Post-Game Reaction: Three Hours and Forty-Three Minutes of Frustration

by TB on Oct 26, 2008 11:19 AM CDT Comment 9 comments

Our K-State Wildcats lost to Oklahoma, 58-35, yesterday. I don't have much to say in an introduction that I won't say below, so we'll just get straight into the analysis.

What I liked...

...a late-first-quarter and early-second-quarter comeback to tie the game. There will be a lengthy critique of our offensive playcalling in the first quarter below, but it should be noted that the playcalling on the three touchdown drives that tied the game at 28-28 was as good as the first-quarter playcalling was bad. The first touchdown, on the short pass that Brandon Banks took to the house, took advantage of an OU blitz that left Banks in space. I'll always take my chances with that. Also, the touchdown pass to Deon Murphy to tie the game at 28-28 was a good call to take advantage of an OU blitz.

...tough running by Josh Freeman. Freeman had 44 rushing yards before his sacks were deducted, and most of those yards came on scrambles rather than designed runs. Still, he seems to be gaining confidence in his running, and he is really difficult to bring down when he gets rolling.

...the howitzer attached to Freeman's right arm. Some of those passes have to leave his receivers' hands stinging for days. A perfect illustration of his power came in the second quarter when he rolled to his left and, on the run, threw a 65-yard strike to Ernie Pierce.

What I didn't like...

...offensive playcalling in the first quarter. I'm watching the game on DVR as I type this, and here is our playcalling on the first drive.

1st play: Play-action pass, complete to Deon Murphy for 15 yards

2nd play: Pass complete to Logan Dold for no gain

3rd play: Freeman runs for 14 yards. The play called was a pass, but OU blitzed and Freeman had to scramble.

4th play: Play-action pass called, Freeman scrambles for four yards.

5th play: Play-action pass, intended for Brandon Banks, incomplete (after this play they showed Shalee Lehning on camera...heart)

6th play: Pass to Ernie Pierce, complete for 8 yards (first down).

7th play: Pass intercepted by OU (Freeman hit on the play)

You'll notice there was not a single designed run in there. None. Not one. And yet, we called three play-action passes. The one called on the first play of the game could possibly be justified because teams often run the ball on the first play of the game, but that only works if the defense buys the fake. In our seven previous games this season, we have run the ball on the first play of the game four times, and two of those runs were against North Texas and Montana State, when our first offensive play of the game came on the opponent's four yard line and one yard line, respectively. Also, one of those, in the Texas A&M game, was a run by Freeman, not a handoff.

Now, here's a look at the plays called on our second drive.

1st play: Play-action pass incomplete, intended for Brandon Banks. Nobody was open, and Freeman basically threw the ball away as Banks was surrounded by three OU defenders.

2nd play: Wide receiver screen pass to Ernie Pierce for four yards.

3rd play: Wide receiver screen pass to Ernie Pierce for a one-yard loss.

Again, not a single running play called, and yet another play-action pass. What the hell? I'm not anything resembling a football coach, but my general belief was you ran the ball to set up play-action passes, not ran play-action passes just because you thought the defense might bite on the fake. So at this point, we've had the ball twice, picked up a couple first downs, had a turnover and a punt, and less than six minutes were gone from the game.

After a long Deon Murphy kick return, we had the ball in OU territory. Next drive...

1st play: Pass incomplete to Jeron Mastrud, almost intercepted

2nd play: Freeman, QB draw off orbit motion by Deon Murphy, no gain (first designed run of the game)

3rd play: Swing pass complete to Logan Dold for 12 yards

4th play: Halfback pass by Logan Dold, complete to Deon Murphy for a touchdown

We scored a touchdown. Beginning a drive on the opponent's 21 yard line always helps. I was happy to see the halfback pass finally brought back, because I think it can be a valuable weapon as long as it's used in moderation.

Finally, our penultimate drive of the first quarter:

1st play: Freeman scrambles on a designed passing play for five yards.

2nd play: Logan Dold rushes up the middle for three yards.

3rd play: Handoff to Deon Murphy off orbit motion for two-yard loss. Punt. Moving on.

