Rich Brooks Original Plan same as Stoops new plan

[UKani]

I know a lot of us are excited for what Mark Stoops is doing with the football program, but if you stop and think, you'll realize that Rich Brooks' original plan is what Mark Stoops has adjusted too.

Mike Archer as DC (BTW who I actually love) had a plan to implement a 3-4 defense and not the one like Rick Minter either. In one of Mike Archer's original interviews he stressed being multiple in fronts and multiple coverage's, just like Mark Stoops does. He also stressed that it would be easier to recruit to the 3-4 rather than the 4-3 at UK, just like Rick Minter and now Mark Stoops have said. There are a ton of similarities here, even in blitz packages there are similarities....

Rich Brooks plan for OC was Ron Hudson who came off of highly successful seasons at Kansas State as OC. He wasn't a hot name, but had highly productive offenses, just like Shannon Dawson who also isn't a hot name but had highly productive offenses. Ron Hudson's offense stressed the vertical passing game and using the middle of the field while using zone blocking schemes in the running game and being physical at the point of attack. It wasn't the Air Raid, but it was supposed to be pass oriented. All of this is just like Shannon Dawson's offense...

The difference between the coaching staffs are that Rich Brooks had a bunch of older guys and were probably less motivated in the recruiting area, while Mark Stoops has a bunch of younger guys who may be more hungry to do well in recruiting. Rich Brooks didn't have the recruiting chops that Mark Stoops does either. And the High Performance stuff Mark Stoops has put in is phenomenal, but probably unheard of on all levels in 2003 when Rich Brooks was hired. But lets not be mistaken Rich Brooks plan for player development was a great one as well. Both coaches had the same mantra, recruit and develop and take no shortcuts.... Its just Mark Stoops will have better players to work with because his recruiting chops are better...

 

[UKWinsAgainYep]

I know a lot of us are excited for what Mark Stoops is doing with the football program, but if you stop and think, you'll realize that Rich Brooks' original plan is what Mark Stoops has adjusted too.

Mike Archer as DC (BTW who I actually love) had a plan to implement a 3-4 defense and not the one like Rick Minter either. In one of Mike Archer's original interviews he stressed being multiple in fronts and multiple coverage's, just like Mark Stoops does. He also stressed that it would be easier to recruit to the 3-4 rather than the 4-3 at UK, just like Rick Minter and now Mark Stoops have said. There are a ton of similarities here, even in blitz packages there are similarities....

Rich Brooks plan for OC was Ron Hudson who came off of highly successful seasons at Kansas State as OC. He wasn't a hot name, but had highly productive offenses, just like Shannon Dawson who also isn't a hot name but had highly productive offenses. Ron Hudson's offense stressed the vertical passing game and using the middle of the field while using zone blocking schemes in the running game and being physical at the point of attack. It wasn't the Air Raid, but it was supposed to be pass oriented. All of this is just like Shannon Dawson's offense...

The difference between the coaching staffs are that Rich Brooks had a bunch of older guys and were probably less motivated in the recruiting area, while Mark Stoops has a bunch of younger guys who may be more hungry to do well in recruiting. Rich Brooks didn't have the recruiting chops that Mark Stoops does either. And the High Performance stuff Mark Stoops has put in is phenomenal, but probably unheard of on all levels in 2003 when Rich Brooks was hired. But lets not be mistaken Rich Brooks plan for player development was a great one as well. Both coaches had the same mantra, recruit and develop and take no shortcuts.... Its just Mark Stoops will have better players to work with because his recruiting chops are better...

Agreed.....So in the end, it really is about talent level. If UK has any chance at all in the SEC, they have to figure out how to sign consistent top 25 classes. I think Stoops can achieve that IF he gets at least 6 wins this season and gets us to a bowl. That will continue momentum.

If we don't get to 6 wins, we will NOT sign a top 25 class and Stoops may have missed his chance to build this program. Recruits want to see us going to bowls and improving. Anything less won't get it done.

 

[Dallas-Wild]

Agreed.....So in the end, it really is about talent level. If UK has any chance at all in the SEC, they have to figure out how to sign consistent top 25 classes. I think Stoops can achieve that IF he gets at least 6 wins this season and gets us to a bowl. That will continue momentum.

