Why would you not support your teams coach. Even if you don't like him you have to support him.

Why do you give the offense a pass?

I would have to say because of the improvement of Andrew Woodson.The top Running back is hurt so I can't blame that on coaching. To me I would rather have a great defense than a great offence! Defense can score points also!

Why support losing?????????? I don't get it. If Brooks needs to go then he needs to go......period. UK is not going to win with this guy. What 18 year old young man can relate to a 70 year old man???:confused: :confused:

Wow. sounds like you're a little negative. If it can't be fixed maybe they should drop football? I think there is no reason why UK can't win at football. They may never be on top of the SEC, but they shoud be a .500 club at worst. Each year they should upset a team or two and go to a bowl more often than not. JMO. BTW, Brooks will never take you there.

My question is then Who will take them there? It's fine with me if they get rid of Brooks,but who would even want this Job?Nobody wants this Job because if they don't turn things around in a few years everyone wants to run them out of town!

I guess the thing that kills me is a lot of people act like Brooks inherited a program that was not hit hard by scholarship reductions and such. Is this not the first year Brooks has a full roster of scholarship players? When trying to compete at a major college football level, there is no way you can have a good program without a full roster of players.

My question is then Who will take them there? It's fine with me if they get rid of Brooks,but who would even want this Job?Nobody wants this Job because if they don't turn things around in a few years everyone wants to run them out of town!

You are wrong. At this stage people want to see excitement and progress. Brooks has had his butt handed to him by UofL since he got here. His solution... move them later in the schedule. Pitiful. In the coaching profession money talks. Put up some bucks and buy an up and comer. You may have to be a stepping stone job for a few years but if everybody leaves the place better than when they arrived so what.

I guess the thing that kills me is a lot of people act like Brooks inherited a program that was not hit hard by scholarship reductions and such. Is this not the first year Brooks has a full roster of scholarship players? When trying to compete at a major college football level, there is no way you can have a good program without a full roster of players.

Thats what Im saying! UK is just now starting to get good players that are Freshmen and sophomores that are just learning to adapt to college football!The coaches may have the talent,but they can't make these kids mature overnight!

Iv'e been around UK football for over 35 years and I can't remember Ky being a power house but one time and that was 77! So if your ready to show Brooks the door all I want to know is Who will you replace him with? I respect your opinion,but you did put it on a message board

 

 

I would have paid Morris the extra change he wanted. I know UK has the money to pay a decent coach. Brooks may be the best option for what they are willing to pay but I see no reason they dont pay a better coach.

You are wrong. At this stage people want to see excitement and progress. Brooks has had his butt handed to him by UofL since he got here. His solution... move them later in the schedule. Pitiful. In the coaching profession money talks. Put up some bucks and buy an up and comer. You may have to be a stepping stone job for a few years but if everybody leaves the place better than when they arrived so what.

And if they do fire Brooks UL is going to hand the next coaches butt to him for the two or three years! That will be how long the next coach will be there until he is ran out of town!

Brooks has been at a disadvantage from a scholarships standpoint. Not only are there fewer to offer, but because of the punishment, some of the best kids have chosen other schools.

 

We need to give Brooks a chance to see what he can do with a full compliment of scholarships to offer. And not only that, we need to give him a few years worth of chances to see what kind of kids he can recruit, and then what he can do with those recruits.

 

He took the job under difficult circumstances, and stuck it out. He needs to be given a shot once the NCAA sanctions are lifted. We owe it to him.

I would have paid Morris the extra change he wanted. I know UK has the money to pay a decent coach. Brooks may be the best option for what they are willing to pay but I see no reason they dont pay a better coach.

Yea morris is 3-4 right now and was 5-6 last year! But I do respect your opinion!

Brooks has been at a disadvantage from a scholarships standpoint. Not only are there fewer to offer, but because of the punishment, some of the best kids have chosen other schools.

 

We need to give Brooks a chance to see what he can do with a full compliment of scholarships to offer. And not only that, we need to give him a few years worth of chances to see what kind of kids he can recruit, and then what he can do with those recruits.

 

He took the job under difficult circumstances, and stuck it out. He needs to be given a shot once the NCAA sanctions are lifted. We owe it to him.

I agree with you totally!Some people want the Roof put on the house before the walls are built!

At some point, I keep expecting Mitch Barnhardt to walk into the dressing room and in his best Sheb Wooley imitation say to Brooks, "Norm, I'm really trying to believe that you know what you're doing out there."

Brooks has been at a disadvantage from a scholarships standpoint. Not only are there fewer to offer, but because of the punishment, some of the best kids have chosen other schools.

 

We need to give Brooks a chance to see what he can do with a full compliment of scholarships to offer. And not only that, we need to give him a few years worth of chances to see what kind of kids he can recruit, and then what he can do with those recruits.

 

He took the job under difficult circumstances, and stuck it out. He needs to be given a shot once the NCAA sanctions are lifted. We owe it to him.

 

 

I voted NO. And two of my favorite preppers (Bluto and OldRambler) have opposite positions. When I read one I change my mind and vice versa. I think I will change my vote to YES and would get rid of Archer. I have never liked him and am still be shaky on Brooks and would stay with him only because of some improvement. But the D is killing us. Why did we hire him back? I thought he did a bad job the first time? Am I wrong?

At some point, I keep expecting Mitch Barnhardt to walk into the dressing room and in his best Sheb Wooley imitation say to Brooks, "Norm, I'm really trying to believe that you know what you're doing out there."

I think over the past 30 years or so All UK Ads have had to ask that same question!