2015 Concern: Can/Will We Have a Fundamentally Sound Team?

[WeepNoMore]

I posted the following in another thread, but it didn't gain much traction. I got only one response to my questions. So I am reposting it in a separate thread (with a few clarifying changes) in the hope that some of you posters with more football knowledge than I can help alleviate my concern:

My major concern (and my major disappointment with Coach Stoops' first two teams) is the lack of fundamentals with which UK players try to compete.

I have seen improvement in the physicality and athleticism of our team and our level of recruiting has been improved significantly. But Coach Stoops' first two teams simply were not fundamentally sound. Specifically, I have observed way too many instances of the following:

(1) arm tackling and failure to wrap up tackles (The 10 or so missed tackles in the TD by the MSU back was the most glaring example.)
(2) failure by our DBs to look back for the ball in pass coverage
(3) dropped interception opportunities due to failure of the defender to watch the ball into his hands
(4) failure by our D linemen to get low enough to get adequate leverage
(5) failure to run to the right hole by our RBs / too quick to break the play to the outside
(6) failure by our RBs to pick up the blitz
(7) happy feet by our QBs
(8) QBs inability to look for 2nd or 3rd options on pass routes
(8a) failure by QBs to step up into the pocket to avoid rush
(9) failure by our receivers to run the right route
(11) dropped passes by our receivers due to failure to watch ball all the way to their hands
(12) failure by secondary and tertiary receivers to complete their assigned routes
(13) false starts by our O line
(14) failure of O line to get required leverage on run blocking
(15) totally missed blocks by O line on pass blocking
(16) failure to maintain lane integrity on punt and KO coverage
(17) others that don't come to mind just now

Even good, well-coached, fundamentally sound teams (Missouri is the best example I can think of off the top of my head.) have these sort of lapses occasionally. But with our last two teams these sort of fundamental mistakes happened over and over and over, game after game.

In my non-expert opinion this failure to play fundamentally sound football falls on the coaching staff as much, or more so, as on the players.

I have four questions for those posters who are much more knowledgeable than I about the game of football:

(1) Am I being too hard on our coaches and/or players with these observations?
(2) Does the blame for not being a fundamentally sound football team fall more on the coaches or more on the players?
(3) Is it realistic to expect to go from such a weak team in terms of fundamentals (2014) to a fundamentally sound football team (2015) in one year?
(4) Is it realistic to expect to move up in the SEC pecking order on improved strength, athleticism and recruiting alone?

 

[Brock28]

Were you not around for the Joker years?

 

[Rhavicc]

It's a process. We really didn't have much of anything to work with as of late. As it pertains to last year, do you remember all those annoying times that players got taken out of the game after making big blocks in the open field, or even if they got called for targeting, Stoops would take them out of the next game, on top of them being out of the game they were ejected from?
That's how you teach fundamentals. Trial and error is a tremendous teacher. Stoops reinforcing error adds onto the effect.

I would attribute some of the lack of fundamentals to the youth offensively. We return a lot of players, and we'll return even more for next year. On defense, it was just a case of having the wrong personnel for the defensive packages that we wanted to run. Discipline in our defensive backfield increased greatly (went from having a 2 interception season to a 16 interception season the following year, which is outstanding). Continuing to add depth and shoring up some of the weaknesses out on the perimeter will be key, as they were only responsible for 3 interceptions last season. Very reasonable to expect more from them this year. Could possibly see that number double, while maintaining numbers at every other position, or possibly exceeding them

As for tackling woes, our linebackers are significantly more beefed up this season than they were last season. In the Louisville game, outside of the tackling on Parker, I was very pleased with how well the tackling was, but again, I expect a lot of that to get shored up out on the perimeter.
Overall, I think we'll be very pleased with our defense. Doesn't hurt that we have a high quality linebacker coach in Andy Buh on board now, as well as finally letting Stoops work with the CB's in practice, and only the CB's. That's his bread and butter. Our safeties are a force though. Read earlier today that Coach Ansley said that he expects Marcus McWilson to be the most explosive player on the team now.
Could serve us pretty well overall. We're fine, just give it time.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

You also failed to mention how young we were at most positions the last 2 years. This year we finally have some talented, experienced guys back. Truly believe we'll see a much improved team this year.

