brainesman

Recent Comments
As a UK season-ticket holder, I know I'm a bit biased but I'm really optimistic about the offense this year. Mark Stoops is a defense-minded HC and really forced the offense to be incredibly risk-averse. It was pound it up the middle with Snell don't turn it over. Stoops won't have that luxury this year, the offense will have to open up. Between the recently-revealed leg injury and just getting rattled at T A&M, Wilson really slumped in the middle of last season before seeming to recover by the end of the year. That A&M game ruined him for awhile. He has the talent and people saying he can't make downfield throws don't know what they are talking about. He has to be more consistent with the intermediate 5-20 yard throws for the offense to work. More importantly though, the offense needs to present him with better opportunities to make those throws and the receivers need to get open because Lynn Bowden was the only one to do that consistently enough last year. Either way, the schedule sets up nicely and the talent level remains fairly high. They probably aren't winning 9 games next year but 8 seems like a reasonable goal.
I'm not saying experience isn't a valuable trait, but it's probably more important to actually be good at football. Everyone seems to forget this when discussing Jake Bentley, who debuted at 17 (and was actually solid at that point all things considered) but who hasn't used his experience to actually get better. I see no way for this offense to improve when they lost all of their fantastic skill players and only return the QB who held them back.
You guys say that you should be able to handle Kentucky every year...
The blurb was written as though it was the SECN game (i.e. the tip to Tom Hart and co.) so I guess they realized their mistake and said screw it. But yeah, their definition of primetime fits that game
I bet that Eli Capiluoto, Mitch Barnhart, and Mark Stoops all hunkered together for hours to plot this great publicity stunt. And you all can ignore the fact that multiple reporters on both sides confirmed the report that day all you want. I don't get why you all are getting so hurt by all of this. I mean, shouldn't you be more upset by the fact you got killed Texas?
I know Muschamp said soccer, but it's more like flagrant foul rule in basketball (bear with me, it's a sport played indoors with a round ball that you have to bounce and shoot through a hoop. I promise it's fun). That's what I thought the rule should've been from the beginning. There are few sports where athletes practice months for only a dozen or so games, I think it's particularly cruel to kick them out of a full game for what is often incidental contact. There should still be ejections, but only for egregious and malicious plays.
That's simply not true. No matter what some around UGA are saying as cover after he passed, there were veritable reports on all sides saying that the offer was made and that he declined. He frustrates me sometimes, but it's a big deal that he is staying.
We always lost to Florida anyway. Might as well have him there than at MSU. Moorhead was a bad hire, with the hope being that he would have a ton of success with this squad since his strength was supposedly gameplanning. He didn't, and now there's no proof he can build a program. We have to deal with Mullen either way, might as well be at the program that we struggle with.
I love Stoops for UK, but he'd be a poor fit for Miami. They need a coach with swagger, not a brick-by-brick builder (very similar to UK basketball, think Cal vs Gillespie). Miami doesn't want to be good, they need to be the biggest show in a very busy town. I'm not saying Stoops wouldn't be a good fit for some bigger programs, but Miami doesn't feel right. I think Lane Kiffen would be a good fit for Miami. Maybe a guy like Kingsbury would work out of the Big 12. It needs to be a guy that demands attention when he walks in a room, Stoops isn't really that guy.
What Vince Marrow has done at UK is incredible. I get that he's not pulling in 5 stars, but what he gets relative to Kentucky's historical standards should merit a spot on any good list.
Trace McSorley completed 53% of his passes this year. Why does everyone make him out to be Tua or Trevor Lawrence? The way to beat Kentucky is to have a QB who can make quick accurate passes outside of the hashes where the DBs will give some space. McSorley can't do it consistently enough and this will look a lot like the Mississippi State game (Fitz is just a bigger version of McSorley). 24-10 Cats.
Brutal mistake on his part... he'd perfected the art of getting out in time. Clearly, he lost his touch.
With Kevin Stallings gone, I need Jeff Fisher back in my life. This needs to happen.
