On to the Purple Kittens Thread

[Jer]

we have been building recruiting. we have the best class ever coming in.

The WRs? X is on pace to have the most receptions of any ISU WR in a single season. What are you talking about?

Dekkers just threw the ball 48 times last Saturday.

I think one could argue – right or wrong – that while recruiting is as good as it’s ever been, it didn’t seem to take quite the bump some expected based on the success we’ve had, especially at certain positions. Whether that be at O-Line where there clearly should have been a focus or at TE or WR where we’ve shown we can get players to the league.

Again, I don’t know my feelings on that, but an argument could at least be proposed.

 

[CoachHines3]

I think one could argue – right or wrong – that while recruiting is as good as it’s ever been, it didn’t seem to take quite the bump some expected based on the success we’ve had, especially at certain positions. Whether that be at O-Line where there clearly should have been a focus or at TE or WR where we’ve shown we can get players to the league.

Again, I don’t know my feelings on that, but an argument could at least be proposed.

The downfall of the OL is nothing new, though. It's been a problem since Campbell has been here.

But I don't believe the WR argument. Maybe TE to an extent but when you have guys that have 0 real game experience, of course there is going to be a drop off. Especially after losing the guys we did at that position.

No one should of expected Easton Dean to come in and be Charlie Kolar.

 

[Cfinnerty16]

we have been building recruiting. we have the best class ever coming in.

The WRs? X is on pace to have the most receptions of any ISU WR in a single season. What are you talking about?

Dekkers just threw the ball 48 times last Saturday.

I'm sure he means our scheme. Receivers don't exactly love running quick 4 yd routes and get hit into oblivion. If you listen to the WRNL podcast that came out yesterday between Levi Stevenson and Marchie Murdock. Marchie said that our style does not lead to having fun by WRs and it doesn't look like they're having fun out there, from a former ISU WR's perspective.

 

[stewart092284]

we have been building recruiting. we have the best class ever coming in.

The WRs? X is on pace to have the most receptions of any ISU WR in a single season. What are you talking about?

Dekkers just threw the ball 48 times last Saturday.

Yes but also - its not just the number of receptions I think some kids look at . I think its one thing to catch a bunch of crossing patterns and slants and hooks / curis. I think when you so rarely throw the ball down the field - people notice that. That and the fact that essentially we throw it to 2-3 guys and then the running backs. X is the best receiver we have, yes, get him the ball, yes, but good defenses are going to be like, we're going to make someone else beat us. It'd be good to start getting other people involved in some way or form.

Agree on recruiting but that's why this season is potentially going to be at a cross roads. A second straight so-so season ( compared to where we were a couple years ago, keep in mind) of 6-6 or 5-7, that will be another dagger to the recruiting in all likelihood because teams can negatively recruit and say see, they peaked, now they're back to being etc and it was just a special group of kids and nothing more along with the normal stuff of how long do you think they keep their coach etc...

I don't think that is the case but I 100% know that is what every coach in the Big 12 is going to be saying if we continue to struggle a little bit. That's why this year was and is huge IMO - because if we can get to 7-8 wins in the regular season we can shut up the negative recruiting about it being a fluke a couple years ago and keep recruiting momentum. If we miss a bowl game - yes, its completely understandable when you look at what was lost from our POV - but it makes negative recruiting very very easy for every school we play. That's why I always thought this was and is a crucial year in terms of results. Because it either lets us build on the recruiting momentum we have or - it takes us back to a place where we have to generate it again if we want it back.

I hate using the term "must" win in week 6 of a 12 game schedule but in some ways IMO it is - when it comes to recruiting. Recruiting classes can always fall apart due to negative results and negative recruiting.

 

[Cfinnerty16]

And another tidbit from the WRNL podcast, what the h3ll is our QB coach doing? Anyone else notice that Brock got an actual QB coach after he left here and now he looks like an NFL quarterback?

 

[stewart092284]

I'm sure he means our scheme. Receivers don't exactly love running quick 4 yd routes and get hit into oblivion. If you listen to the WRNL podcast that came out yesterday between Levi Stevenson and Marchie Murdock. Marchie said that our style does not lead to having fun by WRs and it doesn't look like they're having fun out there, from a former ISU WR's perspective.

