Listen I am not going to argue with you about Florida, but I have news for you: outside of the state of Kentucky, not many could name more than ten players on Kentucky's roster. They simply aren't relevant in football, it's extremely impressive for the Cats to have made four straight bowl appearances and win three of them, with a fourth possible. I don't know why you are disillusioned into thinking that Kentucky is a sleeping giant, that is capable of winning 10 games year in year out, but no one-and I mean NO ONE outside of UK fans think that way. Heck, most Kentucky football fans are realistic and don't think they can compete for a league title. The greatest season in 30 years was two years ago, and they won 8 games. Come on, get real, Kentucky isn't a relevant team in the grand scheme of things. That's not a slight on Kentucky, it's simply not a prime spot for talent, so they can't depend on KY kids, and they can't compete with Florida, Ohio State, Miami, Georgia, Alabama, USC, LSU, and Texas for kids, so they have to take 2 and 3 stars. No team is going to win the SEC with that caliber of players, it's just too strong of a league.

 

 

Heck, I'm an actual UK fan and I couldn't name more than 10 players on the football team :lol:

Heck, I'm an actual UK fan and I couldn't name more than 10 players on the football team :lol:

 

It happens. :lol:

Listen I am not going to argue with you about Florida, but I have news for you: outside of the state of Kentucky, not many could name more than ten players on Kentucky's roster. They simply aren't relevant in football, it's extremely impressive for the Cats to have made four straight bowl appearances and win three of them, with a fourth possible. I don't know why you are disillusioned into thinking that Kentucky is a sleeping giant, that is capable of winning 10 games year in year out, but no one-and I mean NO ONE outside of UK fans think that way. Heck, most Kentucky football fans are realistic and don't think they can compete for a league title. The greatest season in 30 years was two years ago, and they won 8 games. Come on, get real, Kentucky isn't a relevant team in the grand scheme of things. That's not a slight on Kentucky, it's simply not a prime spot for talent, so they can't depend on KY kids, and they can't compete with Florida, Ohio State, Miami, Georgia, Alabama, USC, LSU, and Texas for kids, so they have to take 2 and 3 stars. No team is going to win the SEC with that caliber of players, it's just too strong of a league.

 

Please show me where I said UK could win 10 games year in and year out. Please show me this? I said UK could get to the level of where they can actually compete with those top teams, and every so often make a run for it. Teams like UC, TCU, Boise, Utah have put together teams in the last few years. That if they were in the SEC yeah they might not have gone undefeated. But they definitely would have been playing with the best of the SEC and winning some of them. Possibly only losing one or two. So if those teams could get to a level, where they would actually do well in the SEC and definitely better than UK. Then why is it so crazy to think that UK could do that? I mean for those programs to get to those levels, it took a great coach coming in and getting them to take that next step. Shoot even our little brother in the State in UL. Had put together teams when Petrino was here that would have done very well in the SEC. I mean all these teams have put good enough teams together that would have done better than what we have and would have at least competed for the SEC and definitely win more than 3. So why am I crazy for thinking that UK couldn't do the same with the right coach in place once Brooks retires.

You seem to think that I said this team should have competed for the SEC crown this year. Did I ever say that no I didn't. Have I ever said what Brooks has done here is bad? Have I said get rid of him? Did I see that this season was a disappointment? No I did not. I said this year was an average year, it was not a great accomplishment, but it was not horrible either. It was an average year, the same as it has been the last few years. You talk about this team just being bad, but at this current direction we are in. Do you see this team getting much better than what we have now? I know I dont see that, so I see a lot of this same 3 win a year in the SEC continuing. How exactly is that going in the right direction to possibly competiting for the SEC crown. I know "common sense" tells me that just getting 3 SEC wins a year does not mean you are working your way up to possibly competing for the SEC.

 

You keep talking about well they are in the SEC. Well you are right they are in the SEC. Which also could be used as a recruiting advantage over teams like UC, TCU, Boise, etc. Or I guess I should say use to be able to be used as advantage before those teams did what they had to do to take the next step. Yeah UC has greater Cincinnati, but I don't know if you realized this but Lexington is only an hour away from Cincinnati. You talked about Florida and teams like that having their pipeline to choose from. Well from your statement, you really can't get kids if they are over an hour away from you.