...poor decision-making by Freeman. Not only did he have three interceptions, he had several other throws that could/should have been intercepted, including two on our touchdown drive that ended in Jeron Mastrud's touchdown (the tipped pass that ended up complete to Deon Murphy and the touchdown pass to Mastrud himself). Freeman has the arm to make those throws, but sometimes he needs to realize discretion is the better part of valor and make a percentage play. And the interception on the screen pass really needs no amplification, it was just a terrible decision to throw back to a part of the field where he hadn't even been looking.

...another 500+ yard defensive gashing. Sam Bradford had what amounts to a horrible day by his standards, completing only 13 of his 32 passes for 255 yards. But it didn't really matter, because OU shredded our defense with 271 yards rushing on 6.1 yards per attempt.

...no attempt to even establish a running game. As you can see above, in our first four drives, we called exactly three designed running plays. If you look at our overall rushing statistics, you might say that there was no point running the ball because we only averaged 2.0 yards per carry, but that's missing the point. We didn't even try to run the ball on our first four drives, so how would we even know if it was working?

What it means and where we're going...

What it means is we lost to a team that was a lot better than us. I've heard some K-State fans say they are taking a moral victory from this game because OU only scored three points and gained 129 yards in the second half. However, it was pretty clear to me that OU just wanted to get the hell out of Dodge in the second half. Bradford attempted only nine passes, and after the first drive, in which Bradford attempted two passes and got hit on both, OU seemed more than content to protect Bradford, protect the ball, and bleed the clock.

Of course, it also means that next week we're going to Lawrence to play KU. The 'beaks took a beating from Texas Tech yesterday, losing 63-21. While things aren't all Skittles and beer in Manhattan right now, it's not exactly sunny in Lawrence, either. On the bright side, Bob Lutz finally came out of the closet as a shameless KU homer this morning. My hat is tipped to Bob; the first step is always admitting you have a problem. While I'm hardly optimistic about this game, I no longer feel like it's the foregone conclusion I did a few weeks ago.

Around the Big 12...

Texas Tech 63, KU 21: It wasn't even this close, as Jocques Crawford scored a meaningless touchdown with 3:52 left in the game. Crawford also inched closer to his season-long goal of 2,000 rushing yards, picking up 44 yards to up his season total to 168, only 1,832 short of his goal. Todd Reesing had his worst game at KU, going 16/26 for only 154 yards and throwing three interceptions. Tech was as outstanding as KU was awful, rolling up 556 yards and moving to 8-0 (4-0) with next weekend's showdown against Texas looming.

Also, if anyone has a screen shot of the KU students sleeping on the bleachers at Foreclosure Field, please email it to me at bringonthecats @ gmail.com

Nebraska 32, Baylor 20: The Bears, and Robert Griffin in particular, put a bit of a scare into the Huskers in Lincoln, leading the game at halftime and only trailing 24-20 after three quarters. But Nebraska pulled away for a much-needed win to move to 2-2 in conference play. Joe Ganz had a good day for NU, completing 32 of 46 passes for 336 yards and three TDs. Nebraska also picked up 161 rushing yards and controlled the ball for nearly 39 minutes of the game.

Texas 28, Oklahoma State 24: Perhaps the best college football game I've seen this year, as two good teams traded punches the entire game in front of 98,000 fans in Austin. The Horns came out on top, but I came away extremely impressed with Oklahoma State. In fact, after watching the game between an Ohio State and Penn State, I'm firmly convinced that Oklahoma State is better than both of those Big 11 teams. As PB @ BON notes, Texas won this game despite at least arguably losing several key battles within the game. Colt McCoy also threw an interception and Texas lost another fumble. Next week's showdown on the South Plains could be the game of the year in the Big 12.

Missouri 58, Colorado 0: From The Ralphie Report, we hear that this was the first time in 242 games Colorado had been shut out. Ouch. ESPN Big 12 blogger Tim Griffin called it the low point of Dan Hawkins' tenure in Boulder, although I think the home loss to Montana State would have to be right up there. Really, there isn't much to say, other than it's clear Mizzou has regrouped from the disappointment of losing a shot at its most lofty goals and has apparently refocused on winning the Big 12 North and ensuring it gets another shot at a BCS bowl by playing in the conference championship game.