Yep - was thinking the same thing. X has a lot of catches but they're 99.9% crossing routes, hitches / quick outs or a slant. Same with OL honestly - if I'm an OL what do we do that makes me feel like its a good fit?

We don't pull much - we don't commit to the run in a meaningful way - we don't do a lot of screens where I get to flatten CB's instead of beating my head against some 315 pound monster for 4 quarters, etc. I'd say in general other than running back and TE I don't know that we have what recruits would see as a "fun" system.

We don't throw the ball down the field a ton.
We don't help the offensive linemen or play in an offensive line friendly system,.
And our route trees for receivers are short and fairly basic.


running backs should like coming here because we do run the ball enough and we throw them the ball out of the backfield and ask them to block so essentially, they show every skill needed at the next level for scouts.

 

[Jer]

The downfall of the OL is nothing new, though. It's been a problem since Campbell has been here.

But I don't believe the WR argument. Maybe TE to an extent but when you have guys that have 0 real game experience, of course there is going to be a drop off. Especially after losing the guys we did at that position.

No one should of expected Easton Dean to come in and be Charlie Kolar.

Dean is actually a great example. He’s our best TE and as a Redshirt Junior has a total of 4 catches this year (1 last year). Nobody expected him to be Kohler but that is one of the worst stat lines after 5 games that you’ll see.

Again, I’m not trying to make a recruiting argument because it’s easy to pick out specific guys on either side of an argument. I’m just pointing out what I’ve heard or seen in many discussions. That while recruiting has gotten better, it’s arguably not as good as the success would support.

 

[CoachHines3]

I'm sure he means our scheme. Receivers don't exactly love running quick 4 yd routes and get hit into oblivion. If you listen to the WRNL podcast that came out yesterday between Levi Stevenson and Marchie Murdock. Marchie said that our style does not lead to having fun by WRs and it doesn't look like they're having fun out there, from a former ISU WR's perspective.

I can agree on the schematic things- but we weren't necessarily talking about that until after the KU loss because thats all we were running. Maybe a little bit after the Baylor game.

I, as all others here, can probably agree that we thought this offense would be wide open with Dekkers and the arm talent. Just b/c he has that doesn't mean we can throw it 40 yards all the time. Still have defense to scheme around.

X can't have 20 targets a game- we need others to step up at the WR position but it looks like Noel is starting to become that 2nd guy.

 

[CoachHines3]

Dean is actually a great example. He’s our best TE and as a Redshirt Junior has a total of 4 catches this year (1 last year). Nobody expected him to be Kohler but that is one of the worst stat lines after 5 games that you’ll see.

Again, I’m not trying to make a recruiting argument because it’s easy to pick out specific guys on either side of an argument. I’m just pointing out what I’ve heard or seen in many discussions. That while recruiting has gotten better, it’s arguably not as good as the success would support.

I think you could make an argument that those guys coming back may have stunted the growth of the program.

 

[stewart092284]

Dean is actually a great example. He’s our best TE and as a Redshirt Junior has a total of 4 catches this year (1 last year). Nobody expected him to be Kohler but that is one of the worst stat lines after 5 games that you’ll see.

Again, I’m not trying to make a recruiting argument because it’s easy to pick out specific guys on either side of an argument. I’m just pointing out what I’ve heard or seen in many discussions. That while recruiting has gotten better, it’s arguably not as good as the success would support.

Completely agree on the TE's, not just Dean. He's the main one but Hannika showed flashes, then he disappears. Tyler Moore if nothing else sure looks like he could be a decent battering ram even if he;s not a receiving threat - somewhat similar to Dylan Soehner - at least early career wise but he never plays.

Or take a kid like Bitter - makes a great catch against Iowa, has had a couple flashes in mop up time in his career - and disappears? He's not as good as the three starting, OK, but between him, Wilson and Daniel Jackson I have a hard time thinking they should have combined for 5 catches in 5 games. Yes, I know Wilson and Jackson have had injury issues but the fact that we go 49-23-12 to receivers is not good balance. I don't know if there is another school in the nation that has a 26 reception gap between the top 2 receivers on the team.

 

[stewart092284]

I can agree on the schematic things- but we weren't necessarily talking about that until after the KU loss because thats all we were running. Maybe a little bit after the Baylor game.

I, as all others here, can probably agree that we thought this offense would be wide open with Dekkers and the arm talent. Just b/c he has that doesn't mean we can throw it 40 yards all the time. Still have defense to scheme around.