Perfect example of how the culture is changing, yesterday Stoops told the story of a freshmen working out and actually getting onto one of the upperclassmen for not putting in effort. That's how this thing gets turned around. Guys buying in and holding each other accountable, whether it's a true freshmen or 5th year senior. You get a team full of those guys are you're gonna start to see those losses turning to wins.

As far as your concerns go, those things happen in every program. Just gotta clean up the details and that's what Stoops is working on. If we paid attention to details and did the little things we win 7 games last year.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

It's about a lack of talent and not fundamentals...a superior player can make someone look silly...most of your concerns seem unfounded...how many INTs did we have last year? How many were we getting in prior seasons?

A lot of times errors are just of physical nature and don't have anything to do with fundamentals.

 

[jnewc2]

As far as the defense-related stuff, I've heard Stoops say multiple times this offseason that he has to get more "hands on" with the defense..I think DJ Eliot is a good guy, but I'm not sure if he's an SEC caliber defensive coordinator right now, he just needs to show me more..I know he wasn't exactly working with a full deck last season, but I also think that defense should've been better than it was..especially along the d-line...based on Stoops' quotes this offseason I think he realizes that he needs to take more of an ownership role and get more involved with the defense

I think if we see him do that the defense as a whole will improve a ton in the area of fundamentals..I'm just glad that Stoops seems to have the self-awareness to realize that the defense needs more of his individual attention..I know the immediate thought by many is that since he's the head coach and he's a former standout defensive coordinator that it's "his" defense the last couple of years..but when a guy is a head coach and is getting pulled in a million different directions he just doesn't get to spend nearly as much time with the D as a guy like DJ Eliot does..it hasn't really been "his" defense..he doesn't get to spend that one-on-one time with the defensive players..from what I've heard Stoops saying, he seems to be a whole lot more hands-on with the defense now, and seems to be making the defense more of his own..I'll be honest, I'm just not sold on Jimmy Brumbaugh and DJ Eliot at this point..it could be that they just don't have the horses to work with, but I was disappointed in how they utilized Bud and Za'Darius for most of last season..I know depth wasn't great, but the d-line still should've been better than it was..they should've been dominating other team's o-lines and wrecking havoc in the pass rush..but for the most part they didn't and they weren't..depth was bad, but it wasn't that bad..that's on the coaches to get more consistent play out of them

I think the fundamentals and individual attention is another reason Stoops brought Andy Buh on board..he said he wanted another "big picture guy" who has experience, etc and I think Buh will be a big, big help to the overall defense..by having the 3-4 and having Buh handle the OLB's they've talked about how they'll be able to be stronger against the run, and be able to disguise things better and be more multiple..I think adding Buh will take some of the pressure off of Eliot so that he won't be coaching such a big group of people by himself..I think this year will really be a telling year in just what kind of coach DJ Eliot really is..I think it will help him a whole lot having Stoops getting a lot more involved with the D and having a former defensive coordinator in Andy Buh stepping in and helping

 

[Deeeefense]

Kentucky committed 5.5 penalties per game last season. That was 47th nationally and 10 in the SEC. LSU committed 5.46 PPG for 46th place and USCe 5.38 for 45th. Tennessee was first in the SEC and 7th nationally with 4.15 penalties per game.

Honestly I don't see a lot of statistical differences in the way of penalties between the top to bottom teams.

Some of the other criticisms are easy for arm chair quarterbacks like "arm tackling" anyone who's ever played know that to make a perfect form tackle where you wrap up, you have to be in perfect position. Guess what, the ball carrier is doing everything in his power to make sure you AREN'T in perfect or even good position. When you are not in position you have to reach. When you reach you hope to cause the ball carrier to break stride or slow him up enough until your team mates get there.