 

If you looked at what I said, I even said if UK was at the same place UC, TCU and them were at they might not be able to undefeated like they have since UK is in the SEC. However they could go through the SEC in some years with just 1 or 2 SEC losses, which could land them in the SEC Championship game. I have never said that UK would be able to go undefeated like those teams have. However I do believe UK could get as good as those teams have, and that would mean they could do better than what they currently do in the SEC. TCU if they were in the SEC this year, definitely does better than UK and maybe only 2 losses in the SEC if that. UC if they were in the SEC definitely does better than UK, and once again maybe only 2 losses if that. Same could be said for Boise, they might get 3 SEC losses but still would have done better than UK. Then you have Utah who has put together teams within the last 5 years, who also would have done better in the SEC than UK has.

 

So your telling me I am crazy for thinking that UK couldn't do what those teams did, and be as good as those teams are? UK very well could get to that level that those teams are at. Instead of being undefeated like those teams, UK might have one or two losses since they were in the SEC. However they definitely could get to that level. So common sense tells me you are wrong for thinking that they couldn't. Just like with those programs, it does take the right coach to come in and get that team to the next step. Which I think could happen, if UK looked around after Brooks retires. I really don't see why it is so crazy to think that couldn't happen. If those teams could put together teams like that, then no reason why UK couldn't with the right coach in place like those teams have.

 

Read what Spikes said. That's about as good as I could have said it. Enjoy your dreams man, we should all be sold bold to dream like that. Maybe Ed Reed and Andre Johnson will find out they still have some eligibility and come back and play for the Canes next year too.:idunno:

 

I see UK having a better team next season that this season, and probably an even better one the year after that. What did you expect this season?

 

I don't care if you want to dream big, I just think that you should realize that you are most likely in the minority and that has to be okay. I think that you think a good coach could come in and just snap his fingers and fix the program. Having a little incite into an established program, I can tell you it's not so. Florida, USC, Ohio State are not great just because they have had great coaching and for some reason you severely overrate that.

 

Blue and white sunglasses or not, UK is always going to be at this level or worse. They can have a few seasons as an outlier, but 6-8 wins is a good season at UK and always will be.:thumb:

You seem to think that I said this team should have competed for the SEC crown this year. Did I ever say that no I didn't. Have I ever said what Brooks has done here is bad? Have I said get rid of him? Did I see that this season was a disappointment? No I did not. I said this year was an average year, it was not a great accomplishment, but it was not horrible either. It was an average year, the same as it has been the last few years. You talk about this team just being bad, but at this current direction we are in. Do you see this team getting much better than what we have now? I know I dont see that, so I see a lot of this same 3 win a year in the SEC continuing. How exactly is that going in the right direction to possibly competiting for the SEC crown. I know "common sense" tells me that just getting 3 SEC wins a year does not mean you are working your way up to possibly competing for the SEC.

 

You keep talking about well they are in the SEC. Well you are right they are in the SEC. Which also could be used as a recruiting advantage over teams like UC, TCU, Boise, etc. Or I guess I should say use to be able to be used as advantage before those teams did what they had to do to take the next step. Yeah UC has greater Cincinnati, but I don't know if you realized this but Lexington is only an hour away from Cincinnati. You talked about Florida and teams like that having their pipeline to choose from. Well from your statement, you really can't get kids if they are over an hour away from you.

 

If you looked at what I said, I even said if UK was at the same place UC, TCU and them were at they might not be able to undefeated like they have since UK is in the SEC. However they could go through the SEC in some years with just 1 or 2 SEC losses, which could land them in the SEC Championship game. I have never said that UK would be able to go undefeated like those teams have. However I do believe UK could get as good as those teams have, and that would mean they could do better than what they currently do in the SEC. TCU if they were in the SEC this year, definitely does better than UK and maybe only 2 losses in the SEC if that. UC if they were in the SEC definitely does better than UK, and once again maybe only 2 losses if that. Same could be said for Boise, they might get 3 SEC losses but still would have done better than UK. Then you have Utah who has put together teams within the last 5 years, who also would have done better in the SEC than UK has.