If we don't get to 6 wins, we will NOT sign a top 25 class and Stoops may have missed his chance to build this program. Recruits want to see us going to bowls and improving. Anything less won't get it done.

Totally agree....if some how he were to get more then 6 with such a young team regular season, there is no telling who he might grab in the 2017 class.

And might even add a surprise with no deflections from a very good 2016 class.

 

[vhcat70]

Agreed.....So in the end, it really is about talent level. If UK has any chance at all in the SEC, they have to figure out how to sign consistent top 25 classes. I think Stoops can achieve that IF he gets at least 6 wins this season and gets us to a bowl. That will continue momentum.

If we don't get to 6 wins, we will NOT sign a top 25 class and Stoops may have missed his chance to build this program. Recruits want to see us going to bowls and improving. Anything less won't get it done.

I'm not buying that it's 6 wins this reason or bust for Stoops' program. Regardless of where this recruiting class finishes, we'll be even better next year due to experience. Yes, can't argue that 6+ wins doesn't create an easier path to further growth, but growth/improvement isn't always a straight line up.

 

[C1180]

I'm not buying that it's 6 wins this reason or bust for Stoops' program. Regardless of where this recruiting class finishes, we'll be even better next year due to experience. Yes, can't argue that 6+ wins doesn't create an easier path to further growth, but growth/improvement isn't always a straight line up.

I don't know if he will for sure be a bust if he doesn't win at least 6 games and show improvement across the board. I suspect however it is going to make the recruiting more difficult for the recruiters and IMO will cause a reduction in the talent that is brought in. Selling hopes and dreams can only last for a short time and then you need results. IMO that time is is coming soon for this coaching staff. If the talent level begins to drop and the coaching staff can not reverse the trend then you can say they will likely be a bust.

 

[jauk11]

Football is a funny game, filled with upsets------which has been a great thing for UK over the years because we have never had the talent to compete in the SEC since------well, since UK started putting all their emphasis on basketball. Brooks should have never gone to a bowl game based on the rankings of his recruits, MANY of them that were developed and coached up to become star players------MOST without the benefit of a redshirt, a big problem, if they could play at all they had to play.

There was one BIG thing wrong with Brooks recruiting (and I agree that Stoops and Troops are doing a great job there, not just in signing but in evaluating players-----just like Brooks did with what he had to work with-----and Joker fired most of his coaches because they didn't like to hit the road) Brooks had the BARE MINIMUM of support for football, look at the JOKE of a "recruiting room" for just one example, a recruiting budget for TWENTY FIVE football recruits LESS than for typically FOUR basketball recruits (more with Cal's One and Dones), an operating budget about the same for 85 scholarships as for 13, the list goes on and on. Sorry, but UK was considered a "Basketball School" then------and hard to argue with that at the time. LOTS of changes now.

Everyone predicting 7 or more wins need to remember that upsets happen both ways, a dropped interception (twice) can be the difference in a win or loss even if you should have won the game, and even if you have the better team. Consider Joker's 10 team upsetting TOBC's team when UK had TWO four stars playing (not sure there were even any on the bench) and USC had THIRTY NINE four star commits in the previous four classes along with a five star or two.

Better to look at the talent level we are bringing in and how they are being coached rather than setting a minimum win prediction.

And yes, I believe we "should" win seven games this year.

 

[jnewc2]

I'm not buying that it's 6 wins this reason or bust for Stoops' program.

So you'd be okay with a team that has:
-a better quarterback,
-better running backs,
-a better offensive line,
-better wide receivers,
-better linebackers,
-better defensive backs,
-better special teams,
-better depth at 90% of positions,
-better strength,
-more experience at 90% of the positions, -better overall team speed,
and a better, more experienced coaching staff, not improving on what was a disappointing 5-7 (should've been 6-6) record for last year's team? I have trouble understanding that..I really do, sorry.

We had maybe the most improved team in the entire nation last year, and are returning 90% (or more) of our key contributors, so I have trouble understanding why so many are expecting zero improvement this year (unless you're saying that we're going to improve this year yet fail to win more games than last year's team..which I have even more trouble understanding considering that we were a 5-7 team that was two plays away from being 7-5). I just see no scenario outside of key injury where we don't improve on what was a disappointing 5-7 campaign, sorry.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

Well two things Brooks didn't do that Stoops is doing is recruit well and make Ohio a priority. How no other staff saw that is beyond me.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Hopefully Dawson was ready to shine on his own and get out from under Holgerson's shadow. When Hudson was hired, we heard that Snyder was the real offensive genius and Hudson was just OC in name. That turned out to be true. And, on top of it all, Hudson was reportedly a jerk. I think we know Dawson is not that.