Another one is "DBs not looking back" easy to say from your easy chair but if you are in press coverage and you look back at the wrong time, you will lose a step and the receiver will then have an opportunity for a big play. You have to time your turn/look just as the ball is arriving. That's an art and it takes a lot of reps to get good at judging the timing of the play.

There were legitimate mistakes that were made in gap responsibility, blocking assignments and reading the play etc. most novice fans would miss a lot of these. All things considered, for a young team under a new staff I don't think they faired too badly but I'm sure we will see improvement this year.

 

[TBCat]

The vast majority of your complaints are talent issues not fundamentals. The lane integrity on kick coverage is valid but the guy coaching that is no longer working here. He kept his job for a whole season and that was it. I think Stoops does emphasis fundamentals. The only issues with Stoops and his staff that I see as valid complaints right and not talent oriented are that the handling of the QB situation has be very poor so far. Also we have misjudged at times who our best players are at certain spots. Kory Brown at LB let WKU run for 1000 yards, Raymond Sanders over Dyshawn Mobley or Jo Jo, Darrell Collins at WR, etc. We have made a few personnel decisions that were not the best. You can partially blame talent for those but we also didn't use the best player that we had either.

 

[hmt5000]

good points guys and it echos what i said in that other thread. lack of talent makes guys look weaker at fundamentals then they really are. and like i said in that other thread... wait until that first class is seniors before you judge the coaching staff on the coaching. shoot, chuck smith was a helluva lb'er coach and put some underrated guys in the league but outside of avery we were very weak at lb'er... and it wasn't because of coaching.

 

[Housecat5]

1. Yes
2. Coaches
3. Yes
4. Yes

 

[WeepNoMore]

Thanks for the responses. I appreciate the time you've taken to share your thoughts. I admit to being an arm-chair QB. And I agree that Coach Stoops' first two teams faced a talent deficit against most of the teams we played. But I still maintain that weak fundamentals were more of a factor in our disappointing results.

I guess I was spoiled by watching Jerry Claiborne's teams, which faced a talent deficit in the vast majority of the games UK played under his watch. (There were very few directional schools and popcorn state teams on the schedule in those days.) And yet Claiborne's teams were competitive in nearly every game they played, because his teams were fundamentally sound.

And, yes, Brock28, I remember the Joker years. In fact, I still remember the first game I attended as a 13-year-old ninth-grader in Stoll Field on November 25, 1961, a 16-26 loss to UT in Blanton Collier's last game as UK's coach.

 

[K_TIME]

Talent goes a long way to erasing mistakes and UK is coming further in the talent department...but we have some teaching issues at times.

1. AJ Stamps really blows assignments at deep safety...and nobody is going to argue there is a talent issue. We need AJ to be more sound in his assignment/decisions back there. Is it on AJ/Ansley...
2. WR core really had some problems not finishing their routes...namely Timmons. Not just the drops on Ryan...but he really can go half-baked thru his routes at times...Nobody is going to argue Ryan lacks the talent but he either needs to come of age or we need to run out Garrett, Bone, Baker, Badet, Montgomery, etc.more and less of Timmons. His play really was glaring in a few games.
3. OL...this is chicken/egg in talent and this groups really lacks talent and is being replaced with younger kids. But is Swindle's false starts, Ramsey Meyers, Nick Haynes, etc..really struggled at times to block the correct assignment up front on blitz pick ups, etc.. Is it Schlarman or the kids, etc..

 

[BobbyK49]

I posted the following in another thread, but it didn't gain much traction. I got only one response to my questions. So I am reposting it in a separate thread (with a few clarifying changes) in the hope that some of you posters with more football knowledge than I can help alleviate my concern:

My major concern (and my major disappointment with Coach Stoops' first two teams) is the lack of fundamentals with which UK players try to compete.