 

So your telling me I am crazy for thinking that UK couldn't do what those teams did, and be as good as those teams are? UK very well could get to that level that those teams are at. Instead of being undefeated like those teams, UK might have one or two losses since they were in the SEC. However they definitely could get to that level. So common sense tells me you are wrong for thinking that they couldn't. Just like with those programs, it does take the right coach to come in and get that team to the next step. Which I think could happen, if UK looked around after Brooks retires. I really don't see why it is so crazy to think that couldn't happen. If those teams could put together teams like that, then no reason why UK couldn't with the right coach in place like those teams have.

 

He is telling you that. All these teams you are mentioning are not in the SEC. They are middle of the pack tops in the SEC at their best. Yeah one might beat an SEC team in a bowl, but they're not staring down the barrel at Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, and Tenn every year like UK is. That my friend is big time college football.

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by malachicrunch

Please show me where I said UK could win 10 games year in and year out. Please show me this? I said UK could get to the level of where they can actually compete with those top teams, and every so often make a run for it. Teams like UC, TCU, Boise, Utah have put together teams in the last few years. That if they were in the SEC yeah they might not have gone undefeated. But they definitely would have been playing with the best of the SEC and winning some of them. Possibly only losing one or two. So if those teams could get to a level, where they would actually do well in the SEC and definitely better than UK. Then why is it so crazy to think that UK could do that? I mean for those programs to get to those levels, it took a great coach coming in and getting them to take that next step. Shoot even our little brother in the State in UL. Had put together teams when Petrino was here that would have done very well in the SEC. I mean all these teams have put good enough teams together that would have done better than what we have and would have at least competed for the SEC and definitely win more than 3. So why am I crazy for thinking that UK couldn't do the same with the right coach in place once Brooks retires.

 

 

FC, look at UNC. They have one of the better coaches in the country, an easier conference and better players to recruit. On top of that their coach is known as one of the best at evaluating talent and developing it. If Butch Davis can't make UNC competitive for the ACC crown on an annual basis, not many could do it at UK. That's the comparison, get the Boise, UC, etc. garbage out of here IMO, they don't compare and have totally different situations.

Please show me where I said UK could win 10 games year in and year out. Please show me this? I said UK could get to the level of where they can actually compete with those top teams, and every so often make a run for it. Teams like UC, TCU, Boise, Utah have put together teams in the last few years. That if they were in the SEC yeah they might not have gone undefeated. But they definitely would have been playing with the best of the SEC and winning some of them. Possibly only losing one or two. So if those teams could get to a level, where they would actually do well in the SEC and definitely better than UK. Then why is it so crazy to think that UK could do that? I mean for those programs to get to those levels, it took a great coach coming in and getting them to take that next step. Shoot even our little brother in the State in UL. Had put together teams when Petrino was here that would have done very well in the SEC. I mean all these teams have put good enough teams together that would have done better than what we have and would have at least competed for the SEC and definitely win more than 3. So why am I crazy for thinking that UK couldn't do the same with the right coach in place once Brooks retires.

 

You never have, but by your comments you act like winning seven games is disappointment. Do you remember when Kentucky wasn't making bowl games? And the main difference between Boise State, Utah, TCU, and Cincinnati and Kentucky is that those schools have had great foundations built for them. Dan Hawkins left Petersen with a great base to start from, Gary Patterson has been at TCU long enough to build his base, Whittingham had Urban Meyer build that program, and D'Antonio left UC with some decent talent as well. Rich Brooks doesn't have that luxury, and it is going to be extremely hard for them-UK, to build themselves up to the level of Utah, UC, Boise, or TCU, because of their location. They aren't in a prime location to get home-grown talent, and as I've said before that causes them to have to leave their state and get lesser touted prospects from Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee. They simply don't have the tools to recruit nationally, there isn't a school in this country that is equally skilled in recruiting top talent in Basketball and Football.

 

7 wins for Kentucky, with a true freshman and Mike Hartline starting at quarterback is darn impressive. And can I ask you something? How many players at Kentucky apart from a healthy Lindley and Randall Cobb would start and get major minutes at another SEC school? Think about that for a second, Kentucky's talent level is on par with Vanderbilt, and yet they are still able to get to and win bowls.