Texas A&M 49, Iowa State 35: It has now been conclusively proven that Iowa State is the worst team in the conference, and A&M checks in at 11th. I'm only curious as to how Iowa State only managed 35 points off 574 yards total offense with only two turnovers. If we can somehow pick up a win in our next three games, we have an excellent chance at a six-win season with Iowa State coming to Manhattan on November 22.

Big 12 Standings

North

Missouri 2-2

Nebraska 2-2

KU 2-2

Colorado 1-3

K-State 1-3

Iowa State 0-4

South

Texas 4-0

Texas Tech 4-0

Oklahoma State 3-1

Oklahoma 3-1

Baylor 1-3

Texas A&M 1-3

0 recs | Comment 9 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Sick Reality

I have a question for you guys (or maybe more of a point I want driven home) and I have to say (sycophant alert) that I hold the opinions of the contributors here in high esteem. I don’t seem to be seeing over at Rivals and throughout many journalistic articles one point that really hit hard with me Saturday while I sat through the 1,000th blast of “Boomer Sooner” in the second quarter. We gave up 55 points in the first half. Let me say that again. We gave up 55 points in the first half. That was the first time in their 100-plus years of playing football that OU has scored 55 points in one half. Again, let me say that again. Additionally, that was 3 points less than the highest scoring Big 12 GAME of the year (exluding TT on Saturday). OU has NEVER scored 55 points in one half of football in their entire history. Now what hit me during halftime was that Stan Parrish never gave up that many points to Oklahoma. Bob Stoops essentially used the second half to tinker with his team and work out some wrinkles. He mercifully shut down his team at halftime. Have we actually regressed to the pre-Snyder days of playing tune-up to teams like OU? The post-game comments by Prince was that he actually found some positives from this game. Reggie Walker commented that the tackling wasn’t that bad and that the defense showed some improvement. Really? This is what is so maddening about the Prince era. From the coaches down to the players…no one gets it. The game plans, the game time adjustments, the fundamentals, the recruiting, the player’s attitudes…no one in this entire program understands the current state of the where we are. I apologize for the rambling…but again, I respect the opinions on this site and I wanted your thoughts.

by Catfan33 on Oct 26, 2008 8:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Good comment

And actually, I should have included “55 first half points” under my “Things I didnt’ like…” section. The way I write this is kind of a stream-of-consciousness thing, not necessarily a systematic and thorough review of the previous day’s game (with the obvious exception being my review of the game tape to dissect the first-quarter playcalling).

Fifty-five points in one half is simply unacceptable. There is no situation I can think of where I would find it acceptable to give up 55 points in a half to anyone. There are some offensive geniuses in college football today, but even a competent defense should be able to put up a (much) better showing than that. You brought up the historical aspect by mentioning 55 is more points in a half than OU has scored in its history. What’s scary is that this isn’t even Bob Stoops’ best OU team, much less anything resembling the best OU team in history.

As for the second half, to paraphrase Panjandrum, it’s not like we found some magic decoder ring at halftime that gave us the secret to stopping OU. To put it simply, Stoops called off the dogs, and the players were having a hard time focusing like they did in the first half. You don’t go from thoroughly gashing a team for huge gains to not being able to move the ball at all.

Finally, as to the state of the program, we have reached a point where excpectations are so low, it’s impossible not to meet them. So OU scored 55 points in the first half? Well, we held them to three in the second. So we’re 4-4 on the year now? Well, we still have a shot at a bowl. Ron Prince has never defeated Nebraska, KU or Mizzou? Well, we’ve defeated Texas twice. I simply won’t accept an argument that this program is progressing (see this post), because all signs indicate it is not. Assuming we don’t make a bowl this season, and I think the odds are a little less than 50/50 that we do, we will have gone to one bowl in three years under Ron Prince. That should not be considered an acceptable level of ‘success’ at K-State. I’m not asking to be USC. I simply want to start with being competent, then maybe we can move toward competitive, then we can see about challenging for the North.

