brainesman

Recent Comments
I get people laugh at Kroger Field, but who really cares that it's not called Commonwealth Stadium anymore. It wasn't a classic stadium and it wasn't named after a legendary coach, might as well make money off of it. Most of the conference might as well join in, why name it after some coach or administrator from a century ago who's mostly anonymous to the fan base.
I love reading this comment section. I get it's Kentucky so every SC fan thinks they must have superior talent, but Stoops has elevated the talent at UK and besides, it's not like SC historically has much on UK besides HBC's little run there earlier this decade. Maybe SC has more potential, but it's just not a clearly superior program to UK that most SC fans seem to think it is. SC isn't UT or Florida where we are just trying to get our shots in while we can, SC has never been a national power. SC might win this year, I tend to view this one as a tossup unless Hilinski is the second coming of Trevor Lawrence. But you all can't even play the Missouri card claiming that Kentucky didn't deserve to beat SC, the last couple of years has been pretty thorough wins. It should be a good game between two fairly even teams, good luck.
Their new coach is pretty good. They'll still be trash this year, but they will turn it around at some point
At this point, it doesn't sound like much for UK and looks really bad for Duke. It basically sounds like the assistant coach just asked if this was going on. Considering Kentucky really hasn't had too many of the tip-top recruits, it may help to explain some of it.
9/29/2019: Kentucky 24, South Carolina 10 Terry Wilson (W/injured knee): 13/20, 132 Yards, 1 INT, 9 rush for 59 yards with a TD, 59.9 QBR Jake Bentley: 13/28, 148 yards, 1 TD, 3 picks, 8 rushes for 37 yards, 38.0 QBR (not to mention his TD was a 58 yard pass that went about 15 yards in the air and through the hands of a UK defender who jumped the route) I'll take Terry
I think the receivers have to be the biggest concern. It was easy to criticize Gran for not throwing the ball down the field much last year, but it's hard to do that when guys can't get open. We are hearing some good things about the young guys out of camp, but they need some of them to step up. Secondary has to be the other big concern, but Stoops has probably earned the benefit of the doubt in crafting good secondaries, so I put that below receivers. There's no experience in the defensive back room, but there's talent so it should be able to hold its own. Beyond that, this team looks solid. Benny was amazing in short yardage situations, but I don't think his replacements will be running into as many stacked boxes as the playbook should be opened up. Assuming Terry progresses and stays healthy (although I really like Smith if needed) he'll take some of that burden as well. Losing Big George and Bunchy isn't ideal, but I think people forgot how good Landon Young was at such a young age. I think he'll wind a solid NFL draft pick and the line should be better. Conrad was a Jake Bentley type of player-- he was competant early but never really got any better. Like Marrow said yesterday, Rigg is probably better. Special teams should be a strength if Poore is better than his name. On the defensive front seven they'll certainly miss Josh Allen but most of the rest of the pieces are there. If the secondary is passable and a couple of receivers, Kentucky should be able to real run at 9 wins again.
Yeah, but I understand what O'Gara did because you don't just want to pick favorites the whole series. I just find this exercise to be a little more helpful pre-season than trying to nail each game and it's really useful if you're trying to bet over/under totals.
With the schedule being about as easy as an SEC schedule could be, 8-4 seems like a reasonable goal, with making a bowl a baseline. I don't think it will happen, but there's a path 10 wins as the only sure loss is the UGA game. I tend to think that MSU and Mizzou are a bit overrated (not saying UK is better or will win, just they don't deserve the hype they are getting) while USC will be brutalized by playing Bama and Mizzou in the prior weeks plus the streak is starting to get to them. UT might actually be a underrated, but it's at home so they have a shot. I don't see UK losing to Vandy, it'll be a defacto home game in Nashville. As a gambler, I think in probabilities so it breaks down into something like: Guaranteed win (~100%): UL, UTM, and EMU Should win easily (~90-95%): Arkansas, Toledo Should win (~75%): Vandy Toss-up (~50%): USC, Mizzou, UT Underdog, but a real chance (~25%): MSU, UF Not happening (~0%): UGA If my probabilities are roughly correct, that equals out between 7-8 wins with an edge towards 8. Even if they win 6, this sure beats getting blown out by WKU and winning 2 games a year.
That's fair, but USC fans haven't been worried about the UK the last 5 years either ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Saying the Kentucky game was closer than the score made it seem last year is disingenuous. Yes, UK scored a TD on the last play, but it was a double-digit lead until a late UF TD. UK got the ball back, got a pivotal first down before pining the Gators back near their goal line with seconds left. In reality, the final score was more in tune with reality once that last TD was scored. Besides that, a theme of the Stoops era has been the replacements being better than the guys that left. Other than the DBs, UK has more talent returning than one would think and the guys who are now being forced to play more are generally much better recruits than what Stoops was dealing with before. UF might win that game, but it won't be slaughter. UF isn't that good and UK isn't that bad and it will be a raucous atmosphere (you're also neglecting to mention that UF probably should have lost 3 of the last 4 to UK). If it makes you feel better, you'll have a great bball team this year.
I think it's funny that it's trickier for UGA to face SC after the UF game rather than UK, a team that SC has lost to 5 times in a row.
I understand the anger towards this kind of spending at schools that lose money on sports, but at schools with enormous revenues this is a simple investment in ensuring that revenue will continue to flow in. While it's a vastly different situation than at SEC schools like LSU, I went to undergrad at Xavier and you can see the effect that basketball program has had at the school. Put simply, you probably would have never heard of the school if not for the vast investment in the program to ensure it could become a power. Compare it Regis University in Denver, a similarly sized Jesuit school in a significant city with a comparable academic reputation that you've probably never heard of. When people at Xavier complain about the money spent on the basketball team, I point out that it leads to what is essentially a free, two-hour commercial on national tv 30+ times a year, as well as a national reputation in something positive. Beyond that, the program makes way more money than it spends now and makes donations to the academic side of the school. When money needs to be spent on renovations, it should be viewed as an investment in that and not just money taken from the library
I really felt like MSU brought Moorhead in because they thought he'd be able to craft a great offense with the great pieces that Mullen left behind, thinking that a big year could propel the program further despite the coach having no experience building a high level program. Well, that didn't really work out, last year's team should've been better. I just wasn't impressed with MSU last year after entering the year thinking they were a top 10 caliber team. While I understand that there's plenty of talent still around, they lost a ton and it's probably unreasonable to think they'll be any better. I think he enters 2020 on the hot seat and if I had to bet on any SEC coach to be removed from their job by the end of 2021, I think I'd have to put my money on him. MSU (like Kentucky) needs an energetic coach dedicated to building a program brick-by-brick to succeed and I'm not sure Moorhead has it in him.
I don't get why the UConn move is rated poorly, the new Big East-FOX TV deal is likely only marginally lower than the AAC's new deal at this point (numbers haven't been released yet, but with UConn being a public school we should be getting more data on the conference soon), plus whatever pennies the school can sell it's football rights for. When you factor in the travel savings by being in a much more centralized conference, estimated by the school to be 2 million a year, it doesn't look like a bad decision at all financially. My larger problem with the analysis here is that it completely disregards what is clearly a better decision for it's two flagship sports: men's and women's basketball. In a conference where only Tennessee fans can relate to being irrelevant in football but with very good men's and women's basketball program, UConn was rightfully disregarding football with this decision. UConn didn't want it's basketball games to be stuck on ESPN+, now they won't. And we don't know if this was rushed or not, this may have been percolating for months with the public knowing.
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.