May 10, 200719 yr I guess it all depends on whether you're looking thru blue glasses or red. As was stated it's a slow day for sports. :thumb: :thumb: Yup, if this is all the got to dredge up it is a slow day. . I agree that it wasn't the most brilliant statement of the century, but ..................:sleep: :sleep: :sleep: Why bring this up now?:lol:
May 10, 200719 yr Crawford's take on Lee Todd's indiotic statement Good read... :lol: :lol: Maybe to you but to me it is just more of "lil' brother crying" and starving for attention.
May 10, 200719 yr The main thing is the statement that Louisville is overmarketed and underpreforms and at the time he was talking about football, and Louisville has done quite well in that arena. Was it a DUMB statement? Sure. Ignorant. However, this reporter is using the Sears Cup rankings as defense, and good or bad, UK is winning in those. Had he simply hung his hat on the statment is dumb and UK football is not nearly at the level of UL football, I'd have stayed out of this thread. Any excuse given has reason for UL's shortfall to UK in those rankings smells an awful lot like the type of "moral victory" UL fans are always beating UK fans over the head with. The statement was dumb, and frankly, for a man of his stature, horribly unprofessional. He's not a coach and should stay out of the quote business.
May 10, 200719 yr UK, at No. 27, ranks ahead of No. 36 U of L in the Sears Directors Cup standings, which rank programs on a cumulative score of their 10 best NCAA finishes. When you spend $21 million more, you'd better rank higher. Ah, a moral victory? Is that what that is? Is that making an excuse for the difference in the rankings? If you're going to write an article re-ripping Lee Todd's ignorant statement, I'd suggest you at least be ahead of them in athletic dept. rankings. Just my 2 cents. How can Mr. Crawford rank ahead of UK? He's a newspaper writer, not an athlete, and not affiliated with UofL.
May 10, 200719 yr Only thanks to the womens Rifle team's fourth place finish which got UK the same number of points as a men's final four apperance. Louisville doesn't have a womens rifle team. Otherwise Louisville would have been about four slots ahead of UK. FWIW. How does this work? I'm interested in how the rankings work but honestly don't know how. Can you explain?
May 10, 200719 yr How does this work? I'm interested in how the rankings work but honestly don't know how. Can you explain? There are a list of college sports that they choose from and schools recieve points based on where they finish. So if you have a womens rifle team that was fourth out of 50 schools or a final four team in mens basketball out of 256 teams they both get 80 points for a fourth place finish. scoring for sears cup link Basically alot of schools don't have water polo, fencing, rifle teams, gymnastics and other programs. If they did they could count those finishes.
May 10, 200719 yr Was it a DUMB statement? Sure. Ignorant. However, this reporter is using the Sears Cup rankings as defense, and good or bad, UK is winning in those. Had he simply hung his hat on the statment is dumb and UK football is not nearly at the level of UL football, I'd have stayed out of this thread. Any excuse given has reason for UL's shortfall to UK in those rankings smells an awful lot like the type of "moral victory" UL fans are always beating UK fans over the head with. The statement was dumb, and frankly, for a man of his stature, horribly unprofessional. He's not a coach and should stay out of the quote business. Again I don't like using the Sears Cup either, and if that was the entire crucx and point of the article it would be poor. But I think that Eric Crawford's point is that with a budget that is 21 million less than UK Louisville is competing on the same level, yet Todd says Louisville overmarkets and underperforms. Again without a top four finish in Womens rifle, Louisville would be ahead of UK in the Sears Cup, and as it stands they are still within 10 with the Lady Cats rifle team, unless the womens rifle team is worth 21 million dollars, then Crawford has a point in using the stats to show that Todds comments were at least a poor choice of words. The Sears cup is another separate topic and it is a joke anyway you cut it, the fact is that Florida is the top school in athletics right now winning the two biggest college sport in the same year. That is my opinion.
May 10, 200719 yr Ram95, again, I concur the statement was DUMB, STUPID, UNFOUNDED, NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, UNPROFESSIONAL (need I go on?)...etc. It isn't UK's fault that UL can't / doesn't raise as much money, so whether they are doing "nearly" as well on less money or not...they aren't doing as well in all sports (using the criteria we all agreed is flawed).
May 10, 200719 yr Ram95, again, I concur the statement was DUMB, STUPID, UNFOUNDED, NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, UNPROFESSIONAL (need I go on?)...etc. It isn't UK's fault that UL can't / doesn't raise as much money, so whether they are doing "nearly" as well on less money or not...they aren't doing as well in all sports (using the criteria we all agreed is flawed). No it is not UK's fault that they have more money, but it is not because Louisville is lacking in fund raiseing either. Louisville leads the nation in Basketball revenue, that is not because Louisville has more basketball fans, there are simply more UK fans than Louisville fans, but Louisville spends that money more effectively to produce more revenue. The idea is that Louisville does very well with the funding it does have, and raises more money per fan then UK does. There is no way that Louisville has the fan base and resources that UK has, and as such it does not make sense to pay for fencing and women's rifle teams at Louisville that Louisville doesn't have the fan base to support. Nothing against UK in that, UK is the state university and has the state funding and fan funding to have those teams and that is GREAT. But when you look at how close Louisville is without those resources, it does underscore why Todds comments are in your words "DUMB, STUPID, UNFOUNDED, NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, UNPROFESSIONAL " Crawford never said Louisville is better than UK, what he said is that Louisville is doing very well, and that the impression that UK president Lee Todd was trying to reinforce that Louisville was making a big deal out of little accomplishment, is not true. Again all due respect to UK sports they have great facilities, and programs and it is awesome that they can host all those programs that they do and accomplish at such a high level. All I am saying is that Louisville does a remarkable job with the size market and fan base it has, and that for even a land grant State school with Kentucky's following and funding, Louisville is a program that should be respected for it's own accomplishments. And I think we can all agree that UK has a great athletic department, but Louisville can hold it's own against the Cats on the athletic field and in some sports dominate.