We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats

by TB on Oct 26, 2008 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baby steps...

We’re going to be a competent, competitive, and challenging team. I’m in line behind the person who can deliver that.

Are we the worst defense in the FBS yet? We seriously need to throw away whatever we’re using for defense this year and bring in Yoda so our guys can unlearn what they have learned.

by MadCat on Oct 27, 2008 1:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE: Good Comment

I’m actually asking for a little more and I think this is the perfect time to go for it. The North is obviously down right now with the exception of MU (who is probably a legitimate top 25 team). With such wide open division, what would small steps accomplish? Why not move in and take control of the North before NU, KU, and MU start to really establish themselves. I think a coach of Patterson’s stature could probably do that. I just don’t see the point in merely becoming competent and competitive in the division when NU, KU, and to a lesser extent, MU, are working to establish themselves.

by Catfan33 on Oct 27, 2008 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My only concern is I think we’ve dug a very deep hole. We’re going to graduate about 30 players next year, thanks to the big JuCo haul this year. Panjandrum mentioned this the other day, but there has to be some concern as to whether we can even fill up the roster with the 25-scholarship limitation. Even if we do bring in Patterson next season, which I would fully support the way things are going, he probably won’t get things changed overnight. We’re 109th in total defense right now.

As to the state of the North, you’re right. We need to make our move right now. Nebraska is still nowhere near as good as its fans think, but I don’t think they’re as far away as we’d like them to be. Mizzou has a lot of talented players and appears to be recruiting very well, but the rest of the North is going to get its best shot at Mizzou next year when Chase Daniel graduates and Jeremy Maclin (likely) leaves. Who knows about KU? They’re not looking very good this year, but it’s going to take another couple years before we know whether they’re on their way back to struggling for .500 or whether they’re going to become a year-in, year-out competitor in the North. Colorado is in the same boat given the number of injuries they’ve suffered this year. About the only thing we do know in the North is that Iowa State is really bad.

Bottom line, Prince and his staff are not getting the job done right now. Patterson would be a significant upgrade, but even if we did hire him this December, I wouldn’t expect us to challenge for the North next season. We’ve dug too deep of a hole, and it’s going to take a couple years to get back. As long as I see measurable progress in those years, I’ll be more than happy.

We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats

by TB on Oct 27, 2008 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t disagree with that one bit. I’m not under any dillusion that bringing Patterson in would change things overnight. My point was that staying the current course and waiting to see what Prince can do next season before making any decision would only put us further back in a division that can be ours for the taking in a couple of seasons. Waiting until MU has solidified itself and KU, NU, and CU have taking measurable steps toward solidification will destroy any hope we have at competing in the North. One other point that hit me while watching highlights of OSU-UT, was that last season we were basically on par with OSU. However, OSU is a legitimate top 10 this year. This to me just illustrates the woeful recruiting tactics and coaching ability of Prince. To be on par with a program like OSU one season and basically regress the next while OSU shows significant improvement is to me one more unacceptable measure of Prince’s ability to run a program.

by Catfan33 on Oct 27, 2008 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

IMO, the biggest problem(s) that stunted the growth of this program are...

1) Changing schemes from the Cover 2 to the 3-4 after the first season
2) Failing to hire assistants with recruiting ties to areas where KSU has some type of pipeline (i.e. Texas)

We spent two recruiting classes (2006, 2007) collecting players on defense to run the Cover 2. Specifically, we recruited a bunch of linebackers and defensive linemen. Now, for a Cover 2, the LB’s need to be lighter and better in pass protection because most of the time, the Mike drops back into zone coverage to guard the middle of the field. That’s why you see a smallish guy like John Houlik out there. He would have been great in a Cover 2 scheme if he were to just sit back in the middle and cover a zone with his speed. Same with Dharnaz Tigner. Both of these guys were recruited with that in mind.