I think I'd actually call Cincinnati a better program than Purdue. Their worst years look an awful lot like your best years, they've basically had one bad coach (Tuberville) in the last 20 years. I get it they're not in the BIG, but it's not like Purdue is going to use that platform to win Championships. UC's ceiling is a NY6 bowl because of the conference affiliation, but they compete in that conference with same resources you all have in a superior conference (Ex: the Bengals use UC's facilities once UC's season ends, which also says a ton about the Bengals). All things being equal, I don't think Purdue is a better job than UC.
Mid-40s with slight wind is good weather this time of year. Wednesday it was low 30s with wind and ice.
Idaho dropped to FCS this season... that's why the Power Rank didn't pick it.
I'd be shocked if he doesn't go. Obviously, there is the family connection in Louisville, where his family is basically football royalty. Louisville is in a much better place, football-wise, than most think. When Brohm was hired at Purdue two years ago, we were talking of it much the same way we speak of Kansas now (there were those hot takes by national columnists suggesting they try an option offense too!), Purdue still hasn't won eight games in ten years. Louisville has won at least eight games the last six years, although that will end this year. I know Purdue is committing to football with a new facility on the way, but Louisville already has all of this. While the old Papa John's Cardinal Stadium may only seat 60,000, it is a massive building where every seat is chair-back and has a ton of luxury boxes. Purdue's stadium is closer to a MAC-stadium than it is to Louisville's. Louisville's athletic facilities are unbelievable and they're approaching national-power level in many sports (they've forced UK to do the same), that approach has elevated them above urban commuter school-level. As a Kentucky fa, I'd rather Louisville try some retread like Petrino was the second time. If Brohm can recruit all of these Kentucky kids to middle-of-nowhere Indiana, he'll certainly be able to pull them into Louisville. He's brought Purdue into the same stratosphere as Louisville, imagine what he'll do with a program that never quite lived up to its potential.
Kentucky has beaten at least 3 teams that would be favored against NCSU/Wake Forest on a neutral field: UF, Mizzou, and MSU (USC would probably be as well). Did Stoops stick his finger in your ice cream or something? I get he's 0-2, but last year they battled with a team supposedly a class above them (who finished 10-3 and No. 17) and they came within a 2-pt conversion of winnning. Also, it's been two bowls after he inherited a team that couldn't have competed in the MAC. We should finish 10-2, 9-3 at worst, in the best conference in college football... Cheer up kid.
Splitting the UK/UL vote in Kentucky would get Stoops 70% of vote. I grew up in Louisville and it's still probably only 65-35% UofL to UK fans.
It's a bit simplistic to say UK has just relied on luck... there was nothing lucky about the UF, MSU, and SC games. But hey, sometimes teams tend to have a lucky streak. I'm blanking on who it was, but there was a team a few years ago that won like two games in a row with a tipped up Hail Mary and then a kick-6 return. I can't imagine how much fun it was to cheer for that team, but it must have sucked to be a fan of the others. (Only joking, but I feel your tipped Hail Mary pain)
If Joel Klatt's logic is that UK was down by 11 with 6 minutes left against Missouri, how does he explain that undervalued Army took OU to OT, undervalued ND had to hang on to beat Ball State, and undervalued NU lost to Akron. No one other than Bama (and I'll give Clemson credit as well) has perfect wins, or even been perfect. That just seems like selective logic by Mr. Klatt.
Bookies make money from the juice, they don't try to outsmart the bettors. This line dropped because heavy money was coming in on Kentucky. Vegas's goal is for 50% of the money to be bet on each side--they are guaranteed a profit that way. Since 61% of the bets (although this number has likely risen as the spread dropped) have been on Georgia thus far, that means that the sharp bettors were likely placing large bets on Kentucky. You're right that it says nothing of the game itself, but some smart people seem to think that Kentucky at least keeps it close.