Read what Spikes said. That's about as good as I could have said it. Enjoy your dreams man, we should all be sold bold to dream like that. Maybe Ed Reed and Andre Johnson will find out they still have some eligibility and come back and play for the Canes next year too.:idunno:

 

I see UK having a better team next season that this season, and probably an even better one the year after that. What did you expect this season?

 

I don't care if you want to dream big, I just think that you should realize that you are most likely in the minority and that has to be okay. I think that you think a good coach could come in and just snap his fingers and fix the program. Having a little incite into an established program, I can tell you it's not so. Florida, USC, Ohio State are not great just because they have had great coaching and for some reason you severely overrate that.

 

Blue and white sunglasses or not, UK is always going to be at this level or worse. They can have a few seasons as an outlier, but 6-8 wins is a good season at UK and always will be.:thumb:

 

FC, look at UNC. They have one of the better coaches in the country, an easier conference and better players to recruit. On top of that their coach is known as one of the best at evaluating talent and developing it. If Butch Davis can't make UNC competitive for the ACC crown on an annual basis, not many could do it at UK. That's the comparison, get the Boise, UC, etc. garbage out of here IMO, they don't compare and have totally different situations.

 

Where have I talked about OSU, USC, etc? The programs I have talked about have great coaches, and is purely the main reason why they have gotten to where they are at. You seem to think that I am saying UK could be like them and go undefeated, but where did I say that? I have even admitted if UK was able to put as good of teams together as they have. That they would probably lose a game or two. Which last time I checked only losing a game or two or even if it was three losses would be much better than the current pace we are at. Would they stay at that level the whole time no they wouldn't. It would be a thing that happens every so often when they put a really great team together. Then in the other years they would be a team that competes and might just be a .500 team in the conference. I have never said I think UK can be at the level of a Florida or a team like that because those teams stay close to the top every year. I do think UK could get to the level to where a UC, TCU is at, and every so often make that run for it. Then in the other years still at least be competitive and around .500 just like those teams would do if they were in the SEC every year.

 

Those programs I have mentioned are better programs than what we are right now. I don't know how anyone could argue that one. Those programs would do better than what we do in the conference right now. This UK program though very well with the right coach get to the level where those programs are at, that is not crazy at all and that is what I am saying. If UK can get to that level, they then would have a year like this where they would have been competiting for the SEC. Then the other years would probably be a .500 program. All this is better than what we are currently at right now. Which honestly I have no problem where we are at RIGHT NOW. Its just when I look in the future, in the current direction we are going. I don't see it getting much better than this, with how we are doing things. Especially just giving the job to Joker. Someone else IMO could be a guy that gets UK to take that next step to being an even more competitive team and every so often making a run for it. You are right that UK is never going to be a program that year in year out is going to be one of the best in the Nation. I know that, but this program can also be better than what it is eventually with the right people in place after Brooks retires.

 

I think we should just agree to disagree on this matter. This is now the second thread we have talked about this. Its obvious we have different opinions, and neither one of us are going to be able to change the other ones opinion. So the one thing we can agree on is we disagree and we should just leave it at that now.

You never have, but by your comments you act like winning seven games is disappointment. Do you remember when Kentucky wasn't making bowl games? And the main difference between Boise State, Utah, TCU, and Cincinnati and Kentucky is that those schools have had great foundations built for them. Dan Hawkins left Petersen with a great base to start from, Gary Patterson has been at TCU long enough to build his base, Whittingham had Urban Meyer build that program, and D'Antonio left UC with some decent talent as well. Rich Brooks doesn't have that luxury, and it is going to be extremely hard for them-UK, to build themselves up to the level of Utah, UC, Boise, or TCU, because of their location. They aren't in a prime location to get home-grown talent, and as I've said before that causes them to have to leave their state and get lesser touted prospects from Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee. They simply don't have the tools to recruit nationally, there isn't a school in this country that is equally skilled in recruiting top talent in Basketball and Football.

 

7 wins for Kentucky, with a true freshman and Mike Hartline starting at quarterback is darn impressive. And can I ask you something? How many players at Kentucky apart from a healthy Lindley and Randall Cobb would start and get major minutes at another SEC school? Think about that for a second, Kentucky's talent level is on par with Vanderbilt, and yet they are still able to get to and win bowls.

 

I have not said this season was a disappointment, however I just have not said that this season was a success like some other have tried to say. This was just the normal average year for us. Not great, but not bad just average.

