May 4, 200719 yr UK made a bowl game last year, but they've been at the bottom of the SEC for decades. This is not like we're passing up a Monday Night Football date. Sure its a national tv date on ESPN or ESPN2 but I'd bet that most of their regional Lincoln Financial games pull as many viewers. Very few people outside of the Bluegrass care about UK/UL. UK faces a difficult enough time trying to navigate the SEC, it is much more important to them playing in the SEC to win as many non-conference games as possible in order to be bowl eligible. So you are going to down UK for wanting to have a game under their belt (while sacrificing an ESPN date, don't act like this is a blockbuster game you're talking about....how many people outside of Colorado watch CU/CSU every year? That was a national tv game too but both schools elected to play a game before hooking up) when the non-conference games usually mean the difference in UK having a shot at a bowl game or staying at home. Call it weak all you want, UK should have a good, not great, not even very good team next year. If having a UC fan calling the decision weak (which is saying something from a program of the stature of UC) is the cost of having a chance to perform better and maybe be able to keep moving forward then so be it. Kansas State didn't apologize for doing what they had to do to move from the dregs of D-1 to a top 10 team. I can only hope UK can do the same. Its not as though UL has a whole lot to lose in the equation, they're still a top 15 team and their recruiting isn't exactly hurting. :thumb: Very well said. But GT is probably going to say he's a UC BB fan, and a Michigan FB fan. But really, this isn't that big of a deal.
May 4, 200719 yr :thumb: Very well said. But GT is probably going to say he's a UC BB fan, and a Michigan FB fan. But really, this isn't that big of a deal. It's not that big a deal because you guys have allowed Brooks and Barnhart to convince you it isn't. But this game is a potential for UK to make national inroads in recruiting. Oh well, can't miss what you never had.
May 4, 200719 yr A few things: 1) gt, you can claim all you want that you could care less about this issue but it's easy to see that your dog in this fight is ripping UK whenever possible. One can just do a quick search through old forums and see that. You're a well respected poster on here by myself, and I'd hope and assume everyone else, but don't say that you could "care less" when it's plain to see that you're not one to pass up on a good ol' UK bashing. 2) I find it funny that this is causing such an uproar (by UofL/anti-UK fans of course but an uproar, nonetheless). As someone else stated, who else plays their biggest rival on the first week? It's not an age-old tradition being ruined so I don't see what the issue is. 3) For those of you saying that UK is passing up the chance to take down UofL on the "big stage", be more realistic. Barnhart, Brooks, and all of the UK fan base know that the chance of taking down the Cards at any point in the season, much less the first game of the season, is very slim. Sure, it would be amazing to see the Cats pounce on the Cards in the first game of the year but I'll take a win over the Cards at any point in the season. 4) To improve the chances of getting that win, UK is getting two games under its belt first and it's a good idea to do so.
May 4, 200719 yr It must be nice to want it both ways. UL backers get on here and trash UK for doing what they think is best for their program, instead of playing on the national stage that the first game of the year would bring. How about as has been stated UL playing an SEC bottom feeder the first game of the season play LSU or Florida or Auburn I don't think UK stopped UL from scheduling whoever they wanted the first game. Wonder why they didn't step up to the plate and schedule someone else that would put them on the national stage.
May 4, 200719 yr What's completely silly is to think that UK stands a better chance of winning later in the season. That is operating under the false assumption that UK will improve, but UofL will not.
May 4, 200719 yr What's completely silly is to think that UK stands a better chance of winning later in the season. That is operating under the false assumption that UK will improve, but UofL will not. Yeah, I have never followed that logic either.
May 4, 200719 yr It must be nice to want it both ways. UL backers get on here and trash UK for doing what they think is best for their program, instead of playing on the national stage that the first game of the year would bring. How about as has been stated UL playing an SEC bottom feeder the first game of the season play LSU or Florida or Auburn I don't think UK stopped UL from scheduling whoever they wanted the first game. Wonder why they didn't step up to the plate and schedule someone else that would put them on the national stage. Louisville has tried to get a series with every major school. If the "big boys" weren't scared to sign on for a home and home, we might see that happen. I'd probably rather play an LSU or Florida than UK anyway, from the standpoint that such a game would help UofL improve far more than a beatdown against UK would.
May 4, 200719 yr Can someone please post both teams schedules? Yes I am being too lazy to look them up
May 4, 200719 yr Wouldn't wish it upon him, but has Brohm made it through a college season without being injured. You never know what could happen, and then again Woodsen could too, which would give UK absolutely no chance.
May 4, 200719 yr What's completely silly is to think that UK stands a better chance of winning later in the season. That is operating under the false assumption that UK will improve, but UofL will not. It's simple. Assuming teams improve as the season progresses, both UofL and UK will progress accordingly. Regardless of how well UofL improves, UK needs to be performing as well as they possibly can for a chance to pull the upset.
May 4, 200719 yr Louisville Date Opponent / Event Location Time/Result 08/30/07 vs. MURRAY STATE PJCS 7:30 p.m. ET 09/06/07 vs. MIDDLE TENNESSEE STATE PJCS 7:00 p.m. ET 09/15/07 at Kentucky Lexington, Ky. TBA 09/22/07 vs. SYRACUSE * PJCS TBA 09/29/07 at North Carolina State Raleigh, N.C. TBA 10/05/07 vs. UTAH PJCS 8:00 p.m. ET 10/13/07 at Cincinnati * Cincinnati, Ohio TBA 10/19/07 at Connecticut * East Hartford, Conn. 8:00 p.m. ET 10/27/07 vs. PITTSBURGH * (Homecoming) PJCS TBA 11/08/07 at West Virginia * Morgantown, W.Va. 7:30 p.m. ET 11/17/07 at USF * Tampa, Fla. TBA 11/29/07 vs. RUTGERS * PJCS TBA UK 9-1 Eastern Kentucky Lexington, Ky. TBA 9-8 Kent State Lexington, Ky. TBA 9-15 Louisville Lexington, Ky. TBA 9-22 Arkansas Fayetteville, Ark. TBA 9-29 Florida Atlantic Lexington, Ky. TBA 10-4 South Carolina Columbia, S.C. TBA 10-13 LSU Lexington, Ky. TBA 10-20 Florida Lexington, Ky. TBA 10-27 Mississippi State (Homecoming) Lexington, Ky. TBA 11-10 Vanderbilt Nashville, Tenn. TBA 11-17 Georgia Athens, Ga. TBA 11-24 Tennessee Lexington, Ky. TBA
May 4, 200719 yr Author Yeah, I have never followed that logic either.To me, the best chance of an upset is in the first game.
May 4, 200719 yr Author Offended? Talk about getting it twisted. 1. It's a bad move. 2. It's a coward move. 3, It's flat out saying we don't want UL "any time, any place" 4. Are you really OK with UK saying we want to bury a game between our in state rival over NATIONAL exposure? I could care less about the venom from either side. I'm ALWAYS out of town or working in town when they played this game on Labor Day Sunday. With the game on NATIONAL TV it was never a problem to tune in. The actions of the UK athletic department want to down play the UL game. Why? Because as you stated they don't want to be embarrassed on the big stage. How can you not see the reason for moving the game is weak? UL is too good? I get it... :thumb::thumb::thumb:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.