***Yesterday's Question HERE***

In an attempt to pass the time this off-season we're fortunate to have secured the help of scottwildcat from Boscoe's Boys. Scott is going to provide 100 questions about the past, present, future (and who-knows-what) involving Kansas State sports, and I'll do my very best to answer them.

Let's dive in to the 100 Questions.

Total transparency, my answer on this is based on 100 percent gut feel.

I could (should) have put in the time to go back and break down these kind of tendencies from what Chris Klieman did at North Dakota State, but I'm not sure it would be a great representation, anyway, of how he'll handle similar things at K-State.

At NDSU Klieman typically had the better roster, was constantly competing for national championships and won't have a program in the same position of power - at least initially, of course - at Kansas State. It makes it hard to compare the two situations.

I really believe those things. It's not just the laziness of not wanting to do the work.

I also wanted to use this question to go out on a little limb based on that gut feeling, and I believe Klieman - and this staff - will be aggressive.

They've been incredibly aggressive on the recruiting trail, so far, and that's probably the best real indicator we have on how they act and think.

They aren't going to back off a kid just because another Power Five offered or be shy to aggressively pursue a target with loads of big time offers.

It won't always pay off, but K-State isn't going to back down from anybody when it comes to recruiting.

It helps me project a belief there will be similar actions on the field.

I don't expect for Klieman to take risks to the point of being careless or questioned for going too far, but I think he's too confident - and has too much he wants to prove - to take it easy.

It's easy to assume a coach who plays a traditional style of offense will focus on field position, controlling the clock and forcing the opposition to beat itself.

I'm not saying Klieman won't value those things, but I get the feeling this will be a coaching staff more than happy to take a risk to beat somebody as opposed to counting on the opposition to collapse.

The term "chip on their shoulder," gets thrown around way, way too much. Simply being a competitor doesn't mean you have a chip on your shoulder, nor does simply being very good.

I think that term refers to somebody (or a group of people) who has genuine reason to believe they're being doubted. Klieman and this staff know the questions some have about them, and they're anxious - maybe even eager - to prove some people wrong.

That kind of mentality usually breeds a culture not afraid to take risks.