**** OFFICIAL 2012 Kansas Football Repository Thread ****

[ArrowheadHawk]

New Coach, New year, new thread.

Sat, Sept. 1 SDSU at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS at 6:00p.m. CT Jayhawk IMG TV Network

Sat, Sept. 8 Rice at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS FSN at 2:30p.m. CT Fox Sports Net

Sat, Sept. 15 TCU at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS at 11:00a.m. CT FX

Sat, Sept. 22 Kansas at No. Illinois
DeKalb, Illinois

Sat, Oct. 6 Kansas at Kansas State Bill Snyder Family Stadium
Manhattan, KS

Sat, Oct. 13 Okla. St. at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS

Sat, Oct. 20 Kansas at Oklahoma Oklahoma Memorial Stadium
Norman, OK

Sat, Oct. 27 Texas at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS

Sat, Nov. 3 Kansas at Baylor Floyd Casey Stadium
Waco, TX

Sat, Nov. 10 Kansas at TT Jones AT&T Stadium
Lubbock, TX

Sat, Nov. 17 Iowa State at Kansas Memorial Stadium
Lawrence, KS

Sat, Dec. 1 Kansas at West Virginia
Morgantown, W.V.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

If they really are 24 games under .500, it's going to take significantly more than a few seasons.

Bill Snyder averages 8-10 wins a year. So if his team goes 8-4, it would take six years. I think that is probably a worse case scenario. More likely are a couple of nine win seasons, maybe another ten win season, and a 7-8 win season. Snyder seems to find ways to win even when he does not have a stable full of talent.

So a few seasons might be a bit optimistic, but it certainly is not outside the realm of possibility, as long as Snyder decides he wants to stick around and coach.

[Braincase]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

I know you meant that as a jab, but considering how awful K-State football was for a 50-60 year period, the fact that Snyder will have the university at .500 in football in the next few seasons is one helluva an accomplishment. (I am not a KSU guy for what that is worth).

That's .500 against Kansas. And they only play them once a year in football.

[notorious]

I rarely tread into college team threads, but why do people really care about anything that happens outside of the last 5-10 years?

[Braincase]

Originally Posted by notorious

I rarely tread into college team threads, but why do people really care about anything that happens outside of the last 5-10 years?

Because my memory is longer than 5-10 years.

[Reerun_KC]

Originally Posted by Braincase

Because my memory is longer than 5-10 years.

[mikeyis4dcats.]

Originally Posted by notorious

I rarely tread into college team threads, but why do people really care about anything that happens outside of the last 5-10 years?

because ancient history is as important as the tax rate in 1975.

Overall history has a place, but is not always relevant to modern times.

For instance, even though KSU has a terrible history in football, most would put them solidly over KU in prominance and prestige based on the last 20 years.

[Braincase]

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats.

because ancient history is as important as the tax rate in 1975.

Overall history has a place, but is not always relevant to modern times.

For instance, even though KSU has a terrible history in football, most would put them solidly over KU in prominance and prestige based on the last 20 years.

Especially during the Ron Prince years.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats.

because ancient history is as important as the tax rate in 1975.

Overall history has a place, but is not always relevant to modern times.

For instance, even though KSU has a terrible history in football, most would put them solidly over KU in prominance and prestige based on the last 20 years.

But, where history would cut into that argument is that almost all of that prominace and prestige was earned largely through one spectacular coach, and the small sample size does not bode well for that level to continue once that coach goes. Doesn't mean that will necessarily be the case, but it is a legitimate concern not to place KSU among the "elite" too quickly, or even to be too cocky about their program compared to KU.

KSU is not an isolated case, many have similar reservations about Virginia Tech once Beamer steps down. Their location gives them better hope for optimism, but, until those coaches step away, we won't know their fates for certain.

[Braincase]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

But, where history would cut into that argument is that almost all of that prominace and prestige was earned largely through one spectacular coach, and the small sample size does not bode well for that level to continue once that coach goes. Doesn't mean that will necessarily be the case, but it is a legitimate concern not to place KSU among the "elite" too quickly, or even to be too cocky about their program compared to KU.

KSU is not an isolated case, many have similar reservations about Virginia Tech once Beamer steps down. Their location gives them better hope for optimism, but, until those coaches step away, we won't know their fates for certain.

Nick Saban and Urban Meyer are both waiting for Snyder to retire.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by notorious

I rarely tread into college team threads, but why do people really care about anything that happens outside of the last 5-10 years?

Because nostalgia is often times much prettier than the present.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by Braincase

That's .500 against Kansas. And they only play them once a year in football.

Gotcha. Thought you were referring to the KSU's overall football record. Yeah, I don't think Snyder will be around long enough to get them to .500 against KU.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats.

because ancient history is as important as the tax rate in 1975.

Overall history has a place, but is not always relevant to modern times.

For instance, even though KSU has a terrible history in football, most would put them solidly over KU in prominance and prestige based on the last 20 years.

Here's a scenario for you. Let's say you continue a great run, then savannah st joins the conference.... and beats up on you guys for 10 years... while you all swirl down the shitter looking for a coach that is better than Ron Prince even.

Now you guys have these Savannah St. fans that are cocky. Tell you how much you suck. How your history means absolutely nothing. That you know nothing about football simply because your school has faltered in recent times.

You'd embrace your history, too.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Because nostalgia is often times much prettier than the present.

Your answer is by far the most correct.

[mikeyis4dcats.]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Here's a scenario for you. Let's say you continue a great run, then savannah st joins the conference.... and beats up on you guys for 10 years... while you all swirl down the shitter looking for a coach that is better than Ron Prince even.

Now you guys have these Savannah St. fans that are cocky. Tell you how much you suck. How your history means absolutely nothing. That you know nothing about football simply because your school has faltered in recent times.

You'd embrace your history, too.

that would suck, but that's life. Your teams record from 1953 is irrelevant unless it was something special like a championship or an undefeated season. What is relevant is current history, which I'd define as the most recent season extending through the reign of your current HC. Charlie Weiss has nothing to do with Mangino or Coach Fam. Snyder had nothing to do with Prince or the others before him. The coach makes his own way, and until the coach changes, that is part of the story.

Just my 2 cents.

[Braincase]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Gotcha. Thought you were referring to the KSU's overall football record. Yeah, I don't think Snyder will be around long enough to get them to .500 against KU.

And I like our AD's hiring skills over KSU's. Ironic, considering KU's AD is a KSU (and KU) alum.