May 21, 200719 yr Brohm's career stats against UK: 44/65 (68%) 472 Yds, 1 TD, 0 INT, 2 Rushing TD Not spectacular, but certainly efficient. And 3-0 is a nice number, too. Against UofL, Kentucky has played a defense that was fundamentally based on keeping the plays in front. UK made a determination that they would let stuff go underneath, but weren't going to get beat by the long ball. So Louisville concentrated on pounding UK on the ground in Petrino's tenure, and Brohm's presence is what gave the opportunity to run for the running backs (and not just Bush, I might add.) Quick note: UK has totaled in the past three years 135 yards rushing against UofL. Digest that stat for a second. 66 yards, 47 yards, 22 yards. Only one rushing TD. UofL, in those years, has racked up 833 yards on the ground against UK (261, 209, and 363.) They scored 12 times rushing. If you think the difference in those pictures doesn't have anything to do with the QBs running the show (both in their check down and audible work at the line, and in the threat they pose in the backfield,) well, you and I are just going to have to disagree. Wow.
May 21, 200719 yr Nice stats for those who live in the past...I bet the coach won't make a difference either.
May 21, 200719 yr Author Here is my argument with you. You talked about the outcome of ballgames and the running game being so successful and say that it has a lot to do with the 2 QBs. I dont think you can compare Woodson and Brohm in that area against each other because UL has so much better personnel. There is only so much play calling or audibling can do when you are out-manned. I am not saying Woodson is better than Brohm at that by no means, its just not a fair comparison. I thought UK fans were pretty high on their running backs? How can you use that argument, but at the same time UK fans are talking about the talent gap not being significant?
May 21, 200719 yr I thought UK fans were pretty high on their running backs? How can you use that argument, but at the same time UK fans are talking about the talent gap not being significant? I didnt see UK as being as talented as UL last year. The biggest difference IMO was the lines on both sides of the ball. I didnt think it was comparable. Actually when it comes to skill positions UK did not have the depth UL had, but they stacked up pretty well with them otherwise. And also UK's defense never was very strong, but they did get better as the year went along.
May 22, 200719 yr I wish Fletch would dig up some of the optomism of the UK faithful from last year...especially the BACKFIELD comparisons.
May 22, 200719 yr I wish Fletch would dig up some of the optomism of the UK faithful from last year...especially the BACKFIELD comparisons. Lucky for them, it's probably too far back, and not even on the site anymore.
May 22, 200719 yr Author I wish Fletch would dig up some of the optomism of the UK faithful from last year...especially the BACKFIELD comparisons.Can't... the mods (or the site automatically, I obviously am but an ignorant pleb so I don't know) cleaned everything out from 9/24 back.
May 22, 200719 yr I had a few post saying UK RB's were better, That I did.....How wrong was I? You weren't right... :lol:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.