I have seen improvement in the physicality and athleticism of our team and our level of recruiting has been improved significantly. But Coach Stoops' first two teams simply were not fundamentally sound. Specifically, I have observed way too many instances of the following:

(1) arm tackling and failure to wrap up tackles (The 10 or so missed tackles in the TD by the MSU back was the most glaring example.)
(2) failure by our DBs to look back for the ball in pass coverage
(3) dropped interception opportunities due to failure of the defender to watch the ball into his hands
(4) failure by our D linemen to get low enough to get adequate leverage
(5) failure to run to the right hole by our RBs / too quick to break the play to the outside
(6) failure by our RBs to pick up the blitz
(7) happy feet by our QBs
(8) QBs inability to look for 2nd or 3rd options on pass routes
(8a) failure by QBs to step up into the pocket to avoid rush
(9) failure by our receivers to run the right route
(11) dropped passes by our receivers due to failure to watch ball all the way to their hands
(12) failure by secondary and tertiary receivers to complete their assigned routes
(13) false starts by our O line
(14) failure of O line to get required leverage on run blocking
(15) totally missed blocks by O line on pass blocking
(16) failure to maintain lane integrity on punt and KO coverage
(17) others that don't come to mind just now

Even good, well-coached, fundamentally sound teams (Missouri is the best example I can think of off the top of my head.) have these sort of lapses occasionally. But with our last two teams these sort of fundamental mistakes happened over and over and over, game after game.

In my non-expert opinion this failure to play fundamentally sound football falls on the coaching staff as much, or more so, as on the players.

I have four questions for those posters who are much more knowledgeable than I about the game of football:

(1) Am I being too hard on our coaches and/or players with these observations?
(2) Does the blame for not being a fundamentally sound football team fall more on the coaches or more on the players?
(3) Is it realistic to expect to go from such a weak team in terms of fundamentals (2014) to a fundamentally sound football team (2015) in one year?
(4) Is it realistic to expect to move up in the SEC pecking order on improved strength, athleticism and recruiting alone?

1. Yes
2. Both
3. Yes
4. Yes and No

I'm sorry, but do you really think that Stoops and his staff don't know the fundamentals of football?

I think that what you're talking and worried about is more of a function of Kentucky's youth than anything else. You choose Missouri as a comparison but is it fair to compare the progression of Kentucky/Stoops/Year 3 to Missouri/Pinkel/Year 15? 75 to 80% of Missouri's starters are RS Srs and Jrs. Compare that to Kentucky's starters over the past two years.

 

[WeepNoMore]

1. Yes
2. Both
3. Yes
4. Yes and No

I'm sorry, but do you really think that Stoops and his staff don't know the fundamentals of football?

I think that what you're talking and worried about is more of a function of Kentucky's youth than anything else. You choose Missouri as a comparison but is it fair to compare the progression of Kentucky/Stoops/Year 3 to Missouri/Pinkel/Year 15? 75 to 80% of Missouri's starters are RS Srs and Jrs. Compare that to Kentucky's starters over the past two years.

I would venture that nearly every coach in the Big 5 conferences knows the fundamentals of football. But knowing them and being able to teach them and instill them in your players are two vastly different things. Otherwise, every football team would be fundamentally sound.

Regarding my choice of Missouri: I simply selected them as an example of a team that has been able to win consistently with what many call less talented personnel, because they play fundamentally sound football.

 

[Poetax]

Thanks for the responses. I appreciate the time you've taken to share your thoughts. I admit to being an arm-chair QB. And I agree that Coach Stoops' first two teams faced a talent deficit against most of the teams we played. But I still maintain that weak fundamentals were more of a factor in our disappointing results.

I guess I was spoiled by watching Jerry Claiborne's teams, which faced a talent deficit in the vast majority of the games UK played under his watch. (There were very few directional schools and popcorn state teams on the schedule in those days.) And yet Claiborne's teams were competitive in nearly every game they played, because his teams were fundamentally sound.