However, with a 3-4, you need BULK up in the front seven, and you need big, beefy linemen and run stopping linebackers because they are the ones that make the plays. At this point, KSU has half a roster full of light guys (who weren’t as fast as advertised) who were recruited to run the Cover 2, and now they suck something royal at the 3-4 because they simply don’t have the athletic ability to run the defense.

And, since it’s a foregone conclusion that Tibesar will be part of the bloodletting if Prince is fired, we are potentially going to a third defensive coordinator in four years, and God knows what new scheme he’ll bring in.

The second part of all of this is the inability to recruit players in our backyard. Kansas recruiting is woeful due to the Brayden Burris fiasco (which I maintiain isn’t Prince’s fault, but I digress), and Prince’s rift with Brian Butler down in Wichita. KU and MU have KC locked up right now, so that leaves, what? Topeka? I’m from there originally, and let me tell you, it’s not a hotbed for high school football.

We don’t recruit Texas anymore, Oklahoma kids that we recruit bolt as soon as they get an OU or OSU offer, and i’m not interested in going back to Nebraska for kids. The ones we do get aren’t talented, or they’re head cases (i.e. Evridge, Prater). We’ve had success in Colorado recently, but we can’t rely on that for more than two or three kids a year, tops.

At the end of the day, we have a revolving door of defensive schemes, a recruiting strategy that consists of lowly recruited prep players, taking a slew of grayshirts, and relying on JUCO guys to bump up the recruiting rankings. This is not a strategy for building a program, and it’s why other programs are passing us by. Instead of just rebuilding in 2006/2007, we’re just delaying the rebuilding until absolutely necessary (2010), and by that time, Prince won’t have the record or support to get this program moving in the right direction.

If he does, he either sold his soul to Satan, or somehow, divine intervention took place in Manhattan. Either way, it’s going to take a miracle for him to dig himself out of this quicksand his program has found itself mired in.

"He that never changes his opinions, never corrects his mistakes, will never be wiser on the morrow than he is today." -- Tryon Edwards

by Panjandrum on Oct 27, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I need to make a correction...

When I said that Tibs would be fired if Prince was, I meant to say if Prince were retained. My bad.

"He that never changes his opinions, never corrects his mistakes, will never be wiser on the morrow than he is today." -- Tryon Edwards

by Panjandrum on Oct 27, 2008 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right now...

I would retain Prince as head coach (I’m ignoring contracts here) if he is willing to abandon the ship he has set sail.

1. Defense – WTF
2. Offense – a) Run game…I don’t know the answer to this myself. Do we have the wrong players, the wrong coaches, the wrong schemes, or the wrong fundamentals? Something must change since our O-linemen were supposed to finally be experienced enough to make a difference. I personally like having fullbacks occasionally. b) I also see Freeman scrambling alot. Is he not getting enough time in the pocket or is he just leaving it as soon as possible?
3. Defense – again WTF…I wanted to point out what I saw during the OU game this time: 1.) OU was rotating out WRs from the sideline and no one noticed. OU was running the no-huddle hurry-up offense and I’m sure the WR nearest the Sooner bench was the first check for the QB. I know we gave up at least 2 easy touchdowns to an uncovered receiver near that sideline. Of course, with most of OUs staff standing on the field anyway, I’m sure it was hard to tell who was playing and who wasn’t. Maybe the refs should think about sideline warnings. I also thought there were rules for allowing the defense time to rotate out players to cover such an occurrence, but maybe they were and our defense sucks anyway. If this works, I would have all my receivers line up near my bench and run long routes each snap…before long, the DBs will be toast since they would have to do twice as much running just to get into position.
2.) There is a dead-zone over the top-middle of the field in our defense. OU was able to get a receiver into this area without coverage for a few touchdowns here. Easy homerun when the sideline WR thing is not working or is getting a little too boring. Maybe we were in a formation that did not cover this area, but OU found it too often for my tastes.
3.) I’m not much for providing solutions here, but I do recognize a problem when I see it. I don’t see how our coaches or players can feel that they’re doing an alright job on defense…I think in relation to other teams nationwide and back in time, we are really stinking up the place.

by MadCat on Oct 27, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs