easy

Recent Comments
The consensus from all the media around the program is Rodriguez will be suspended 1 or 2 games if at all, and it seems almost certain he will be back for the Ole Miss game week 5. So you can probably make your prediction based on a 50/50 chance he will play at Florida week 2 (Kentucky has cupcakes weeks 1, 3, and 4).
The Kentucky that was just picked 2nd in the East and finished #18 last year?
Oh big time, the tradition of college football is to try to hold on to tradition for as long as you can, until the money is undeniable. The first big moves after 84 still took a while to manifest: 1990 Penn State decides it can make more money in the Big 10 rather than staying independent; 91 South Carolina and Florida State leave the Metro, Arkansas leaves the SWC to make more money; 96 the Big 8 and 4 SWC schools combine to make more money; 04 the decade long death of the Big East begins as Miami and Va Tech can get more money and exposure in the ACC; etc. etc.
The conference alignment and postseason changes have been inevitable since the Supreme Court removed control of TV rights from the NCAA in 1984. Its just a slow process in finding the most profitable arrangements for the biggest schools.
That's not what he is saying. His whole interview was directed at UK donors and boosters who until very recently have not been communicated to clearly, if at all, about NIL due to our AD being a stick in the mud and not liking it. He's telling them the that's its all cleared up now and that the football team needs a collective with money set up in it in order to compete with recruiting. Our '22 class was ranked 14th but currently our '23 class is 50th because these NIL funds were not set up like at most other schools. Most of our basketball NIL money come from other entities. Shoe companies and such willing to pay future NBA players.
You referenced the JP Sports days, which I remember well, and there was ESPN and Fox then, and games to watch from noon to prime time. Before that, the NCAA controlled TV rights and there were fewer channels, but there were still nationally televised games. You’re missing my point anyways. I’m not saying fandom didn’t have a regional feel, I’m saying the article makes college football out to be historically a quaint little sport only cared about in certain places when it says stuff about ‘pockets of passion.’ It’s disingenuous to refer to the sport as anything but massively important and nationally relevant for 100 years, it just organizationally was relatively slow to move beyond segmentation of that interest. Pro leagues play national schedules and have playoffs, and even college basketball has had the NCAA tournament for over 80 years, while CFB and it’s bowl system left a lot of potential on the table. The NCAA lost its control over media rights in football, and everything that’s happened since then is a direct result of that. A slew of independents - South Carolina, Florida State, Penn State, etc. - realized the money would be better in a conference where they could sign a TV deal. The Big 8 and upper half of the SWC realized they were better off together than separate, and on it goes. The nationalization of the game revolving around TV money was inevitable for such a massively popular sport. There’s a reason why 8 of the 10 largest stadiums in the whole world are college football stadiums.
It was national, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and later ESPN showed a day’s worth of football just like they did the NFL. To catch all second tier games, yes, that was regional and often local radio and tape delays. But the interest and fan support overall has always been among the biggest sports in the country. It may have been segmented and LSU fans may not have known a lot about what Washington was doing, but that doesn’t diminish the fact that there were/are a TON of LSU and Washington fans. More than Pelicans and Sonics fans, and, if you go back far enough, more than Saints and Seahawks fans.
It’s completely false that college football was a ‘regional sport.’ It has been at least a top 4 sport in the country in terms of popularity, attention, viewer/listenership since it’s inception. Pre World War II it was baseball, boxing, and college football, followed closely by horse racing. It wasn’t until several decades later in the 70s/80s that the NFL and NBA began catching up, while boxing and horse racing fell off. Now baseball has fallen off as well and the NBA hasn’t caught college football. College football is weird, quirky, and unique. But it has never been a marginal sport. Alluding it as such is either lying or ignorance.
I like NIL, and I like the transfer portal. The huge numbers bubble, especially for recruiting, will bust and things will feel more acceptable. I like the playoff expansion. I think 12 teams is perfect. The only thing I DON'T like is this most recent conference realignment. I think the B1G, ACC, and Pac 12 should've eaten up the Big 12 while they had the chance last year. But they didn't, potentially leading to the demise of the ACC and Pac 12, and to the super-conferencing of the SEC and B1G. Four 16-team conferences made so much sense. They would still be largely regional, and small enough to feel like a conference not an entire league. But we may be heading towards 20 or 24 team conferences. I can stomach it but I don't like it.
