91 seconds

[Dolokaju]

91 seconds that changed the future of Cyclone Football.

With 91 seconds left and heading for a 98.7% sure victory at a place ISU doesn't win at, I could argue that we were heading for an 8th season of the Rhoads era. Seriously, we finally had a more K-State type of ball control offense that we had been want but with a little more explosive ability. The defense was starting to get the 3-4 and had good playmakers. And based on the fall recruiting, it finally seemed like ISU had finally found their niche. Since falling behind 35-0 at Baylor, ISU had put together a string of overall good outings minus the Oklahoma game(though that score hid a few positives that they did have). With K-State set to lose Snyder, ISU was in a position to move a spot up, not to mention Tech and West Virginia coming to Ames next season and the Cyclones could've been set for a really nice year.

91 seconds.

Unfortunately the coaches chose to put their futures in some chart. Ok, tell me though, does the "chart" account for the fact that you fumbled 6 times already? No? Then I would say that in this case it's as useful as a magic 8 ball. In the end, Mike Warren and Joel Lanning fumbled, but I ask this; Who was playing the best at that point of the game? The defense that, once they started rushing more than 3 again unlike the prior quarter, stuffed the Mildcats on back to back and what "should have" been winning drives. Take the knees, coffin corner a punt with about 10 seconds left and watch Kstate try to drive 80 yards. Good luck.

91 seconds.

Instead we got another debacle of a loss and will be looking for a new coach in a market where everybody and their mother will be looking. On the bright side, the facilities and fans are top notch. Will money be an issue? Maybe, but remember there is a lot of media money comes in and the administration knows you have to spend to get in this market. So if ISU has a cap of $3 million, they should be in the running for a good coach.

In closing, I was a Rhoads supporter. Not because I thought he was the best coach, but because he was the type of guy I wanted to lead our football program. 2011 Okie State is a great memory for me, not so much for the win but for the bonding moment that I had with my then 10 year old son. We talk about that till this day. Thank you Coach!

 

[Judoka]

Focusing on the chart is stupid. Every coach has a chart like that and we'd be yelling at Rhoads if he didn't have that prepared.

 

[CyCloned]

The bottom line is that the coaches had a lot of chances to win games by making better choices and they did not. Remember not centering the ball against Toledo? How about using your feature back to try and get a 4th and 1 out of the shotgun as opposed to going under center and using your 235 pound power back? (Go back over the last two years and see how many games ISU would have won if they could have just got a first down on 4th and 1.) How about sending a RB that just had a fumble into the line where everyone has one thing on their mind, stripping the ball. The chart thing was just another excuse for not knowing what to do with your team at crunch time.

 

[cyinne]

I've always wondered where you can find those probabilities for winning games in certain situations. Like us being 98.7% sure victory- is there a website you can figure these things on? I'm not hating, just curious.

 

[Cyclonepride]

It was more like 30 minutes of trying to sit on a lead, but the last 90 seconds was the final nail.

 

[Dolokaju]

The 98.7% was from an ESPN article. A lot of my intention here was focusing on the straw that broke the camels back...but yes, I went after the chart...especially when it takes common sense out of the equation...

 

[cyclonedave25]

I've always wondered where you can find those probabilities for winning games in certain situations. Like us being 98.7% sure victory- is there a website you can figure these things on? I'm not hating, just curious.

I used this website: http://www.pro-football-reference.c...ield=opp&yds_from_goal=44&down=1&yds_to_go=10
And plugged in score differential 7, 1:31 to go in 4th Q, Opponents 44 yard line, 1st and 10 and it gave us a 99.87% chance of winning. I think it's different than ESPN's article because they calculated KSU's timeout into the equation.

 

[chuckd4735]

The way this went down today, I tend to believe it was bowl or bust for CPR. After OSU, we were holding on to hope that we be one of the potential 5 win teams that made a bowl game, but after yesterday, when all hope went out in a big way, it was over. Had we won yesterday, and lost to WV, I think we would be having this same conversation, one week later.

 

[Hawkize31]

I've always wondered where you can find those probabilities for winning games in certain situations. Like us being 98.7% sure victory- is there a website you can figure these things on? I'm not hating, just curious.

http://www.predictionmachine.com/Io...State-Wildcats-College-Football-Live-11-21-15

There are sites that track plays and field position and score and time remaining and determine the likelihood of a win for a team in a given scenario. Its not like exact or anything (how could it be), but you can use percentages in past examples to extrapolate. There's an 'about us' section, but its not very descriptive.

So this site sees the scenario: ISU ball, 1st and 10, 1:36 left, 7 point lead, and gives Iowa State a 99.9% chance to win.
The Warren fumble dropped ISU's odds to 89.6%.
After the KSU touchdown it dropped to 40%.
After the Lanning fumble it was 35.6%.
After the field goal is was 0.1%.

