, the best lineup that NU developed and would use again, NU loses 5 of 11. Lucky wasn't a starter or even a contributor really over that span. Here is the list:

 

RT - Murtha

RG - Slauson

QB - Ganz

WR - Swift

WR - Peterson

 

At WR, Holt was the 3rd Receiver. He now has to take Swift or Peterson's slot. All of the TE's are back. The top 2 IB's are back, Helu and Castille. At RT, Murtha was out a lot and Marcel Jones played when Murtha was out getting a ton of playing time and a start or two. Basically RT really can't be considered a lost starter based on Jones playing so much. The big holes are RG, the top 2 WR spots, and QB obviously. That is 4 out of 11 which isn't too bad, with everyone's confidence in what we have seen/heard in Lee thus far I think you can see why we are pretty optimistic about the Husker O in 2009.

[caveman99]

double

[jayhawk]

My take:

 

Nebraska - Unproven QB and WR's prevent me from picking NU to win the North. No question the defense looked great against Clemson. OTOH, Clemson isn't a pass happy, spread offense.

 

 

This.

And clemson finished the year 4-5

Do some research before you post. After the Bowden mess that started the season, Clemson finished 7-6, including 3-1 over their last 4. Not to mention a 31-14 ass kicking of in state rival and SCC team South Carolina.

 

Clemson would have destroyed KU if they had played in a bowl game.

 

Just Like Va Tech did?

[jayhawk]

'Bear1979' - You give Mizzou too much credit. They had 2 good seasons in a row for the first time under Pinkel. They will not have 3. They will lose to Nebraska handily, and very likely to Baylor. This Mizzou team will resemble their 2004 team.

 

yeah. what he said.

 

Well what he said was stupid. For someone who comes to this board crying about giving Baylor respect and learning about their team you sure are short sighted.

 

Last year was the 4th bowl game in a row under GP and 5th in 6 years. I think thats just a little better than two good seasons for the first time ever. Maybe just maybe baylor fan we could have our 6th good season in the last 7. I dont know though,you, a Baylor fan, is smack talking, you might know better than the rest of us. But then again what would you know about bowl games and winning seasons....

 

BTW smart guy, that 2004 team was ranked and absolutly feel apart. So if you said that to imply that team sucked, you have no idea what you are talking about.

P.S. 2004 - MU 30 - Baylor 10. I wonder what you would give up in life just to have Baylor go 5-6....

 

P.S.S. Dont talk smack with your crappy team on my Tigers when I am having a bad day. I might just bite ya.

 

 

Geez....settle down. You call critcism smack talk? This is just a down year for Mizzou. You lost some great talent. I was a big fan of Chase Daniel since he's from my hometown, but w/out his smarts at QB, and breaking in a new QB along with a slew of other players....how can you be so optimistic? I asked the Huskers the same question! The other big problem w/ Mizzou is them having to break in 2 new coordinators. Mizzou will be back in the North title hunt again, just not next year.

 

I said your team will resemble 2004 b/c it will be competitive, but will likely reach 5 or 6 wins with your schedule. Quit your Baylor bashing. You could possibly eat your words this next season, as you almost did last season. If a way less talented Baylor team nearly beat a more talented Mizzou team last year....then a much more improved Baylor team with 20 returning starters has an even better chance of victory against your 2009 Mizzou Tigers. That is simple logic. Till then I'll just sit back and enjoy this season for once.

 

Put Baylor in the North and our bowl drought wouldn't have lasted 5 year much less 15. We used to call Kansas a guaranteed win until 2007. That changed quickly. Programs shift in power every decade. Baylor should be relevant again for a while like we were in the 80's.

 

What is this ignorance?

 

Let's go to the data...

 

1998 (@Waco) 28-12 Baylor, your biggest victory over us since the Big 12, by a touchdown.

1999 45-10 KU wins... We whipped you. We were not een very good back then,

2002 (@Waco) 35-32 You did get us, by a whole field goal at home. It does suck to lose to Baylor, but doesnt look like your guys should have just chalked this game up to me...

2003 28-21 KU wins... in a closer game

2006 (@Waco) 36-35 Baylor wins... Now I did not watch this game cause I was out of the country on business, but from what I remember we were whipping you and Meier (our QB then) got hurt and you rallied. Won by a point. Sure fire win?

2007 58-10 KU wins... Of course we destroyed you again in Lawrence, but you did say this was the year we were not easy money...

 

So as you can see, since we have started playing you in the conference, you have won every game in Waco, and then gone to Lawrnece and lost each time. Also please note, you always win a close game, no more than a touchdown, and no matter how bad we have been, we beat you by that or a LOT more. I will grant you the early years of the Big 12 were bad years for us, but how you think they were automatic wins I cannot begin to understand. Your comment is jibber jabber...

 

 

I guess that was just my perception when I attended Baylor. I was there from 98 to 02, therefore the Kansas game was one of the few games I got excited about b/c it was the only conference game i attended that resulted in a win. Either way....our programs at the time were comparable....both historically as well as our talent level during the 90's. We were both pretty good during the early 90's and both sucked during the late 90's. You just passed us in the overall win column as a program a few years ago. KU has a great program now...I just picked you guys to win the North for God sakes! (see previous post) Give me a little slack here. I'm just stating our mindset at Baylor about 10 years ago, and that's what it was. I'm sure Kansas was relieved to see Baylor on the schedule too these past 10 years. You're telling me Kansas didn't look at Baylor as a likely win either? You know KU fans did!!!

 

P.S- Don't make it sound like our wins were a fluke. In 2006, that was a MIRACULOUS 4th qtr comback. 3 TD's scored in last 5 minutes of the 4th quarter!?!? That was just a good game period.

 

My only point was you made our game sound like a gimme, when on average, we have probably been the better team... Regardless, we were no gimme for Baylor...