 

Also you do realize the second part I bolded just supported my whole argument. You mention how coaches laid the foundation for the next coaches to be successful. Well I don't know if you have read much of what me and CatsCatsCats have talked about for the last week. But that is the examples I have used. John L. Smith at UL got that program going in the right direction. However it took Petrino to get them to take that next step. I don't think they do that under John L. UC under Danatonni was able to get the program in the right direction, but it took BK to get them to take that next step. Do you think they do that under D'antoni? I know I don't think they do at all. This is what led to me and him having all these discussions, because I think when Brooks does retire that UK would be in the same position as those schools. If you have noticed I keep saying when Brooks retires. I never say get rid of him, I think he should stay as long as he wants. He has done a great job, especially considering where it was when he took over. So your point about how other guys laid the foundation, is my whole argument here. When Brooks does retire, he would have laid a good foundation here. I just don't think that Joker would be the guy that could get this program to take that next step up to just where programs like UC, TCU and stuff are at now. Brooks is going to have a good foundation laid when he leaves, and I think UK could get some coach to come in who would be better than Joker and could get this program to go up to the next step. I mean UK would be a very attractive program, for coaches on their way up, and could get a coach who actually has experience being a head coach and running a program. That has been my whole point about this. Its because I don't like the direction this program is going in, knowing that Joker is taking over. When they really would be at a point with the right guy could take that next step up some. Hopefully Joker proves me wrong, since he will be the guy. I just think UK would be in a position when Brooks retires where they could get someone who would be even better for them. So thanks for basically backing up what I have been saying, even though you didn't realize it. :thumb:

Where have I talked about OSU, USC, etc? The programs I have talked about have great coaches, and is purely the main reason why they have gotten to where they are at. You seem to think that I am saying UK could be like them and go undefeated, but where did I say that? I have even admitted if UK was able to put as good of teams together as they have. That they would probably lose a game or two. Which last time I checked only losing a game or two or even if it was three losses would be much better than the current pace we are at. Would they stay at that level the whole time no they wouldn't. It would be a thing that happens every so often when they put a really great team together. Then in the other years they would be a team that competes and might just be a .500 team in the conference. I have never said I think UK can be at the level of a Florida or a team like that because those teams stay close to the top every year. I do think UK could get to the level to where a UC, TCU is at, and every so often make that run for it. Then in the other years still at least be competitive and around .500 just like those teams would do if they were in the SEC every year.

 

Those programs I have mentioned are better programs than what we are right now. I don't know how anyone could argue that one. Those programs would do better than what we do in the conference right now. This UK program though very well with the right coach get to the level where those programs are at, that is not crazy at all and that is what I am saying. If UK can get to that level, they then would have a year like this where they would have been competiting for the SEC. Then the other years would probably be a .500 program. All this is better than what we are currently at right now. Which honestly I have no problem where we are at RIGHT NOW. Its just when I look in the future, in the current direction we are going. I don't see it getting much better than this, with how we are doing things. Especially just giving the job to Joker. Someone else IMO could be a guy that gets UK to take that next step to being an even more competitive team and every so often making a run for it. You are right that UK is never going to be a program that year in year out is going to be one of the best in the Nation. I know that, but this program can also be better than what it is eventually with the right people in place after Brooks retires.

 

I think we should just agree to disagree on this matter. This is now the second thread we have talked about this. Its obvious we have different opinions, and neither one of us are going to be able to change the other ones opinion. So the one thing we can agree on is we disagree and we should just leave it at that now.

 

You overlook alot of factors IMO. Agreeing to disagree is the only thing that is left to do. Just don't tell me I'm wrong, when the evidence points elsewhere. Sure you can throw out Boise or whoever, but they are not in the SEC. Boise, UC, U of L are stepping stone jobs, UK is but is still more of like a dead-end job IMO. You don't go to UK to get noticed and move up in the coaching rankings. You do that at UC or U of L because it's easier to do.

 

But keep living the dream man, I wish that I could do the same.:thumb:

I have not said this season was a disappointment, however I just have not said that this season was a success like some other have tried to say. This was just the normal average year for us. Not great, but not bad just average.