These charts are actually really cool. They help put insane outcomes into perspective.
Heres one from a wacky Ravens/Vikings game

 

[Shawker]

Rhoads' decision to not kneel the ball almost certainly cost them the game ultimately, but eight fumbles...four lost...that's not on Rhoads.

 

[Wally86]

Focusing on the chart is stupid. Every coach has a chart like that and we'd be yelling at Rhoads if he didn't have that prepared.

maybe the issue is the chart was wrong.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Rhoads' decision to not kneel the ball almost certainly cost them the game ultimately, but eight fumbles...four lost...that's not on Rhoads.

A coach's job is to get players to execute. 7 years of poor execution is on Rhoads.

 

[CycloneErik]

Rhoads' decision to not kneel the ball almost certainly cost them the game ultimately, but eight fumbles...four lost...that's not on Rhoads.

Take a knee and 2 of those fumbles at the end don't happen.

 

[spitfyr36]

The 98.7% was from an ESPN article. A lot of my intention here was focusing on the straw that broke the camels back...but yes, I went after the chart...especially when it takes common sense out of the equation...

Don't you know 42% of statistics are made up on the spot 94% or the time

 

[ISUx82]

91 seconds or not, this was bound to happen anyways. CPR was on life support. He sat on the ball and watched it go away and this has been the issue for a long time.

 

[HFCS]

When the clock operator put 10 seconds on the clock that should not have been there I honestly had no idea if it would help us or screw us. That was quite an odd play to stop the clock on, odd they corrected the much more minor error later.

 

[clonedude]

I still don't know why Rhoads goes into halftimes thinking about what is the minimum amount we need to score in the 2nd half to pull out the win?

Last week he said that at halftime against Okie State he felt like 2 more scores would put the game out of reach for Okie State. After the KSU debacle he said he felt like at the half that we'd only need one more score to put the game out of reach.

I understand that he ended up being correct in both cases, but why have that mentality in your head to begin with? Do you think Art Briles thinks that way? He wants to win by 50 or more and rub it in your face. He wants to score every time he has the ball. But Rhoads always has in the back of his mind the minimum amount we'll need to score to pull it out.

I just don't like that way of thinking. IMO, if we can score 35 pts in the 1st half against KSU, then I'd feel like we should be able to score 35 again in the 2nd half too. Why not? And if KSU can score more than 70 to beat us, then more power to them.

 

[HFCS]

I still don't know why Rhoads goes into halftimes thinking about what is the minimum amount we need to score in the 2nd half to pull out the win?

Last week he said that at halftime against Okie State he felt like 2 more scores would put the game out of reach for Okie State. After the KSU debacle he said he felt like at the half that we'd only need one more score to put the game out of reach.

I understand that he ended up being correct in both cases, but why have that mentality in your head to begin with? Do you think Art Briles thinks that way? He wants to win by 50 or more and rub it in your face. He wants to score every time he has the ball. But Rhoads always has in the back of his mind the minimum amount we'll need to score to pull it out.

I just don't like that way of thinking. IMO, if we can score 35 pts in the 1st half against KSU, then I'd feel like we should be able to score 35 again in the 2nd half too. Why not? And if KSU can score more than 70 to beat us, then more power to them.

The approach the entire rest of the Big 12 takes is "Let's score another 35 to make it 70 for the game no matter how much we're ahead by".

 

[rochclone]

I still don't know why Rhoads goes into halftimes thinking about what is the minimum amount we need to score in the 2nd half to pull out the win?

Last week he said that at halftime against Okie State he felt like 2 more scores would put the game out of reach for Okie State. After the KSU debacle he said he felt like at the half that we'd only need one more score to put the game out of reach.

I understand that he ended up being correct in both cases, but why have that mentality in your head to begin with? Do you think Art Briles thinks that way? He wants to win by 50 or more and rub it in your face. He wants to score every time he has the ball. But Rhoads always has in the back of his mind the minimum amount we'll need to score to pull it out.

I just don't like that way of thinking. IMO, if we can score 35 pts in the 1st half against KSU, then I'd feel like we should be able to score 35 again in the 2nd half too. Why not? And if KSU can score more than 70 to beat us, then more power to them.

I think fans that say "Well we scored 35 in the first half and should be able to score 70 every game" have played a little too much XBox. I don't think the game plans have been overly conservative in the second half for the most part. I just think the percentage of 3rd down conversions (especially 3rd and short) has been pitiful. It is an execution issue more than a play calling issue.

 

[19clone91]

While overall the second half was awful offense for ISU, you also have to remember that thanks to Snyder ball, ISU only had the ball once in the 3rd quarter. No excuse for losing but it is a point