 

[hmt5000]

Brooks also brought in speed and stoops seems to be bringing in bigger guys who are faster. It's gonna be up to the coaches coaching to get in the top half of the sec.

 

[Poetax]

I'm not buying that it's 6 wins this reason or bust for Stoops' program. Regardless of where this recruiting class finishes, we'll be even better next year due to experience. Yes, can't argue that 6+ wins doesn't create an easier path to further growth, but growth/improvement isn't always a straight line up.

You could be right if those losses were fights right down to the wire with the SEC elite. Getting blown out in any game would hurt the program more then not getting to a bowl game. In this coming year we have to show that we can compete, that is the biggest thing that we need to do. Personally I think we need 6 wins to keep that recruiting going strong in the future.

 

[Deeeefense]

There may be some similarities but there are a lot of differences between these two coaches. Brooks was old school and IMO did not manage the program nearly as well as Stoops has. Brooks' first few years were horrible - probation was a mitigating problem but he inherited a team that went 7-4 and things went down from there culminating with a homecoming loss to lowly OU. In fact there was a large contingent of fans that wanted Brooks fired early on. Two deficiencies stood out with Brooks, one, as UKani mentioned he did not have a staff that would recruit, but also he made some bad coaching decisions and was stubborn about making changes. Hudson was an over-hyped coach that Bill Snyder wanted out, his offense was a disaster. Brooks refused to fire him when everyone from the AD down was calling for his head. Then there was the Steve Brown situation. Brown was a darn could DB coach but he was in over his head as a DC - who remembers the MSU game when we kept 5 DBs on the field the entire game while the Bulldawgs run up 600+ yards of rushing? - again Brooks refused to make changes. Lastly there is the one most everyone remembers, the legacy appointment of Joker Phillips as head coach. I'm not going to beat that drum any more but it's obvious that Phillips was simply not ready to become a D1 head coach. Still I give Brooks his due for putting together some good teams starting with the "mid season wakeup" of the 2006 team and going through the 2008 team, the 07 team being his best.

Stoops on the other hand seems to always choose excellent coaches that are well qualified for their positions. The staff not only recruits well, but they work harmoniously together as a team unlike previous staffs. Stoops doesn't have the "issues" that Brooks had with certain players and coaches, at least not that I'm aware of and Stoops seems to have "quietly" restructured the remains of the Joker roster, moving guys off that were not going to produce and retaining and developing the ones that could.

I really think when we hired Stoops we struck gold. I think this guy has only begun to display his coaching acumen and the best is yet to come.

 

[Rhavicc]

Hopefully Dawson was ready to shine on his own and get out from under Holgerson's shadow. When Hudson was hired, we heard that Snyder was the real offensive genius and Hudson was just OC in name. That turned out to be true. And, on top of it all, Hudson was reportedly a jerk. I think we know Dawson is not that.

Keep in mind that Dawson did run his own offense before, albeit, at the FCS level, but he did run one, and it was a top 10 offense in the country. He was playing with players with talent that is aligned to the talent of the rest of the FCS schools, and he did incredibly well. Things to consider:

1. Dawson would name a play, and Holgorsen would either agree with it, or change the plays to something else. 80% of the time, Holgorsen agreed with Dawson and run the play that he Dawson relayed to him.

2. Dawson is widely known as a QB whisperer. He's made elite players out of a lot of QB's who were just average multiple times in his career. He knows how to fix QB's mechanically, mentally, and emotionally. With the tools that Patrick Towles has, and the coaching ability that Dawson brings, Towles' potential is through the room. Also consider that Dawson himself said that Towles has more arm talent than any QB he's coached to this point.

3. Dawson has been around some great offensive minds in his career. Holgorsen being the latest, and one of the greatest in the game today. Dawson has admittedly stated that when he got to WVU, he was a true air raid disciple, and most of the plays he would call would be pass plays, but in his time at WVU, he's learned many things from Holgorsen offensively, apparently to the point where they were calling the exact same play 4/5ths of the time.

