January 31, 200818 yr UK will be the bigger more physical team on both sides of the ball and will win because of that! Just like UL did a couple of years ago.
January 31, 200818 yr Author Geez, you guys are hilarious.....Why does it seem that rookies have to get torched every new year? Hunter Cantwell 2005 - Oregon State - 3/3 - 60 yards - 1 td Syracuse - 3/5 - 66 yards UConn (Brohm was injured) - 16/25 - 271 yards - 1 td VPI - 15/37 - 216 yards - 3 tds (all the while under duress for most of the game) 2006 - Temple - 5/6 - 52 yards UM (Brohm was hurt) - 3/4 - 113 yards, 1 td KState - 18/26 - 173 yards - 1 td MTSU - 17/32 - 340 yards - 3 td He is seasoned and ready. VPI? Whose that? Mtsu? Congrats. That shows alot. All i'm sayin is IMO he hasn't proven anything. I'm not saying he's bad I just don't know what UL fans are getting all excited about. You'll see, if Pulley gets the job, just like Cantwell, has alot of potential also.
January 31, 200818 yr U of L should and will be favored. UK loses it's QB, two best WR's, best RB (although I think most people familiar with the team would admit that RB shouldn't be a concern for this team) and TE...from a team that relied heavily on it's offense to win games for the past two seasons in which they went 16-10 combined. U of L was 12-1 and 6-6 in the past two seasons. In the "horrific, abysmal" 2007 they were one blown coverage away from beating the (as some posters suggest) "far superior" Kentucky squad. With a highly thought of QB stepping in for Brohm, obvious talent elsewhere, and year two of the Kragthorpe era, it's not hard to draw this conclusion... 1. U of L almost beat UK in their disappointing '07 season... 2. UK has a lot of questions to answer with all of the offensive talent they have to replace... 3. U of L should be better, how much is the question. Add it all up, with the game being in Louisville, they want revenge, they'll be eager to redeem themselves from 2007, it's the first game of the season and UK will be breaking in a lot of new starters...U of L should be favored and I expect they will. These past two seasons have been great for UK football and they have us heading in the right direction, but let's not get overzealous. The same people who ridicule U of L fans for jumping the gun and proclaiming their team a national power after a handful of good to great seasons, are doing no less by proclaiming that UK has trampled the U of L football program under foot after two 8-5 seasons and one nail-biting victory in Commonwealth Stadium. Let's try to keep things in perspective.
January 31, 200818 yr U of L should and will be favored. UK loses it's QB, two best WR's, best RB (although I think most people familiar with the team would admit that RB shouldn't be a concern for this team) and TE...from a team that relied heavily on it's offense to win games for the past two seasons in which they went 16-10 combined. U of L was 12-1 and 6-6 in the past two seasons. In the "horrific, abysmal" 2007 they were one blown coverage away from beating the (as some posters suggest) "far superior" Kentucky squad. With a highly thought of QB stepping in for Brohm, obvious talent elsewhere, and year two of the Kragthorpe era, it's not hard to draw this conclusion... 1. U of L almost beat UK in their disappointing '07 season... 2. UK has a lot of questions to answer with all of the offensive talent they have to replace... 3. U of L should be better, how much is the question. Add it all up, with the game being in Louisville, they want revenge, they'll be eager to redeem themselves from 2007, it's the first game of the season and UK will be breaking in a lot of new starters...U of L should be favored and I expect they will. These past two seasons have been great for UK football and they have us heading in the right direction, but let's not get overzealous. The same people who ridicule U of L fans for jumping the gun and proclaiming their team a national power after a handful of good to great seasons, are doing no less by proclaiming that UK has trampled the U of L football program under foot after two 8-5 seasons and one nail-biting victory in Commonwealth Stadium. Let's try to keep things in perspective. Can we make this a Sticky at the top of the forum? :thumb:
January 31, 200818 yr U of L should and will be favored. UK loses it's QB, two best WR's, best RB (although I think most people familiar with the team would admit that RB shouldn't be a concern for this team) and TE...from a team that relied heavily on it's offense to win games for the past two seasons in which they went 16-10 combined. U of L was 12-1 and 6-6 in the past two seasons. In the "horrific, abysmal" 2007 they were one blown coverage away from beating the (as some posters suggest) "far superior" Kentucky squad. With a highly thought of QB stepping in for Brohm, obvious talent elsewhere, and year two of the Kragthorpe era, it's not hard to draw this conclusion... 1. U of L almost beat UK in their disappointing '07 season... 2. UK has a lot of questions to answer with all of the offensive talent they have to replace... 3. U of L should be better, how much is the question. Add it all up, with the game being in Louisville, they want revenge, they'll be eager to redeem themselves from 2007, it's the first game of the season and UK will be breaking in a lot of new starters...U of L should be favored and I expect they will. These past two seasons have been great for UK football and they have us heading in the right direction, but let's not get overzealous. The same people who ridicule U of L fans for jumping the gun and proclaiming their team a national power after a handful of good to great seasons, are doing no less by proclaiming that UK has trampled the U of L football program under foot after two 8-5 seasons and one nail-biting victory in Commonwealth Stadium. Let's try to keep things in perspective. Excellent post, 5wide. Bravo. :thumb:
