Game Thoughts Oklahoma State

CloniesForLife

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 22, 2015
15,609
21,022
113
Was great yo see the win.

But I still am frustrated that we passed 38 time for 348 yards (9.2 yards per pass) and ran 34 times for 74 yards (2.2 yards per rush). With that huge disparity in the success of the two types of plays the Cyclones need to be passing on more that 53 percent of the plays, in my opinion. Not 100 percent but 60-70 or 75 percent?

And against Ohio we rushed 23 times for 38 yards 1.7 per rush) and passed 24 times for 233 yards (9.7 yards per pass). And again 50 percent rush-pass!

Now I admit that I'm not smart but it seems obvious to me from the results that we need to pass more!
I mean they made a step change and got good results so hopefully they keep leaning into that but we will see
 
  • Like
Reactions: zmjames6

joefrog

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2008
8,207
2,543
113
Clive, Iowa
Clock management with a 2 TD lead in the 4th quarter was really bad. We ran a hurry up QB sneak with 30 seconds on the play clock and then punted with 22 seconds on the play clock. Not to mention there were other plays where we snapped the ball with more than 10 seconds on the play clock. This is not what winning teams do.
What's funny is, we did the exact opposite of that late in the game against Iowa!
 

Bigman38

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Jul 27, 2010
20,224
20,357
113
38
Council Bluffs, IA
Was great yo see the win.

But I still am frustrated that we passed 38 time for 348 yards (9.2 yards per pass) and ran 34 times for 74 yards (2.2 yards per rush). With that huge disparity in the success of the two types of plays the Cyclones need to be passing on more that 53 percent of the plays, in my opinion. Not 100 percent but 60-70 or 75 percent?

And against Ohio we rushed 23 times for 38 yards 1.7 per rush) and passed 24 times for 233 yards (9.7 yards per pass). And again 50 percent rush-pass!

Now I admit that I'm not smart but it seems obvious to me from the results that we need to pass more!

My takeaway was some small tweaks to the offense that were positive, but overall that was pretty much the exact same offense as last week against a much worse team.

But I'll take the win and hope I'm wrong.
 

Cyinthenorth

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 29, 2013
15,894
11,976
113
36
Dubuque
It seems like an odd comparison to make, but we're in a very similar position to Clemson. They let the game move beyond what their philosophy was and brought in a new OC to correct things. However, Dabo insisted they run the same style and put some very clear guardrails in place that Riley wasn't allowed to go outside of. CMC made that same move. Both are quickly finding out that the name of the OC doesn't matter if you're forcing them to do the same thing as before.
I agree, and have noticed some similarities between our programs. Dabo seems a bit high on his own supply, and Campbell has for awhile now too.
 

MJ271

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 9, 2012
2,122
2,737
113
Atkins
in the williams and blum pod this week, CW said the same thing, and also that it feels like the coaching staff has recognized what is working and what is not. Purely speculation, but at 9 yards/play why would you not try and throw the ball 70-80% of the time? Especially since Rocco proved he is capable

Was great yo see the win.

But I still am frustrated that we passed 38 time for 348 yards (9.2 yards per pass) and ran 34 times for 74 yards (2.2 yards per rush). With that huge disparity in the success of the two types of plays the Cyclones need to be passing on more that 53 percent of the plays, in my opinion. Not 100 percent but 60-70 or 75 percent?

And against Ohio we rushed 23 times for 38 yards 1.7 per rush) and passed 24 times for 233 yards (9.7 yards per pass). And again 50 percent rush-pass!

Now I admit that I'm not smart but it seems obvious to me from the results that we need to pass more!

I've shared some of these stats a couple of times, but it seems worthwhile to keep repeating it. 70%-80% passes is a super high amount that would be higher than basically every FBS offense in the past decade (many of Leach's teams were in the 70s, but no other FBS team has reached 70% since Hawaii in 2007). In quarters 1-3 on Saturday, Iowa State threw 59.65% of the time, which would rank 13th in FBS this year and would have been 9th last year. Even last year, Iowa State threw the ball 57% of the time, which was 16th in FBS.


I just like to add those numbers in so we all know the context when we want the team to pass more. I don't know, maybe they should be throwing 70% of the time. But just to be clear, throwing 70% of the time would almost certainly finish the season as the most pass-happy offense in FBS.
 

joefrog

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2008
8,207
2,543
113
Clive, Iowa
Our 3 hardest games remaining are OU, Texas and KSU. The rest of the games are at home or against mediocre to bad teams so I think we should have a shot at all of those.