4. Holgorsen was ultimately the guy who would decide on plays, but he did not focus on preparing the offense the week before the game. That task was laid into the hands of Dawson, who did very well preparing those players. WVU has less talent than UK does, and they're keeping up with (or beating) teams like Alabama, Kansas State, TCU, Baylor, all of which are very good. He knows how to prepare his players for games, and he has a terrific idea of how to call plays. He will do very well here.

 

[Bigbluediddy63]

There may be some similarities but there are a lot of differences between these two coaches. Brooks was old school and IMO did not manage the program nearly as well as Stoops has. Brooks' first few years were horrible - probation was a mitigating problem but he inherited a team that went 7-4 and things went down from there culminating with a homecoming loss to lowly OU. In fact there was a large contingent of fans that wanted Brooks fired early on. Two deficiencies stood out with Brooks, one, as UKani mentioned he did not have a staff that would recruit, but also he made some bad coaching decisions and was stubborn about making changes. Hudson was an over-hyped coach that Bill Snyder wanted out, his offense was a disaster. Brooks refused to fire him when everyone from the AD down was calling for his head. Then there was the Steve Brown situation. Brown was a darn could DB coach but he was in over his head as a DC - who remembers the MSU game when we kept 5 DBs on the field the entire game while the Bulldawgs run up 600+ yards of rushing? - again Brooks refused to make changes. Lastly there is the one most everyone remembers, the legacy appointment of Joker Phillips as head coach. I'm not going to beat that drum any more but it's obvious that Phillips was simply not ready to become a D1 head coach. Still I give Brooks his due for putting together some good teams starting with the "mid season wakeup" of the 2006 team and going through the 2008 team, the 07 team being his best.

Stoops on the other hand seems to always choose excellent coaches that are well qualified for their positions. The staff not only recruits well, but they work harmoniously together as a team unlike previous staffs. Stoops doesn't have the "issues" that Brooks had with certain players and coaches, at least not that I'm aware of and Stoops seems to have "quietly" restructured the remains of the Joker roster, moving guys off that were not going to produce and retaining and developing the ones that could.

I really think when we hired Stoops we struck gold. I think this guy has only begun to display his coaching acumen and the best is yet to come.

Stoops has yet to prove anything besides the fact he has improved recruiting. His defenses have been totally atrocious and from where I sit he micomanages his coaches to the point they leave. Stoops has alot to prove as far as talent development and coaching players up. Brooks sure knew how to do that. Year three will tell us what we need to know about Stoop's coaching acumen. Anything else is purely blind speulation. You can put Stoops above Brooks when he takes down a number 1 team, beats Georgia or Auburn on the road. Hell, we havent beaten anyone on the road yet. Bowl game or bust this season. Its put up or shut up time No way around it. Realisticly this team should win at least 7 games the way their schedule its up.

 

[Rhavicc]

Stoops has yet to prove anything besides the fact he has improved recruiting. His defenses have been totally atrocious and from where I sit he micomanages his coaches to the point they leave. Stoops has alot to prove as far as talent development and coaching players up. Brooks sure knew how to do that. Year three will tell us what we need to know about Stoop's coaching acumen. Anything else is purely blind speulation. You can put Stoops above Brooks when he takes down a number 1 team, beats Georgia or Auburn on the road. Hell, we havent beaten anyone on the road yet. Bowl game or bust this season. Its put up or shut up time No way around it. Realisticly this team should win at least 7 games the way their schedule its up.

Not entirely true. The defense has actually improved statistically, it was just that bad under Joker. Also, history shows that Stoops began getting the most out of his defenses in year 3. In Arizona, it jumped to top 25 in year 3 after being at UK level. At Florida State, it jumped to top 10 in year 3 after being at UK level.
I understand being a bit down being where the program was, but don't be unreasonably pessimistic by saying "he's yet to prove anything".
You've yet to prove anything in your 9 posts before you start blasting the coaching staff. I imagine you won't be posting here for very long.

 

[Bigbluediddy63]

I'll say it again, this staff has yet to prove anything untill they show it on the field. Im like the majority of realistic fans, not big blue shade wearing loser apologists. Without a bowl game and marked improvement against divisional oppenents that obliterated us last year, the recruits arent going to keep buying what these coaches are selling.