And, yes, Brock28, I remember the Joker years. In fact, I still remember the first game I attended as a 13-year-old ninth-grader in Stoll Field on November 25, 1961, a 16-26 loss to UT in Blanton Collier's last game as UK's coach.

When you can find a way to make a true freshman at 18 look fundamentally better then a 22 or 23 yr old redshirt senior, let Stoops know.

 

[WeepNoMore]

When you can find a way to make a true freshman at 18 look fundamentally better then a 22 or 23 yr old redshirt senior, let Stoops know.

Gimme a break!! They aren't and haven't been all 18-year-old true freshmen for the past 2 years, though a number of the upperclassmen may have played as if they were.

 

[Onomatopoeia]

You're over analyzing and being too hard on the coaches. It was talent and talent only. Coaching can only go so far.

Remember, UT brought in the #7 recruiting class in the country in 2014. By your logic, they should have been a top ten team in the country last year. They finished 7-6. Also, keep in mind UT never was as bad as UK, so we have much further to go than they.

I hate to be that guy, but this is the typical basketball mentality that some of our fans can't seem to let go. For the 1000th time, football talent doesn't produce as fast as basketball. Football players don't really grasp the speed of the game (especially SEC) until 2nd or 3rd year. Take into the fact that Joker had recruited Sun Belt (maybe not even that good) talent and it was a recipe for disaster.

If Cal was given a team with Florida A&M basketball talent (which was UK football equivalent) do you really think he would go to the Final Four? Even the tournament? No. And you're delusional if you think otherwise. But if Cal brought in one of his top classes with that Florida A&M talent, would they go? Certainly. But experience doesn't mean anything in basketball. That's the key difference.

 

[adolph rollingover]

An honest assesment is what coaches do every offseason and every week. Your questions are part of the assesment. To organize a little more think of dividing into
1. alignment
2. assignemnt
3. execution

Errors which repeately occur in the first two usually are a direct reflection on the coaches. If a player does not know his assignment or can't remember he is supposed to cut his split by 2 yards when running 2 west H shallow then the coaches need to develop a better teaching model or find a new H.

execution errors can be result of poor fndamentals, but most often are not. Most of the tme the player wants to execute properly but his body does not have the ability to do so.

 

[Oldtrainer]

Amazing when a team with less talented players look when they play a team with alot more talented players. Example UK against most of SEC teams in past years! Personally think coach Stoops and staff are up grading UK squad talent level and believe CAT fans will see improvement this coming season. Think 6 and/or 7 wins are doable this season and next year will be much improved!

 

[Blue Decade]

I posted the following in another thread, but it didn't gain much traction. I got only one response to my questions. So I am reposting it in a separate thread (with a few clarifying changes) in the hope that some of you posters with more football knowledge than I can help alleviate my concern:

My major concern (and my major disappointment with Coach Stoops' first two teams) is the lack of fundamentals with which UK players try to compete.

I have seen improvement in the physicality and athleticism of our team and our level of recruiting has been improved significantly. But Coach Stoops' first two teams simply were not fundamentally sound. Specifically, I have observed way too many instances of the following:

(1) arm tackling and failure to wrap up tackles (The 10 or so missed tackles in the TD by the MSU back was the most glaring example.)
(2) failure by our DBs to look back for the ball in pass coverage
(3) dropped interception opportunities due to failure of the defender to watch the ball into his hands
(4) failure by our D linemen to get low enough to get adequate leverage
(5) failure to run to the right hole by our RBs / too quick to break the play to the outside
(6) failure by our RBs to pick up the blitz
(7) happy feet by our QBs
(8) QBs inability to look for 2nd or 3rd options on pass routes
(8a) failure by QBs to step up into the pocket to avoid rush
(9) failure by our receivers to run the right route
(11) dropped passes by our receivers due to failure to watch ball all the way to their hands
(12) failure by secondary and tertiary receivers to complete their assigned routes
(13) false starts by our O line
(14) failure of O line to get required leverage on run blocking
(15) totally missed blocks by O line on pass blocking
(16) failure to maintain lane integrity on punt and KO coverage
(17) others that don't come to mind just now

Even good, well-coached, fundamentally sound teams (Missouri is the best example I can think of off the top of my head.) have these sort of lapses occasionally. But with our last two teams these sort of fundamental mistakes happened over and over and over, game after game.

