I don't know, it wasn't me asking the question.

 

I'll give an honest answer to both then.

 

In the East, absolutely they could contend.

 

Nationally, I just don't see it.

Terry Wilson is fine for the expectations of this team. He's just not a guy that's going to put them in a position to win against great teams.

 

However, as long as you keep a 0 or a 1 in the loss column, I guess you have as good an argument as any other team in the land.

The lady announcer as the game was ending/had ended?!?!

 

Wrong.

 

I am looking for a name.

I'll give an honest answer to both then.

 

In the East, absolutely they could contend.

 

Nationally, I just don't see it.

Terry Wilson is fine for the expectations of this team. He's just not a guy that's going to put them in a position to win against great teams.

 

However, as long as you keep a 0 or a 1 in the loss column, I guess you have as good an argument as any other team in the land.

 

I agree, baby steps.

 

Win the East and then who knows.

I'll give an honest answer to both then.

 

In the East, absolutely they could contend.

 

Nationally, I just don't see it.

Terry Wilson is fine for the expectations of this team. He's just not a guy that's going to put them in a position to win against great teams.

 

However, as long as you keep a 0 or a 1 in the loss column, I guess you have as good an argument as any other team in the land.

 

Hmmm doesnt winning the east basically mean your competing nationally at least this year? To win the east they most likely will have to beat Georgia. Who is one of the favorites to be in the playoff. Say even if UK loses to Texas A&M and then beats Georgia to win the east. That means UK is playing in the SEC title game with the playoffs on the line most likely.

 

So this year I do think winning in the East and competing Nationally go hand and hand.

 

With all that said. Georgia is dang good. UK wont be able to just run on them. UKs passing game will have to be much better by then to have a legit shot at them.