 

[gamalielkid]

I am as optimistic as anyone about the future of UK football. I believe this team will win 7 plus games this year. However, everyone who knows anything about big time football knows that it takes more than 3 years of recruits to build a powerful team in the SEC. I will not be down on Coach Stoops for not winning 7 games this year - I will be down if we don't continue to see improved play and playing close to most teams until the final series of downs. Improvement has a lot more to do with things other than winning. I also think that big time recruits understand this more than the average fans do. Most players know it is year 5 before a coach can take a team from nothing to being very, very competitive and challenging for championships. It takes a solid two deep and actually three deep to stay competitive for an entire season. We just aren't at that point. That is why the talent sees what is coming and they understand they would be redshirting at other major programs too! Players who pulled away at the last minute last year may well rue changing their minds when they would have been red-shirt sophmores. I feel very strongly that year 5 will see Kentucky being a feared team!

Let's face it - when Joker left, we were in worse shape than UAB was and is! Coach Stoops had it harder than most new coaches - he had to work around a dsyfunctional team who were not ready for big time football opponents. He had to rid the team from certain players and attitudes. That attitude has changed! Commonwealth will be rocking and tickets will once again be in high demand. No matter what Mitch has said, I fully expect to see a major expansion to Commonwealth in the next decade - ticket demand will be there when the Cats start contending for Championships!

Football has one big advantage over basketball - tail gaiting - and weekend parties across the south! Away games are a lot of fun - especially when you have a competitive team. Kentucky fans will travel and travel huge when we have a competitive team too. We have had a taste of tail gaiting - but we haven't had anything like the other SEC schools except for Vanderbilt. Our day is coming and coming very soon!

Go Big Blue!

 

[C1180]

I am as optimistic as anyone about the future of UK football. I believe this team will win 7 plus games this year. However, everyone who knows anything about big time football knows that it takes more than 3 years of recruits to build a powerful team in the SEC. I will not be down on Coach Stoops for not winning 7 games this year - I will be down if we don't continue to see improved play and playing close to most teams until the final series of downs. Improvement has a lot more to do with things other than winning. I also think that big time recruits understand this more than the average fans do. Most players know it is year 5 before a coach can take a team from nothing to being very, very competitive and challenging for championships. It takes a solid two deep and actually three deep to stay competitive for an entire season. We just aren't at that point. That is why the talent sees what is coming and they understand they would be redshirting at other major programs too! Players who pulled away at the last minute last year may well rue changing their minds when they would have been red-shirt sophmores. I feel very strongly that year 5 will see Kentucky being a feared team!

Let's face it - when Joker left, we were in worse shape than UAB was and is! Coach Stoops had it harder than most new coaches - he had to work around a dsyfunctional team who were not ready for big time football opponents. He had to rid the team from certain players and attitudes. That attitude has changed! Commonwealth will be rocking and tickets will once again be in high demand. No matter what Mitch has said, I fully expect to see a major expansion to Commonwealth in the next decade - ticket demand will be there when the Cats start contending for Championships!

Football has one big advantage over basketball - tail gaiting - and weekend parties across the south! Away games are a lot of fun - especially when you have a competitive team. Kentucky fans will travel and travel huge when we have a competitive team too. We have had a taste of tail gaiting - but we haven't had anything like the other SEC schools except for Vanderbilt. Our day is coming and coming very soon!

Go Big Blue!

A horse has a gait. Football fans Tail Gate.

 

[Levibooty]

I can't agree with the sentiment that this staff "hasn't proven anything". They have proven they cannot perform miracles for one thing. They have proven Kentucky can recruit the state of Ohio. They have proven they can recruit better than what Kentucky has in the past. They have proven to value recruiting good linemen. That's about all a Kentucky fan could realistically ask for at this point.

I do agree that for Kentucky to sustain and improve recruiting even more, we have to start seeing the rewards on the field in number of wins but then we did see that last year. We just need to see the trend to stay on the upward path. After all we did win two SEC games last year which although it's not where we want to be that is improvement and it is improvement that has been accomplished mostly with the young recruits Stoops has brought here. That's better than losing to Vanderbilt and every other team we play in the SEC.

 

[shutzhund]

While 6, 7 or 8 wins and a bowl are obviously desirable we should remember, as seasoned football fans, that this is Stoops 3rd year following the Joker disaster and this is the SEC we're talking about. While many posters abhor the thought of patience the process of improvement is not a steady line upwards. THERE ARE PLATEAUS IN THE PROCESS.