I am coming around on the idea of adding 8, and this is basically my list. When ND inevitably turns the SEC down I'd like to add Kansas. Give Mizzou someone to finally relate to (and Oklahoma), good academics, and solidify yourself as a ridiculously good basketball conference with UK, KU, UNC, and Duke as anchors.
Yep they rejected them, and then like a year later realized that they needed to drop those standards or get left behind and added Louisville, a worse academic school
Big12 has weaker brand power still than the leftover Pac 12. There’s 8 solid brands plus WSU and OSU, while the new Big 12 has more of a little brother crowd outside of Kansas basketball. I would predict the other way around (Pac 10 picking up 6 of the new Big 12) rather than the other way around. The ACC meanwhile makes a hard push to bring ND all the way in, plus another (WVU probably).
I just want to put out there that the SEC *could* do 8 games and 3 permanent rivals (even though its not one of the two seemingly final options). The rotating games don't have to be perfectly divisible into the rotating teams - just look at what the SEC did at 12 teams. There were 5 extra teams in the other division from you that rotated through 2 games. So if they really wanted to compromise just do 8 games, 3 rivals. The remaining 12 teams rotate through the remaining 5 games in a staggered way. You still get to play everyone very often, just not perfectly biennially.
This is a teaser showing a lot of different jerseys the team will never wear or else have already had before as their jerseys. It's saying we will have new uniforms (home, away, and likely 1 alternate) revealed this fall.
It doesn't necessarily have to. When we had 12 teams, we had 2 crossover games rotating 5 teams. It just meant the rotating teams staggered instead of playing at the same time.
I wonder if they're considering getting rid of divisions in '23 and '24 before OU and UT get here, like the Mountain West and potentially the ACC are doing
Even if the tackles and secondary end up being bad, I don't see Kentucky winning fewer than 7 or losing to Louisville. Louisville does not have the line play to compete with us.
You don't need to have pods to do a 3-6-6 system. Just because Bama needs to play Auburn and Tennessee every year doesn't mean that Auburn and Tennessee ALSO have to play every year. Prioritize the rivalries to keep and assign 3 permanent for each team, its pretty easily possible - its the same strategy SEC basketball scheduling has used for a decade.
Three 2nd place finishes in the last 6 years would indicate UK isn't overlooking other teams much
Last year it was still the weakness of the defense, we had some very solid pieces but were really thin, especially at CB. This year we’re still thin but also unproven, and help will come from the portal over the summer but we obviously don’t know how good it will be. WR was probably just as much of a liability last year because we played multiple games - including at Georgia - with only one real catching option. This year we’ll have probably 4-5 very solid WRs.
Probably, but Georgia with Bennett doesn't take full advantage of what will be our weak spot this year at DB. Its unfortunate for us that 3 of our swing games are @ Tennessee, Miss St., and @ Ole Miss. I think UK's offense is set to be the best its been in over a decade, and the front 7 on defense will be more than solid. But we still may go 9-3 again due to swing game match ups instead of taking another step forward, before a likely rebuilding year in '23.
All of Kentucky's losses came to teams in the field of 64. Again, a fair critique of UK is that they peaked too soon, but you just don't know what overhyped means because you keep saying it when it objectively doesn't apply.
No, overhype implies that Kentucky is getting expectations they haven't shown they can achieve, and are only going on potential and not what they've done on the court. They have shown their potential on the court multiple times.
Owning perhaps the most impressive two wins of any team this season - hanging 107 on Tennessee's defense in regulation, and going up 20 by halftime at Allen Fieldhouse before cruising to a victory - is not overhype. When Kentucky plays at that level they are easily up there with Gonzaga and Arizona as championship favorites, and much better than anyone in their region. But its been since early Feb. that UK has looked that good and injuries have been the excuse.
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Auburn all deserved 2s. Duke did not.
Tennesse has the biggest loss in games amongst those teams, by 28 to Kentucky, and the have the worst overall record. Them at 4 is fine.
12 team is coming, but the other conferences don't want to do it now while ESPN has exclusive rights.
Completely missing the underlying point of big time millionaire boosters donating to universities and athletic departments: its tax deductible. Putting money into a NIL fund isn't a charitable donation, so there will be less money there than going to the school. Rich people don't stay rich by throwing away money without some extra benefit - and giving the university a million dollars to help pay for a football coach's buyout also helps with the IRS.
Well with all legitimacy the Zion Duke season taught us that the Tourney committee will excuse losses with players out. That Duke team was probably only top 10 worthy, but because their losses happened with Zion out they got given the number 1 overall seed.