May 11, 200719 yr No it is not UK's fault that they have more money, but it is not because Louisville is lacking in fund raiseing either. Louisville leads the nation in Basketball revenue, that is not because Louisville has more basketball fans, there are simply more UK fans than Louisville fans, but Louisville spends that money more effectively to produce more revenue. The idea is that Louisville does very well with the funding it does have, and raises more money per fan then UK does. There is no way that Louisville has the fan base and resources that UK has, and as such it does not make sense to pay for fencing and women's rifle teams at Louisville that Louisville doesn't have the fan base to support. Nothing against UK in that, UK is the state university and has the state funding and fan funding to have those teams and that is GREAT. But when you look at how close Louisville is without those resources, it does underscore why Todds comments are in your words "DUMB, STUPID, UNFOUNDED, NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, UNPROFESSIONAL " Crawford never said Louisville is better than UK, what he said is that Louisville is doing very well, and that the impression that UK president Lee Todd was trying to reinforce that Louisville was making a big deal out of little accomplishment, is not true. Again all due respect to UK sports they have great facilities, and programs and it is awesome that they can host all those programs that they do and accomplish at such a high level. All I am saying is that Louisville does a remarkable job with the size market and fan base it has, and that for even a land grant State school with Kentucky's following and funding, Louisville is a program that should be respected for it's own accomplishments. And I think we can all agree that UK has a great athletic department, but Louisville can hold it's own against the Cats on the athletic field and in some sports dominate. Louisville does a good job, but its like you guys are saying that hey we don't have the funds or resources and we are only 11 spots under UK in an unfair playing field. I understand the point Crawford was trying to make, but bringing up the Sears standings is just plain silly. I would bring up the fact that UL does a good job in sports, they have a better football program and are better in some of the olympic sports and leave it at that while disputing Todd's comments.
May 11, 200719 yr I guess big brother will have to remind lil' bro who is still the boss. I hope the little guy enjoyed their brief chance to get close to even...now it is gone.
May 12, 200719 yr Louisville does a good job, but its like you guys are saying that hey we don't have the funds or resources and we are only 11 spots under UK in an unfair playing field. I understand the point Crawford was trying to make, but bringing up the Sears standings is just plain silly. I would bring up the fact that UL does a good job in sports, they have a better football program and are better in some of the olympic sports and leave it at that while disputing Todd's comments. No that is not at all what I am saying. I am quite simply saying that: UK is the State Flagship University FACT UK gets more funding than Louisville FACT UK has more fans than Louisville FACT UK has an operating budget of 21 million more than Louisville FACT And dispite these facts Louisville is playing extremely close to UK in the standings, and in fact if it weren't for the fact that UK's Women's Rifle team was not awesome Louisville would be ahead of UK in the Sears cup. That would suggest that Lee Todds comments about overmarketing and underproducing are hypocritical. Crawford used the Sears cup to illustrate his point, not to say that UK has some unfair advantage over Louisville but that Louisville is doing well and the label Todd threw out doesn't apply. Again, the Sears Cup is worthless in my opinion. But since that is the ONLY standard out there that gauges athletic departments and the ratings do support the fact that Louisville is competeing on the same level as UK with a budget 21 million less than UK, it does in fact support Crawford's point that Todd was wrong. That is it, no crying about less funds. Kentucky and Louisville are Top programs and there is enough funds to compete on that level for both programs. Louisville just does it more cost effective.
May 12, 200719 yr I guess big brother will have to remind lil' bro who is still the boss. I hope the little guy enjoyed their brief chance to get close to even...now it is gone. Bring it!:fire:
May 12, 200719 yr No that is not at all what I am saying. I am quite simply saying that: UK is the State Flagship University FACT UK gets more funding than Louisville FACT UK has more fans than Louisville FACT UK has an operating budget of 21 million more than Louisville FACT And dispite these facts Louisville is playing extremely close to UK in the standings, and in fact if it weren't for the fact that UK's Women's Rifle team was not awesome Louisville would be ahead of UK in the Sears cup. That would suggest that Lee Todds comments about overmarketing and underproducing are hypocritical. Crawford used the Sears cup to illustrate his point, not to say that UK has some unfair advantage over Louisville but that Louisville is doing well and the label Todd threw out doesn't apply. Again, the Sears Cup is worthless in my opinion. But since that is the ONLY standard out there that gauges athletic departments and the ratings do support the fact that Louisville is competeing on the same level as UK with a budget 21 million less than UK, it does in fact support Crawford's point that Todd was wrong. That is it, no crying about less funds. Kentucky and Louisville are Top programs and there is enough funds to compete on that level for both programs. Louisville just does it more cost effective. Louisville is getting beat by 11 spots to Kentucky in the Sears Cup: FACT If you think the Sears Cup is worthless then that part of the article is absolutely worthless. That is what I am saying. I agree that Todd's comments were not very smart. All I am saying is that the whole Sears cup argument is stupid.
May 12, 200719 yr If Todd was speaking mainly about football and not the athletic department as a whole and he made these comments before last season then stupid or not was he really that far off. Sure now he looks pretty stupid after the awesome season UofL had but before this past season UofL fans were hyping the football program up to be a "national power" as some put it. They fell pretty short of the hype until this past season. I don't agree with what Todd said or at least don't agree that he should have said it but was he really wrong? I don't know, maybe...maybe not.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.