January 31, 200818 yr U of L should and will be favored. UK loses it's QB, two best WR's, best RB (although I think most people familiar with the team would admit that RB shouldn't be a concern for this team) and TE...from a team that relied heavily on it's offense to win games for the past two seasons in which they went 16-10 combined. U of L was 12-1 and 6-6 in the past two seasons. In the "horrific, abysmal" 2007 they were one blown coverage away from beating the (as some posters suggest) "far superior" Kentucky squad. With a highly thought of QB stepping in for Brohm, obvious talent elsewhere, and year two of the Kragthorpe era, it's not hard to draw this conclusion... 1. U of L almost beat UK in their disappointing '07 season... 2. UK has a lot of questions to answer with all of the offensive talent they have to replace... 3. U of L should be better, how much is the question. Add it all up, with the game being in Louisville, they want revenge, they'll be eager to redeem themselves from 2007, it's the first game of the season and UK will be breaking in a lot of new starters...U of L should be favored and I expect they will. These past two seasons have been great for UK football and they have us heading in the right direction, but let's not get overzealous. The same people who ridicule U of L fans for jumping the gun and proclaiming their team a national power after a handful of good to great seasons, are doing no less by proclaiming that UK has trampled the U of L football program under foot after two 8-5 seasons and one nail-biting victory in Commonwealth Stadium. Let's try to keep things in perspective. I totally disagree with points 1,2,&3.
January 31, 200818 yr I totally disagree with points 1,2,&3. How exactly can you disagree with #1 that UL was winning in the waning seconds of the game, which would be almost beating them. That's like disagreeing that St.X was winning in the waning minutes of the 2007 state game. If we're going by that logic, then St.X didn't almost win the title at all in '07. :banana:
January 31, 200818 yr How exactly can you disagree with #1 that UL was winning in the waning seconds of the game, which would be almost beating them. That's like disagreeing that St.X was winning in the waning minutes of the 2007 state game. If we're going by that logic, then St.X didn't almost win the title at all in '07. :banana: He doesn't know...:lol:
February 1, 200818 yr I totally disagree with points 1,2,&3. 1 & 2 certainly are correct......3 is a judgement call.
February 1, 200818 yr UK barely beat LSU, i guess thats not a respectable win either. Where in the world has anyone said it wasn't a respectable win? However you want to spin it it was far from the dominating win that some on the UK side are acting like it was.
February 1, 200818 yr U of L should and will be favored. UK loses it's QB, two best WR's, best RB (although I think most people familiar with the team would admit that RB shouldn't be a concern for this team) and TE...from a team that relied heavily on it's offense to win games for the past two seasons in which they went 16-10 combined. U of L was 12-1 and 6-6 in the past two seasons. In the "horrific, abysmal" 2007 they were one blown coverage away from beating the (as some posters suggest) "far superior" Kentucky squad. With a highly thought of QB stepping in for Brohm, obvious talent elsewhere, and year two of the Kragthorpe era, it's not hard to draw this conclusion... 1. U of L almost beat UK in their disappointing '07 season... 2. UK has a lot of questions to answer with all of the offensive talent they have to replace... 3. U of L should be better, how much is the question. Add it all up, with the game being in Louisville, they want revenge, they'll be eager to redeem themselves from 2007, it's the first game of the season and UK will be breaking in a lot of new starters...U of L should be favored and I expect they will. These past two seasons have been great for UK football and they have us heading in the right direction, but let's not get overzealous. The same people who ridicule U of L fans for jumping the gun and proclaiming their team a national power after a handful of good to great seasons, are doing no less by proclaiming that UK has trampled the U of L football program under foot after two 8-5 seasons and one nail-biting victory in Commonwealth Stadium. Let's try to keep things in perspective. :thumb: Good post and you make some very good, sensible points. I seem to remember a U.L. team from a year ago that was favored and should have been. We all witnessed what happened with that.
February 1, 200818 yr 1 & 2 certainly are correct......3 is a judgement call. 1. UL played their very best game of the year against UK IMO. 2. UK returns as much or more on offense this year than last IMO. 3. UL does not return as much talent as they had last year IMO. That's my take on it with blue colored glasses on and I admit it!
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.