For the 3 toughest the optimist in me says:

OU hasn't played anyone that great yet and is looking ahead to Texas so maybe we surprise them.

Texas is at home and in November so hopefully it is nice and cold for them. Hopefully they're undefeated and over confident going into this one.

KSU probably our toughest game since it is on the road. We played them tough last year and hopefully the offense keeps improving throughout the year.
The key to beating KSU is pass, pass, pass.

Their run defense is stout.

Mizzou changed their offensive coordinator and philosophy in the offseason, and went from scoring 10 points on KSU last year to 30 this year.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: CloniesForLife

deadeyededric

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2009
15,836
13,622
113
Parts Unknown
are you telling me Kansas has more talent than us? Their offense doesn't have blue chip talent and they do just fine
If they aren't more talented they are better coached. They are in better shape than we are right now. Either we just don't have talent or our coaching sucks. Not sure where you are going with this. We couldn't beat Nevada or BYU imo.
 

Cyinthenorth

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 29, 2013
15,894
11,976
113
36
Dubuque
I've shared some of these stats a couple of times, but it seems worthwhile to keep repeating it. 70%-80% passes is a super high amount that would be higher than basically every FBS offense in the past decade (many of Leach's teams were in the 70s, but no other FBS team has reached 70% since Hawaii in 2007). In quarters 1-3 on Saturday, Iowa State threw 59.65% of the time, which would rank 13th in FBS this year and would have been 9th last year. Even last year, Iowa State threw the ball 57% of the time, which was 16th in FBS.


I just like to add those numbers in so we all know the context when we want the team to pass more. I don't know, maybe they should be throwing 70% of the time. But just to be clear, throwing 70% of the time would almost certainly finish the season as the most pass-happy offense in FBS.
I don't think the issue is we aren't passing enough. The issue is and remains an ineffective run game. You can't ask Rocco or really any QB to throw the ball 40+ times per game. Any more than that and we'd be talking about completely abandoning the run game, which some may argue would be a good idea for this year's Cyclones. I think the problem right now is knowing when to pass versus when to run.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: MJ271

Cyinthenorth

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 29, 2013
15,894
11,976
113
36
Dubuque
If they aren't more talented they are better coached. They are in better shape than we are right now. Either we just don't have talent or our coaching sucks. Not sure where you are going with this.
I could probably buy Kansas being a little more talented than us at certain positions. There football program is getting good NIL support just because of residual from men's basketball.
 

BACyclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 27, 2011
2,293
2,943
113
Reinbeck, IA
We thought it looked like a dislocated shoulder. Source - my daughter and gf have both dislocated their shoulders and they both thought the way his arm was hanging looked exactly like that. Whatever it is, hope he heals fast, they need him.

Really bummed for Norton. Right at that point he seemed to be hitting his stride, opening up...then BAM he's obviously hurt his shoulder.

For a RB you'd have to think (if true) he's out multiple weeks with this kind of injury.
 

BACyclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 27, 2011
2,293
2,943
113
Reinbeck, IA
I think there are absolutely reasons to be hopeful. I tried to preface my prior comments with the context that route trees, play calling, development, and separation were our problems, not purely a raw talent deficit. While I do think we lack some depth in the WR room, the route trees were a bit more crisp against OSU and the play calling was clearly better. I'd like to see continued development because quite frankly I don't think even the coaches know what we have for talent with that group because they haven't been developed over the past few years.

The staff loves the idea of establishing the running game to open up the passing game as this also helps limit possessions and control the game. However, I think there is some recognition that we may need to switch things around and get some 10-15 yard passing game established to open up the run game. We just don't have the line to come out of the gate and run up the middle 2 out of every 3 downs.

Defenses clearly play against knowing this tendency. Watch us play on first down, and every defensive player will usually be packed in tight side-side and within 10-12 yards of the LOS. They dare us to throw in neutral situations, and usually we don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: t-noah

ZuriCyclone

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2019
3,134
1,737
113
Was great yo see the win.

But I still am frustrated that we passed 38 time for 348 yards (9.2 yards per pass) and ran 34 times for 74 yards (2.2 yards per rush). With that huge disparity in the success of the two types of plays the Cyclones need to be passing on more that 53 percent of the plays, in my opinion. Not 100 percent but 60-70 or 75 percent?