That is unless you do it the CAROLINA WAY. A very attractive option if you have a warm and cuddly NCAA in your hip pocket. WE DON'T.

 

[Deeeefense]

I can't agree with the sentiment that this staff "hasn't proven anything". They have proven they cannot perform miracles for one thing. They have proven Kentucky can recruit the state of Ohio. They have proven they can recruit better than what Kentucky has in the past. They have proven to value recruiting good linemen. That's about all a Kentucky fan could realistically ask for at this point.

I think they proved they are pretty darn good at game planning, and real-time game coaching as well. On paper we shouldn't even been on the same field with Florida, South Carolina and MSU yet we won one, should have won two and had a shot at the third. We all remember the second half season melt down, but that's a lot more attributable to a lack of depth and the ability to substitute early on than coaching performance.

I think Coach Stoops and company definitely over-achieved last year compared to what they were expected to do, and what they had to work with.

 

[prospectcat]

I know a lot of us are excited for what Mark Stoops is doing with the football program, but if you stop and think, you'll realize that Rich Brooks' original plan is what Mark Stoops has adjusted too.

Mike Archer as DC (BTW who I actually love) had a plan to implement a 3-4 defense and not the one like Rick Minter either. In one of Mike Archer's original interviews he stressed being multiple in fronts and multiple coverage's, just like Mark Stoops does. He also stressed that it would be easier to recruit to the 3-4 rather than the 4-3 at UK, just like Rick Minter and now Mark Stoops have said. There are a ton of similarities here, even in blitz packages there are similarities....

Rich Brooks plan for OC was Ron Hudson who came off of highly successful seasons at Kansas State as OC. He wasn't a hot name, but had highly productive offenses, just like Shannon Dawson who also isn't a hot name but had highly productive offenses. Ron Hudson's offense stressed the vertical passing game and using the middle of the field while using zone blocking schemes in the running game and being physical at the point of attack. It wasn't the Air Raid, but it was supposed to be pass oriented. All of this is just like Shannon Dawson's offense...

The difference between the coaching staffs are that Rich Brooks had a bunch of older guys and were probably less motivated in the recruiting area, while Mark Stoops has a bunch of younger guys who may be more hungry to do well in recruiting. Rich Brooks didn't have the recruiting chops that Mark Stoops does either. And the High Performance stuff Mark Stoops has put in is phenomenal, but probably unheard of on all levels in 2003 when Rich Brooks was hired. But lets not be mistaken Rich Brooks plan for player development was a great one as well. Both coaches had the same mantra, recruit and develop and take no shortcuts.... Its just Mark Stoops will have better players to work with because his recruiting chops are better...

Rich Brooks also had a dream of recruiting rooms and updated workout facilities. He knew his coaching a recruiting could only go so far without it. The Joker experiment probably would have never happened If the administration gave Brooks what he asked for. All water under the bridge but I hope UK (MB) now understands SEC football programs do not get built on a budget!!

 

[bigblueinsanity]

So far, recruiting has been much better under Stoops. But player development much better under Brooks.

When Brooks arrived, the program was so down, he had to take the best athletes he could; then figure out where they fit. He followed that by incredible player development.

Stoops came in while the program was down, but had alot more buzz around his name. He was given a larger checkbook with which to hire better assistants, which in turn translated to alot of recruiting success. It also helped that he landed an unknown homerun in Vince Marrow to pull kids out of Ohio that we historically had no chance with. However I havent seen the player development under Stoops that I wouldve liked; yet.

Like Brooks, Stoops hired an OC with good a pedigree, but it didnt bring the desired results. Hopefully Stoops found his man the 2nd time around, like Brooks. Hopefully it will be another hometown hero that leads us back to perennial bowl contention.

 

[How Blue Can You Get?]

Stoops is better recruiter, Brooks better coach/developer...However, Stoops is a relatively new HC, where as Brooks had lots of HC experience when he took over...What Stoops has managed to do though, whether it should be fully attributed it to him or not, is he got facility upgrades, admin support, and increased overall excitement around the program since he's gotten here. Succeed or fail, facility upgrades will remain. Mark Stoops has already done us a major solid, and I believe the best is yet to come!