 

Also you do realize the second part I bolded just supported my whole argument. You mention how coaches laid the foundation for the next coaches to be successful. Well I don't know if you have read much of what me and CatsCatsCats have talked about for the last week. But that is the examples I have used. John L. Smith at UL got that program going in the right direction. However it took Petrino to get them to take that next step. I don't think they do that under John L. UC under Danatonni was able to get the program in the right direction, but it took BK to get them to take that next step. Do you think they do that under D'antoni? I know I don't think they do at all. This is what led to me and him having all these discussions, because I think when Brooks does retire that UK would be in the same position as those schools. If you have noticed I keep saying when Brooks retires. I never say get rid of him, I think he should stay as long as he wants. He has done a great job, especially considering where it was when he took over. So your point about how other guys laid the foundation, is my whole argument here. When Brooks does retire, he would have laid a good foundation here. I just don't think that Joker would be the guy that could get this program to take that next step up to just where programs like UC, TCU and stuff are at now. Brooks is going to have a good foundation laid when he leaves, and I think UK could get some coach to come in who would be better than Joker and could get this program to go up to the next step. I mean UK would be a very attractive program, for coaches on their way up, and could get a coach who actually has experience being a head coach and running a program. That has been my whole point about this. Its because I don't like the direction this program is going in, knowing that Joker is taking over. When they really would be at a point with the right guy could take that next step up some. Hopefully Joker proves me wrong, since he will be the guy. I just think UK would be in a position when Brooks retires where they could get someone who would be even better for them. So thanks for basically backing up what I have been saying, even though you didn't realize it. :thumb:

 

Listen I'm going to take myself out of this argument, because I am not making my point with you apparently, but I have some news for you: Seven wins isn't average for Kentucky, it's a good season for them. Great considering the adversity they faced to get those seven wins, they were in every game but two, but being in the game gets you squat. Notre Dame was in every single game this year, had far superior talent, and went 6-6. UK had vastly less superior talent when you look at the rest of the SEC and finished third in the East. That's on the coaches for me. They may have lost some games you think they should have won, but in the end this is not a 7 win team. If wins went on talent, Kentucky should have only beaten Eastern, Miami of Ohio, Louisville, and UL Monroe-or who ever the other NC game was, and Vanderbilt. Instead they won seven. For a program that has never been a national power, and a fan base that should now be used to missing out on bowl opportunities, I'm astounded at some of the reactions of some of its fans. Be happy with 7 wins, because it wasn't too long ago that you were consistently winning 4-5 a year.

You overlook alot of factors IMO. Agreeing to disagree is the only thing that is left to do. Just don't tell me I'm wrong, when the evidence points elsewhere. Sure you can throw out Boise or whoever, but they are not in the SEC. Boise, UC, U of L are stepping stone jobs, UK is but is still more of like a dead-end job IMO. You don't go to UK to get noticed and move up in the coaching rankings. You do that at UC or U of L because it's easier to do.

 

But keep living the dream man, I wish that I could do the same.:thumb:

 

Then don't tell me I am wrong, when you CAN'T PROVE THAT YOU ARE RIGHT. UK very well IMO could get to that level that UC, TCU, and programs are at with the right coach in place after Brooks retires IN MY OPINION. In your opinion they can't, but just because that is your opinion, does not mean your right. So please don't tell me I am wrong then either. They are both our opinions, yours is no more right than me. Especially since we won't get to see if my opinion is true, since they will just be giving it to Joker without even looking. So your opinion is no more right than mine, so please don't be acting like that.

 

Once again lets agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Then don't tell me I am wrong, when you CAN'T PROVE THAT YOU ARE RIGHT. UK very well IMO could get to that level that UC, TCU, and programs are at with the right coach in place after Brooks retires IN MY OPINION. In your opinion they can't, but just because that is your opinion, does not mean your right. So please don't tell me I am wrong then either. They are both our opinions, yours is no more right than me. Especially since we won't get to see if my opinion is true, since they will just be giving it to Joker without even looking. So your opinion is no more right than mine, so please don't be acting like that.

 

Once again lets agree to disagree and leave it at that.

