Kentucky 52 Louisville 21

[16thBBall Fan]

Final Cats finish the regular season at 9-3.

[sportsfan41]

Absolute beat down.  Still don't know how Vegas had this one so wrong.  

[TheDeuce]

Total domination from the Cats, for the third game in a row. Louisville is simply unable to compete on the offensive and defensive lines, completely outmatched. You can’t beat a good SEC team with mid-major interior lineman. 

On to the bowl game, I guess. 

[theguru]

1 minute ago, TheDeuce said:

Total domination from the Cats, for the third game in a row. Louisville is simply unable to compete on the offensive and defensive lines, completely outmatched. You can’t beat a good SEC team with mid-major interior lineman. 

On to the bowl game, I guess. 

I wish more fans were like you. 

[16thBBall Fan]

6 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

Absolute beat down.  Still don't know how Vegas had this one so wrong.  

Yep, 3 in a row by 30+

[theguru]

I know Kentucky disappointed us at times this year but this is a very good football team.

I can't wait to see them play in a Bowl game.  Too bad they aren't in a "NIT Football" tournament.

I am still for the top 16 teams in one playoff and 17 to 32 in another playoff.  The money involved would be off the hook.  And Kentucky fans, just think about Kentucky, wouldn't you love to see them play in the 17 to 32 Championship, I sure would. 

[Randy Parker]

9 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Total domination from the Cats, for the third game in a row.

And the 2017 game that Louisville won was lopsided in the Cards favor.  Been a bit since we've seen a competitive game in this series. 

[Randy Parker]

11 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

Absolute beat down.  Still don't know how Vegas had this one so wrong.  

Same here. 

[sportsfan41]

I got to thinking about the Freshmen thing for Louisville. In regards to them having "70 freshman ".   It would appear that Louisville is counting last years freshman as freshman again this year since the season didn't count as a year against players eligibility.  And also anyone that was red shirted as a freshman during the 2019 season. Is that correct?

[theguru]

Just now, sportsfan41 said:

I got to thinking about the Freshmen thing for Louisville. In regards to them having "70 freshman ".   It would appear that Louisville is counting last years freshman as freshman again this year since the season didn't count as a year against players eligibility.  And also anyone that was red shifted as a freshman during the 2019 season. Is that correct?

70?  Could you imagine a roster with 280 on it?  Or if you throw in a COVID year 350?  

[TheDeuce]

3 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

I got to thinking about the Freshmen thing for Louisville. In regards to them having "70 freshman ".   It would appear that Louisville is counting last years freshman as freshman again this year since the season didn't count as a year against players eligibility.  And also anyone that was red shirted as a freshman during the 2019 season. Is that correct?

I would say that’s exactly right. It’s definitely not 70 kids in their first year in the program.

[sportsfan41]

4 minutes ago, theguru said:

70?  Could you imagine a roster with 280 on it?  Or if you throw in a COVID year 350?  

Yeah. In the update thread Deuce stated that Louisville says 70 of the 115 players are freshman.  I have a hard time believing they signed 70 players in one class.  And even if they did, that would be cause for concern. 

[sportsfan41]

1 minute ago, TheDeuce said:

I would say that’s exactly right. It’s definitely not 70 kids in their first year in the program.

That's what I figured.  I mean I somewhat understand why they did it but it can also be misleading as well.  I haven't really heard it talked about other than with Louisville so I'm not sure if that's how most teams have done it or not. 

[TheDeuce]

2 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

That's what I figured.  I mean I somewhat understand why they did it but it can also be misleading as well.  I haven't really heard it talked about other than with Louisville so I'm not sure if that's how most teams have done it or not. 

It’s probably an effort to give Satterfield and Co. a bit more slack, tbh. 

[theguru]

If we use the term 5th year senior or super senior why not 2nd year freshman or super freshman.