In my non-expert opinion this failure to play fundamentally sound football falls on the coaching staff as much, or more so, as on the players.

I have four questions for those posters who are much more knowledgeable than I about the game of football:

(1) Am I being too hard on our coaches and/or players with these observations?
(2) Does the blame for not being a fundamentally sound football team fall more on the coaches or more on the players?
(3) Is it realistic to expect to go from such a weak team in terms of fundamentals (2014) to a fundamentally sound football team (2015) in one year?
(4) Is it realistic to expect to move up in the SEC pecking order on improved strength, athleticism and recruiting alone?

Last year, Kentucky ranked #2 in the entire SEC in turnover margin, definitely 1 of the most important measures of a fundamentally sound team. You mentioned Missouri as an example of a fundamentally sound team, but Kentucky ranked ahead of Missouri in both turnover margin and fewer yards penalized per game. You went to a lot of trouble to make your argument, but it looks like you missed the forest for the trees in some respects.

 

[kats23]

What helps teams look fundamentally sound is depth as much as talent. As the game wears on and the season wears on, thin teams will get sloppy and start to look like they aren't fundamentally sound I think that had a lot to do with UK last season and the late slide.

 

[gsayers]

These kids are being taught fundamentals by the best teachers in the game.

A lack of depth my friend. We seemed to be sound the first part of the season. I doubt that we just completely decided not be fundamentally sound.

I can tell you that, beyond good things are coming and they're coming this year.

I think this offense, if not the most productive, may be one of the most productive offenses in KY football history.

 

[C1180]

I do not think youth can be used as an excuse on defense unless you just mean that the younger players are more talented and just need experience. The majority of the two deep this year and last year consist and consisted of upper classmen and most of them are Seniors The depth however is fairly young.

You could make a case for youth on offense however because the offense is very young.

 

[ukalumni00]

A lot of good comments already. For me, my biggest question marks continue to be both Elliott and Schlarman. John has done a tremendous job recruiting lately. Elliott has not impressive on the recruiting trail except when he first got to UK. Both get a pass because of lack of talent, depth, experience, and size but it's time to start seeing some real improvement.

 

[mrschwump]

No question UK 2014 made far too many unforced errors to beat good SEC teams. Hopefully another year's experience and some much needed depth will make 2015 better.

 

[OFortuna]

One of the mantras Stoops continually repeats, and which you increasingly hear repeated by players, is "discipline/attention to detail." It is an attitude toward every aspect of their "business" that he is trying to inculcate in the program until it becomes second nature -- the right way, in the right place, etc. Doesn't guarantee wins, or diminish the need for talent, but does help develop a team that does not beat itself and can maximize the talent it does have. Not there yet, as Stoops will acknowledge, but definitely on the way.

 

[Blue Decade]

No question UK 2014 made far too many unforced errors to beat good SEC teams. Hopefully another year's experience and some much needed depth will make 2015 better.

Wrong. Again, Kentucky ranked #2 in the entire SEC last year in turnover margin, behind only Georgia.

 

[screwduke]

Gimme a break!! They aren't and haven't been all 18-year-old true freshmen for the past 2 years, though a number of the upperclassmen may have played as if they were.

A lot of the upperclassmen were joker recruits.

 

[mrschwump]

Wrong. Again, Kentucky ranked #2 in the entire SEC last year in turnover margin, behind only Georgia.