I believe you stated that I was wrong, before I said that about you. I don't care if you think UK is the next USC. Doesn't bother me. But, MOST are going to disagree with you, and that has to be okay IMO.:idunno:

Listen I'm going to take myself out of this argument, because I am not making my point with you apparently, but I have some news for you: Seven wins isn't average for Kentucky, it's a good season for them. Great considering the adversity they faced to get those seven wins, they were in every game but two, but being in the game gets you squat. Notre Dame was in every single game this year, had far superior talent, and went 6-6. UK had vastly less superior talent when you look at the rest of the SEC and finished third in the East. That's on the coaches for me. They may have lost some games you think they should have won, but in the end this is not a 7 win team. If wins went on talent, Kentucky should have only beaten Eastern, Miami of Ohio, Louisville, and UL Monroe-or who ever the other NC game was, and Vanderbilt. Instead they won seven. For a program that has never been a national power, and a fan base that should now be used to missing out on bowl opportunities, I'm astounded at some of the reactions of some of its fans. Be happy with 7 wins, because it wasn't too long ago that you were consistently winning 4-5 a year.

 

First thing first UK finished 5th in the SEC East, not second. Fifth the same spot they usually always finish in. So is that better than normal no, is that worst than normal no it is not. So that would make it average. This is now the 4th year in a row for it. Coach Brooks has gotten UK to this level 3 years ago, and we still are at this level. No better or no worst, so yes once again that qualifies as average. The program as whole has been at this same level for 4 years straight, which means they are staying at the same level basically. Which once again means average.

 

Once again you keep acting like I am disappointed about this season. Where I never have said I was. I just not said all excited and saying this was a great season like others when this team basically stayed at their same level. They beat 5 bad teams, and won 2 games the rest of the way and 5 of those games came against teams that were down and could have been beaten. So no way you can say this season was a success or a failure it was just average at the same level that Brooks had gotten this program too.

 

My question is when I guess do you think people should be allowed not to say it was a great season if they only win 3 SEC games a year. I mean 2 years from now if its still the same, does everyone still have to act excited. What about 5 years from now, or 10 years from now? At what point if it just basically stays at this level can people say they are not excited about it? Or should people every year just be happy as can be about it? My problem is not where the program is now, my problem is in the future and the direction we are going. I see no reason to believe that this program is actually still going up. I think Brooks is going to have a good foundation laid when he retires, and I think UK would be at a real good spot to really build off of that with the right hire. I just don't like how they just have given the job to Joker. I think they should look around and interview people and if he is the best guy for it still then great. However UK would be in a spot they probably never have been in when Brooks retires, and it could be that chance for them to take that next step up from 3 SEC wins a year. I just think they are blowing it by not even looking.

First thing first UK finished 5th in the SEC East, not second. Fifth the same spot they usually always finish in. So is that better than normal no, is that worst than normal no it is not. So that would make it average. This is now the 4th year in a row for it. Coach Brooks has gotten UK to this level 3 years ago, and we still are at this level. No better or no worst, so yes once again that qualifies as average. The program as whole has been at this same level for 4 years straight, which means they are staying at the same level basically. Which once again means average.

 

Once again you keep acting like I am disappointed about this season. Where I never have said I was. I just not said all excited and saying this was a great season like others when this team basically stayed at their same level. They beat 5 bad teams, and won 2 games the rest of the way and 5 of those games came against teams that were down and could have been beaten. So no way you can say this season was a success or a failure it was just average at the same level that Brooks had gotten this program too.

 

My question is when I guess do you think people should be allowed not to say it was a great season if they only win 3 SEC games a year. I mean 2 years from now if its still the same, does everyone still have to act excited. What about 5 years from now, or 10 years from now? At what point if it just basically stays at this level can people say they are not excited about it? Or should people every year just be happy as can be about it? My problem is not where the program is now, my problem is in the future and the direction we are going. I see no reason to believe that this program is actually still going up. I think Brooks is going to have a good foundation laid when he retires, and I think UK would be at a real good spot to really build off of that with the right hire. I just don't like how they just have given the job to Joker. I think they should look around and interview people and if he is the best guy for it still then great. However UK would be in a spot they probably never have been in when Brooks retires, and it could be that chance for them to take that next step up from 3 SEC wins a year. I just think they are blowing it by not even looking.

 

I'm finished arguing with you. I am getting a headache, we are obviously not going to agree on anything when it comes to this, so I'll let you be.