X can't have 20 targets a game- we need others to step up at the WR position but it looks like Noel is starting to become that 2nd guy.

Yes, you are correct there - but that's all we ran against Iowa etc - and I don't get it. Its not that Dekkers doesn't throw it down field - its that we don't even have the route tree's to take advantage of the vertical game a decent amount of the time. That's why I am so worried about the offense. If it was simply a situation where we were taking what the defense gave us - that's fine, that's the smart, logical thing to do and its what we should do.

But we're not - on a majority of our pass plays - even looking like we're trying to run someone deep. That's concerning. Because IMO you should always have one guy pressing vertical (15+ yards) or more. Because even if its not designed to go his way, there's a chance he's wide A** open and there's a game changing play. Right now we are forcing ourselves to fight in a phone booth on purpose and that makes no sense. Its not even the defenses that are dictating it - we seem to be dictating it to ourselves. And that's what I can't understand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We need more than Noel though. IMO to be a good passing team you need 4-5 receivers regularly, maybe more depending on your scheme. And to some extent, we don't try to get anyone else the ball. Like we used Akers and just threw him bubbles for the most part but we made sure to get him involved. We need to get Shaw, Bitter, Gaines -Wilson / Jackson - anyone to get targets and opporunties.

 

[CyGuy5]

Before the season I would have taken 6-6, it’s just the way we’ve lost is absolutely brutal. With the conference looking as tough as it does, could be a challenge to get to 6 wins. Would love to get one this weekend although not sure how likely that is. Pretty sure KSU’s D line is going to obliterate our sorry excuse for an o-line

 

[CoachHines3]

Before the season I would have taken 6-6, it’s just the way we’ve lost is absolutely brutal. With the conference looking as tough as it does, could be a challenge to get to 6 wins. Would love to get one this weekend although not sure how likely that is. Pretty sure KSU’s D line is going to obliterate our sorry excuse for an o-line

biggest fear.

especially the way dekkers moves in the pocket. Some of the sacks he takes are on him and not the o-line.

 

[CyGuy5]

biggest fear.

especially the way dekkers moves in the pocket. Some of the sacks he takes are on him and not the o-line.

That’s the other thing I don’t get, is that by nature due to scheme? We saw it with Purdy too where he looked like a statue in the pocket and took sacks we knew he could avoid. Seems like more of the same with Dekkers

 

[CoachHines3]

That’s the other thing I don’t get, is that by nature due to scheme? We saw it with Purdy too where he looked like a statue in the pocket and took sacks we knew he could avoid. Seems like more of the same with Dekkers

I don't think Dekkers has that "improvise" bug that Purdy had. Purdy was great at avoiding sacks or at least not taking them b/c it was his fault.

Some of it might be coverage and no one is actually open but even so, he doesn't look to run very often whether because he's being told not to or by his own choice.

 

[stewart092284]

biggest fear.

especially the way dekkers moves in the pocket. Some of the sacks he takes are on him and not the o-line.

Agree on the sacks. He holds the ball - not even talking about how he moves he just doesn't come off of reads. Now a big / reasonable part of that is experience but IDK if he's just looking to X or maybe Noel but he doesn't come off his initial read and when you're late as a QB - its usually a sack or a INT and that's what we are seeing right now

 

[Clone95]

That’s the other thing I don’t get, is that by nature due to scheme? We saw it with Purdy too where he looked like a statue in the pocket and took sacks we knew he could avoid. Seems like more of the same with Dekkers

Uh, no we didn't see it with Purdy.

 

[surly]

Uh, no we didn't see it with Purdy.

Purdy was elusive.

I suspect both offenses will struggle as the strength of both teams is their defensive units.

 

[Clone95]

The one thing that does give me hope is that, even with our anemic running game and scoring output against KU, we dominated TOP. That's why our D was able to dominate the 2nd half. If we can win TOP, again, I think the D can contain Martinez and Vaughn. Just need to find ways to put the ball in the end zone. We are creating turnovers this year, maybe we can turn some into scores or, at least short fields.

 

[surly]

I look for K-State to start chucking it if ISU puts 7 or 8 in the box. It's going to be very interesting watching how they tactically play off one another because ISU is not going to let the run game beat them.