I think most of us don't get on here too often (I admittedly do) because we're usually ignored. For example, in one of the pre-season SDS podcasts they basically skipped Kentucky and said that they couldn't name three players on the team. KSR is probably a bigger and better organization that SDS and is literally only UK. That's all most really need. And you all aren't scoring 45, I can't guarantee that UK will score 7, but UGA isn't scoring 45. And our stadium will be full, as it was against USC and MSU. For what it's worth, I'd like to see Sanford Stadium after 40 years of not finishing better than 4-4 in SEC play and 31 straight losses to Florida. I don't think you all are doing better than 60,000.
I get the anger around the call, but I don't think it was indefensible. Watch at: 03-4 on the embedded video, the DB uses his right arm to drive the receiver out of bounds, after that the defender then plays the ball. If you watch the other angle later in the video, he actually has to correct himself back towards the ball and away from the sideline. I'm not going to pretend that I don't see this in a blue tint, but I never saw this as a preposterous call. Wagner (6'8") played basketball at Iowa last year, if he doesn't get driven out then he may have been able to catch it in bounds.
Best college football player I've seen since Elvis Dumervil. No one affects every offensive play quite like him. The most amazing thing--Dumervil never had to drop back in coverage either. He should be the first player on the board for teams that run a 3-4 defense.
While I get that people watching UF-UGA just saw that Terry Wilson was benched in the Mizzou game, he actually played very well and the running game was non-existent--most UK fans (outside of the Gunnar Hoak-apologists) were rather confounded by him getting benched and remaining benched as long as he did. The offense moved pretty well with Terry (and didn't at all with Hoak) they just got bogged down, had rather unimaginative play-calling, and failed three 4th and shorts where the used no motion and ran it right up the middle. If Wilson plays like that, he won't be the problem this week. The o-line and RBs have to be better in order to hang in the game. While not a perfect metric, his QBR (50 is average) was 71.1--the previous two games it had been 7.1 and 18.8. Again, the uninformed eye just sees that he got benched, but that was incompetent offensive coaching rather than incompetant QB play.
I get the stat, but I would guess that the scenario listed results from a big injury to a highly-ranked team. I don't even know if there's a player in college this year that would fit the criteria, but imagine some of the highly-ranked Louisville teams the previous two seasons if they lost Lamar. That would be my guess as to where the examples come from. That being said, I get why Missouri is favored, 7 just seems like too much. In the Odom era, Mizzou is 2-6 ATS against teams that finished the year with winning SEC records and 7-2 against teams with losing records. They tend to get beat bad by good teams, but then flex their muscles against weaker opponents. Lock has been similar, his best performance against those winning teams was against Georgia last year where he went 15-25 for 253, 2 TDs and an INT for a 189 Rating. Otherwise, he's never hit 60% completion or a 120 rating (that's Terry Wilson bad) against any of those teams. I don't see Mizzou scoring more than 24 in this game, UK's D is just too good. Maybe UK's offense can't hit that total, but this spread has resulted from Missouri pouring on points against bad defenses. It's a trap that we've fallen into repeatedly (as a degenerate myself, I'm guilty as well) but we forget that Missouri's fireworks against bad teams don't carry over when they play good ones.
I think he's gone, as he really doesn't have much more to prove by remaining in college. All of those defensive guys came back, but they all had played on bad defenses and, at best, disappeared in games for lengthy stretches of time. Obviously, I'd love it if he came back but he is what he is. He can dominate college games, but I don't see him being better than a Day 3 pick in the NFL. He doesn't really have elite explosiveness (at least half of his runs end with him dragging multiple defenders rather than bursting through them) and he doesn't really help out in the passing game either by blocking or catching. He'll have a LaGarrett Blount-type of role in the NFL, but he's not something that the league really values at this point. That isn't changing whether he leaves this year or the next, so I wouldn't blame him if he chose to get his money and minimize the risk of injury.
That's what I thought the moment that I saw this story. It's a different version of the Schiano situation, they'll find one little thing because they don't like him for football reasons and hope that does him in: although, he's earned any bad will directed his way.