 

[TransyCat09]

I'll say it again, this staff has yet to prove anything untill they show it on the field.

We more than doubled the win total from the previous year and the final year of the previous staff. Maybe that doesn't count, though

 

[Levibooty]

So far, recruiting has been much better under Stoops. But player development much better under Brooks.

When Brooks arrived, the program was so down, he had to take the best athletes he could; then figure out where they fit. He followed that by incredible player development.

Stoops came in while the program was down, but had alot more buzz around his name. He was given a larger checkbook with which to hire better assistants, which in turn translated to alot of recruiting success. It also helped that he landed an unknown homerun in Vince Marrow to pull kids out of Ohio that we historically had no chance with. However I havent seen the player development under Stoops that I wouldve liked; yet.

Like Brooks, Stoops hired an OC with good a pedigree, but it didnt bring the desired results. Hopefully Stoops found his man the 2nd time around, like Brooks. Hopefully it will be another hometown hero that leads us back to perennial bowl contention.

I can't agree with this. I'm as big of a fan of Brooks as most but I just can't see that there is any evidence to support this statement at this time. When Brooks was where Stoops is now his record was first 4-8 and then 2-9. Now I do think Brooks was good at developing his recruits, but at the same time in their careers at UK, Stoops has a bit more to support his ability to develop players. Both coaches stepped into a rebuild situation and there just has not been enough time to judge Stoops's coaching abilities with great conviction. That said Stoops has an improving and better record with younger players. I think it is yet to be seen one way or the other who may be better but in no way do I see evidence that Stoops should take the back seat at this time.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I can't agree with this. I'm as big of a fan of Brooks as most but I just can't see that there is any evidence to support this statement at this time. When Brooks was where Stoops is now his record was first 4-8 and then 2-9. Now I do think Brooks was good at developing his recruits, but at the same time in their careers at UK, Stoops has a bit more to support his ability to develop players. Both coaches stepped into a rebuild situation and there just has not been enough time to judge Stoops's coaching abilities with great conviction. That said Stoops has an improving and better record with younger players. I think it is yet to be seen one way or the other who may be better but in no way do I see evidence that Stoops should take the back seat at this time.

I dont think your position is unreasonable. But what players have shown improvement under Stoops? Most players stayed the same last season, some even regressed. I do think Josh Forrest is the only player I can think about who showed improvement under Stoops. But his tenure is young.

Compare that to Brooks, Woodson looked like he should quit football for a time, then had an incredible JR and SR season. John Connor was a walk on, yes a WALK ON. Zipp Duncan came in as a TE, and ended up an excellent OT. Tamme went from a nobody WR to an NFL caliber TE. Keenan Burton got better every single year.

On Defense, every linebacker that came through showed incredible development over the course of their career. Miller, Williams, Williamson, Trevathan, Woodyard. Winston Guy ended up an NFL player. Trevard Lindley ring a bell? Myron Pryor, Jarmon, and Lumpkin all showed vast improvement.

I love Stoops. And Stoops may change this trend and have players show similar development. But so far, hes way behind in that category.

 

[hmt5000]

Your showing a group out of over 150 kids brooks recruited. Stoops is only up to 75. Give him that big a sample size and I have no doubt he can match that.

Your Woodson example, towles is just starting his Jr year. Boom looks better than any guy brooks had you can't coach it either. Forrest just started playing lber last year and is making some preseason teams.we increased our int #s x10.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Your showing a group out of over 150 kids brooks recruited. Stoops is only up to 75. Give him that big a sample size and I have no doubt he can match that.

Your Woodson example, towles is just starting his Jr year. Boom looks better than any guy brooks had you can't coach it either. Forrest just started playing lber last year and is making some preseason teams.we increased our int #s x10.

Ok lets assume everything you say is true. Even if the sample size is 1/2 of what Brooks had, Stoops still hasnt developed 1/2 the players Brooks did.

Boom Williams will be great. But so far he is clearly not better than Rafael Little. And is about on par with Derrick Locke. Dont forget, the backfield was so loaded Alphonso Smith (a future NFL player at the time) could barely get on the field.

I love Stoops. But to date, he hasnt shown the ability to develop players like Brooks could. The good news is that hes getting much better recruits.