Let's just overlook missed assignments, missed blocks, missed tackles, poorly run routes, dropped passes/INTs and cherry-pick one stat. If you don't think UK needs to clean up mistakes to be a better team I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Blue Decade]

Let's just overlook missed assignments, missed blocks, missed tackles, poorly run routes, dropped passes/INTs and cherry-pick one stat. If you don't think UK needs to clean up mistakes to be a better team I don't know what to tell you.

Every team needs to clean up mistakes. Every team misses assignments. That doesn't change the fact that Kentucky ranked #2 last year in the entire SEC in turnover margin.

 

[Poetax]

Gimme a break!! They aren't and haven't been all 18-year-old true freshmen for the past 2 years, though a number of the upperclassmen may have played as if they were.

Sorry that you are upset but the players that Stoops had to depend on early were either first year players(juco) or true or redshirt freshmen in his first two years.

 

[WeepNoMore]

Sorry that you are upset but the players that Stoops had to depend on early were either first year players(juco) or true or redshirt freshmen in his first two years.

Guess Donte Rumph, Mister Cobble, Avery Williamson, Bud Dupree, Z (in year 2), Ashely Lowery, Raymond Sanders, LaRod King, Demarco Robinson, Landon Foster, Jordan Aumiller, Darren Miller, Kevin Mitchell, Jonathan George, Joe Mansour, Josh Forest (in year 2), Zach West (in year 2), Jordan Swindle (in year 2), Javis Blue (in year 2),Mike Douglas, Khalid Henderson (in year 2), et. al., were mere figments of my imagination???

 

[Poetax]

Guess Donte Rumph, Mister Cobble, Avery Williamson, Bud Dupree, Z (in year 2), Ashely Lowery, Raymond Sanders, LaRod King, Demarco Robinson, Landon Foster, Jordan Aumiller, Darren Miller, Kevin Mitchell, Jonathan George, Joe Mansour, Josh Forest (in year 2), Zach West (in year 2), Jordan Swindle (in year 2), Javis Blue (in year 2),Mike Douglas, Khalid Henderson (in year 2), et. al., were mere figments of my imagination???

They are just not the caliper players that Stoop and staff are recruiting. Don't you think we are getting players better now then those you mentioned?

 

[uofkFTW18]

Guess Donte Rumph, Mister Cobble, Avery Williamson, Bud Dupree, Z (in year 2), Ashely Lowery, Raymond Sanders, LaRod King, Demarco Robinson, Landon Foster, Jordan Aumiller, Darren Miller, Kevin Mitchell, Jonathan George, Joe Mansour, Josh Forest (in year 2), Zach West (in year 2), Jordan Swindle (in year 2), Javis Blue (in year 2),Mike Douglas, Khalid Henderson (in year 2), et. al., were mere figments of my imagination???

Of all those guys you mentioned, 3 were drafted(Z, Bud and Avery). A few are trying to fight their way onto a roster(Miller, Rumph, and Blue from what I've heard). Forrest is a good player and Swindle would be serviceable if he could fix his false start problems. Other than that, that's an incredibly unimpressive group of players. Experience will only do so much to hide talent deficiencies.

That's not to say that we shouldn't have these kinds of discussions, though; I just think that we should wait until the staff has more talent to work with before we make concrete statements about their abilities to coach/develop players(whether it be positive or negative). If we continue to have some of the issues you posted in your OP over the next few years then I would agree that there's something wrong at the coaching level. Just my opinion, of course.

Also, LaRod King didn't play for Stoops. His last year was Joker's last year.

 

[WeepNoMore]

They are just not the caliper players that Stoop and staff are recruiting. Don't you think we are getting players better now then those you mentioned?

Absolutely, we are getting better players now! I just have a problem with broad generalizations like "the players that Stoops had to depend on early were either first year players(juco) or true or redshirt freshmen in his first two years", when in fact there were a number of upperclassmen, some of them pretty darn good players, that played during Coach Stoops' first two years. Unfortunately, not nearly enough of the pretty-darn-good variety.

