Louisville Football in the SEC

[RADIO GUY]

Just wondering what the thoughts are if Louisville were playing on the SEC, where would they stack up against the better teams in the SEC. This thread might have been on here before, but I am not going to look for it. I am looking for how and why, not just blank statements of "they would rule" etc.

[Mr. No Name]

Just wondering what the thoughts are if Louisville were playing on the SEC, where would they stack up against the better teams in the SEC. This thread might have been on here before, but I am not going to look for it. I am looking for how and why, not just blank statements of "they would rule" etc.

 

Not that Iknow of. :jump:

[SLINK]

Louisville would do pretty good. Last year, if they had played UK's schedule, I think they would have been 10-2 with losses to LSU and Florida.

[UKMustangFan]

Louisville would do pretty good. Last year, if they had played UK's schedule, I think they would have been 10-2 with losses to LSU and Florida.

 

 

I agree....They would compete year in, year out, but I still think they'd be below the likes of Florida, LSU, and Auburn. More on the level with the Georgia and Tennessee's of the conference.

[The Red Rambler]

I think they would do well. They have tons of team speed which a "mst have" in the SEC, especially on defense. They might have a tough time on the road. It seems like the few games the 'Ville has lost in the last few seasons have been on the road. Playing on the road in the SEC is extremely tough but after a season or two I think they could adjust over time.

 

I think they would more than hold their own. If they were in the SEC West they could compete yearly for that Division Title.

[RADIO GUY]

It is interesting to hear other takes on this, as I believe that yes Louisville would be one of the better teams in the SEC and would make the conference even tougher than it already is. So maybe if they were in the SEC, they would fit just about where they are in the Big East (talent wise and record wise)?

[goherd96]

Now, I believe they would be a competitive SEC team. Not sure if they'd be top tier every year, but probably along the lines of Tennessee of Georgia, up for a couple of years...middle of the pack for a couple. Now, if they had been a member of the SEC for as long as UK, I'm not sure they would be doing any better as building a program in this league seems to be nigh on impossible.

[Original Rookie]

They would be very good still. The biggest difference is that UL would have to play their best ball week in and week out instead of having only a few games to worry about.

[just 4 fun]

UL would have done well the past couple of years and would again this year...I don't think they would do as well as they're currently doing in the Big East and would be a middle of the road team, similar to what Arkansas & Alabama have been, in most years... I do believe they would have some better years that they would compete for a title, every now and then...

[Mayfieldsportsfan]

IMO if they had UK's schedule they would have been 11-1 with a loss to Florida. I really think that Louisville has the team to be successful in the SEC.

[TonyDanza]

I think years ago UL would have been bottom of the list. If they switched today....top three!!

[bugatti]

They would be very good still. The biggest difference is that UL would have to play their best ball week in and week out instead of having only a few games to worry about.

Exactly.... :thumb: No blasting on UL's schedule last year, but they, imo, really only had two games last season when they had to really bring it to win... those games came in successive weeks which was really difficult to do, and ultimately lost one of those games. You are almost guaranteed a stretch of teams of those caliber in back-to-back weeks in the SEC (or three weeks in a row in some cases - see UF last season).

 

UL has the kids and coaching to compete and do well, but the talent gap would be a lot more narrow than what it is in the Big East.

[DADDY CAT]

They would be a Georgia type team. In the hunt most years, Enough to win it now and then, but those losses that you get with LSU, Florida, TN, Auburn and what looks to be soon Alabama, would keep them middle of the pack almost every year.

[Toothpick]

They would compete the last few but would have been at or near the bottom prior to their recent success. Had they been in the league last year it would have been interesting to see how they would have done, as someone mentioned, having a stretch or even a couple stretches where you have to bring your best shot in back to back and maybe even back weeks is murderous year after year that is the SEC. I dont think over the long haul UL would be a top team and would likely not be even a middle of the road team. UL is in the midist of a great run but Louisville is in a difficult place to get top rate recruits year after year and only by establishing the program as a traditional power will that change and that takes years of success before that happens. The program is not to that level as of now as is evident from coaches using UL for a stepping stone to those traditional powers. One wrong coaching hire by UL could set the program back years.

[westsider]

The week-to-week grind of the SEC is something to which Louisville would have to adjust, but they have the talent to get it done. They're certainly an upper-half, maybe even upper-tier, program at this point.