 

[tdcat]

Ok lets assume everything you say is true. Even if the sample size is 1/2 of what Brooks had, Stoops still hasnt developed 1/2 the players Brooks did.

Boom Williams will be great. But so far he is clearly not better than Rafael Little. And is about on par with Derrick Locke. Dont forget, the backfield was so loaded Alphonso Smith (a future NFL player at the time) could barely get on the field.

I love Stoops. But to date, he hasnt shown the ability to develop players like Brooks could. The good news is that hes getting much better recruits.

It is way too early to judge Stoops and staff regarding player development. How many players do you think can be developed in two seasons of play? However, even in that short time there is a positive trend being ignored. UK had two DEs drafted last year including a first rounder. Strange those critical of player development would ignore that. Forrest has obviously gotten better. UK just had five picked by Phil Steale for preseason SEC. That is an imprfovement. Melvin Lewis will play in the NFL. Are you going to tell me the staff didn't develop him?
There are others as well. How about Toth? How about McClain? What will the staff show when the long OL and DL recruits who have been redshirting get to finally play. If you don't think you won't see player development then based on this early trend I'd say you aren't being objective.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Yeah, this staff in two years has developed players. We will see more of that this year on the offense and defense.

Stoops came to UK and found little talent and positions void of players. Brooks came to UK and he found a team grossly out of shape and with no desire.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

This argument is silly. Stoops is going on year 3. Brooks didn't start showing progress until you got it, year 3. You can't compare a bunch of young kids to how guys like LIttle, Woodsen, etc. ended up as juniors and seniors. At least not yet. 2 years is hardly enough of a sample size when there was little talent in the upper classes for Stoops to improve. Except that first rounder we had this year. Because Brooks had so many of those.

Hell you could argue that Towles is a prime example of a guy already showing improvement. He was vastly improved last year. You don't go from 2 wins to 5 wins without some improvement by guys. Just a dumb argument with no basis in reality.

 

[tdcat]

This argument is silly. Stoops is going on year 3. Brooks didn't start showing progress until you got it, year 3. You can't compare a bunch of young kids to how guys like LIttle, Woodsen, etc. ended up as juniors and seniors. At least not yet. 2 years is hardly enough of a sample size when there was little talent in the upper classes for Stoops to improve. Except that first rounder we had this year. Because Brooks had so many of those.

Hell you could argue that Towles is a prime example of a guy already showing improvement. He was vastly improved last year. You don't go from 2 wins to 5 wins without some improvement by guys. Just a dumb argument with no basis in reality.

Look at it this way. You need to compare apples to apples. Some of you are comparing Brook's entire UK career of player development to Stoops' at this point.

Stoops has had two years of field coaching at UK. When Brooks had finished his first two years of field coaching the team was coming off a 2-9 record. How many of you saying Brooks is better at player development than Stoops thought Brooks was developing players at the end of his second year?

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

exactly tdcat, Brooks was all but washed up according to many at the time.

 

[hmt5000]

Agreed. To small a sample size to tell about stoops as a head coach but the man can develop football players.in 3 more years he'll have a dozen cats in the nfl with several more getting close looks.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I didn't say Stoops isn't developing players. I'm saying he didn't develop them as well as Brooks did. Two completely different statements.

 

[KidnamedKI]

Lol people act like Rafael Little was Barry Sanders....

 

[UKani]

Yeah its unfair to say that Rich Brooks develops talent better than Mark Stoops. Mark Stoops has a small number of players to work with. All I can do is look at the players that Mark Stoops has worked with while at UK. When I talk to Bud Dupree and he tells me that he developed more under Mark Stoops in 1 year than he did under Joker in 2.5 years that tells me that at the very least Mark Stoops can do a really good job at developing talent. Only time will tell how good he is. But my hunch tells me that Mark Stoops will be as good if not better than Rich Brooks at developing talent. One thing that Mark Stoops is doing that Rich Brooks didn't do is utilize student assistants who don't have NCAA restrictions on them on how much time they can work with players on. I think that is big in helping younger guys develop.

 

[tdcat]

It should also be noted that Korem's methods for physically developing players should be far, far superior to what UK had before...it will just take some time.

 

[Bigbluediddy63]

Being probation riddled with a loss of scholarship athletes is far different than coming in after a couple of down years. But besides any of that, this year will show us what we need to know about stoops. Looking at this roster expectations should be high for this season, imo