My concern is that, IMHO, Coach Stoops' teams were (or, if some of the posters above are correct, appeared to be) weak fundamentally these past two years. And that some of the high expectations for this coming year as expressed by some posters do not take into account that moving from a weak team fundamentally to a fundamentally sound FB team from year two to year three may be expecting too much.

As some posters have observed, being less talented, less physical, and less athletic than the opposition can make players that may have good fundamentals look fundamentally weak, especially when combined with a lack of quality depth.

While it clearly appears that we are moving forward in terms of athleticism and physicality, I'm taking a wait and see approach to decide whether improved athleticism and physicality translates into a fundamentally sound FB team in year three of Coach Stoops' tenure. If there is not a considerable improvement in the areas I listed in my original post, then one has to question whether simply getting more physical and more athletic players translates into sounder fundamentals. And, if not, then why not.

 

[Poetax]

Absolutely, we are getting better players now! I just have a problem with broad generalizations like "the players that Stoops had to depend on early were either first year players(juco) or true or redshirt freshmen in his first two years", when in fact there were a number of upperclassmen, some of them pretty darn good players, that played during Coach Stoops' first two years. Unfortunately, not nearly enough of the pretty-darn-good variety.

My concern is that, IMHO, Coach Stoops' teams were (or, if some of the posters above are correct, appeared to be) weak fundamentally these past two years. And that some of the high expectations for this coming year as expressed by some posters do not take into account that moving from a weak team fundamentally to a fundamentally sound FB team from year two to year three may be expecting too much.

As some posters have observed, being less talented, less physical, and less athletic than the opposition can make players that may have good fundamentals look fundamentally weak, especially when combined with a lack of quality depth.

While it clearly appears that we are moving forward in terms of athleticism and physicality, I'm taking a wait and see approach to decide whether improved athleticism and physicality translates into a fundamentally sound FB team in year three of Coach Stoops' tenure. If there is not a considerable improvement in the areas I listed in my original post, then one has to question whether simply getting more physical and more athletic players translates into sounder fundamentals. And, if not, then why not.

A perfect example of what you are saying happened in Stoop's first season. We had a play on where the QB threw or lateraled the ball to the wide receiver and the wide receiver was supposed to throw it back to the QB but he waited too long and the play was stuffed. A lot of the older players that Stoops acquired did not have the fundamentals nor the savvy to make plays like that. You hate to say it but I think their mindset was in loser mode because of all the bad luck and bad games they had. I think now we are getting players who are much smarter and knew how to win on their high school teams. I like where Stoops is taking us.

 

[WeepNoMore]

Of all those guys you mentioned, 3 were drafted(Z, Bud and Avery). A few are trying to fight their way onto a roster(Miller, Rumph, and Blue from what I've heard). Forrest is a good player and Swindle would be serviceable if he could fix his false start problems. Other than that, that's an incredibly unimpressive group of players. Experience will only do so much to hide talent deficiencies.

That's not to say that we shouldn't have these kinds of discussions, though; I just think that we should wait until the staff has more talent to work with before we make concrete statements about their abilities to coach/develop players(whether it be positive or negative). If we continue to have some of the issues you posted in your OP over the next few years then I would agree that there's something wrong at the coaching level. Just my opinion, of course.

Also, LaRod King didn't play for Stoops. His last year was Joker's last year.

Thanks for the correction re LaRod King.

Also, some of the other players I mentioned were/are solid college players, though not of the star variety. Even at Alabama and Georgia not every player, even a starter, is going to have a shot at professional football.

PS: I realize that UA and UG have a lot more of the star variety that we do.

 

[Poetax]

Thanks for the correction re LaRod King.

Also, some of the other players I mentioned were/are solid college players, though not of the star variety. Even at Alabama and Georgia not every player, even a starter, is going to have a shot at professional football.

I respect your opinion of calling them solid but we did go 4-7 with most of those players so that's why I think we are getting a much more talented prospect then we were before Stoops was here.