And against Ohio we rushed 23 times for 38 yards 1.7 per rush) and passed 24 times for 233 yards (9.7 yards per pass). And again 50 percent rush-pass!

Now I admit that I'm not smart but it seems obvious to me from the results that we need to pass more!
These numbers are going to make me punch Drywall between the studs. The stubbornness of CMC is just insane. He likes to live by the ideology of establishing the run, but when you have less then G5 talent on the OL, do what works to win
 
  • Like
Reactions: joefrog

ZuriCyclone

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2019
3,134
1,737
113
The craziest part of the game was watching OSU trying to establish the run , down 14 and going three and out :D.

They were trying to one up CMC.
 

Clone95

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 13, 2019
1,272
3,121
113
51
If they aren't more talented they are better coached. They are in better shape than we are right now. Either we just don't have talent or our coaching sucks. Not sure where you are going with this. We couldn't beat Nevada or BYU imo.
What has KU done? Going 3-6 in conference last year really impressed you?
 

MJ271

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 9, 2012
2,122
2,737
113
Atkins
I don't think the issue is we aren't passing enough. The issue is and remains an ineffective run game. You can't ask Rocco or really any QB to throw the ball 40+ times per game. Any more than that and we'd be talking about completely abandoning the run game, which some may argue would be a good idea for this year's Cyclones. I think the problem right now is knowing when to pass versus when to run.
I largely agree, with the caveat that I might actually trust Rocco to throw that much. I don't think his comp is Brock Purdy, I think his comp is more in the style of Gardner Minshew.

But, you would definitely prefer to be more balanced than that and at some point you also might run into the issue where the run game might not be able to improve at all because they don't have the opportunity to do so.

As far as when to pass vs. when to run, I honestly was fine with most of those decisions on Saturday (I was not against Ohio). There were probably a couple too many times running on both 1st and 2nd down for my liking, and a couple 3rd down runs I disagreed with at first. But I think both of those 3rd down runs were intended to set up plays on 4th down (one of them led to Noel's TD, which I think everyone forgets was on a 4th and 3). While the last three drives were more conservative in total than I would've liked, I didn't disagree with any of the play calls in the moment. The last non-victory formation drive even ended with a Rocco Becht run, which I thought everyone here was clamoring for.
 

RagingCloner

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 2, 2022
4,626
6,932
113
I largely agree, with the caveat that I might actually trust Rocco to throw that much. I don't think his comp is Brock Purdy, I think his comp is more in the style of Gardner Minshew.

But, you would definitely prefer to be more balanced than that and at some point you also might run into the issue where the run game might not be able to improve at all because they don't have the opportunity to do so.

As far as when to pass vs. when to run, I honestly was fine with most of those decisions on Saturday (I was not against Ohio). There were probably a couple too many times running on both 1st and 2nd down for my liking, and a couple 3rd down runs I disagreed with at first. But I think both of those 3rd down runs were intended to set up plays on 4th down (one of them led to Noel's TD, which I think everyone forgets was on a 4th and 3). While the last three drives were more conservative in total than I would've liked, I didn't disagree with any of the play calls in the moment. The last non-victory formation drive even ended with a Rocco Becht run, which I thought everyone here was clamoring for.
I was somewhat shocked that the play action pass worked as well as it did for us being almost completely inept at running the football
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
48,460
39,262
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
Pretty easy to.pick a dialog to fit your desired narrative. How about this:

- if our linebacker doesn't get beat on a wheel route you eliminate a 70 yard play?
- if our OLB, DE, and CB do what is taught from 4th grade on (turn all running plays to the inside) u eliminate a 70 yard run?
- if our RB realizes that he doesn't have a first down and doesn't dive, then the ending is totally different.

The game is probably a 30ish to 15ish game.
A dive would have been preferable. If he dove he would have gotten yardage until he hit the ground. He slid feet first so he was down as soon as he started his sliding motion.
 

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
10,878
13,959
113
I could probably buy Kansas being a little more talented than us at certain positions. There football program is getting good NIL support just because of residual from men's basketball.
They have form here, so not surprising they are figuring it out fast. KU is has been buying bball players for decades. Now they have discovered an adjacent market (football) where they can buy players via NIL.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cyinthenorth