A Quiet or Subtle Change in Our Collective Football Mentality . . . .

[The-Hack]

In all off season (and midseason) boards for 20 years, we have frequently seen the argument made . . . . hell, I very frequently made the argument myself . . . ., that "we can't just line up and run the ball against the SEC."

I and others made the argument to support passing, and "system" football, to cloth or hide our evident shortcomings and depth.

I just find it interesting that one of the most common thought patterns from the last 20 plus years of public posting here, and elsewhere, regarding UK Football has regressed without so much as a whimper or complaint, or a mention.

And I'm not ridiculing the ones who have said it, or posted it. I was one of the most fervent in support of that very thought.

I went to the Mizzou game in Columbia. A young fan who spent much of his time on his device looked up when it was 28-7, early in the 4th quarter, and asked me why we kept running the football.

I asked the old rhetorical country smart-arse question in response, "Well, why does a dog lick his balls? . . . . because he CAN."

I waited a LONG time to be able to say that.

I hope I get to say it lots more in '17.

 

[DACats86]

Absolutely nothing is more demoralizing to the other team when you can line up in a running formation (so they know what's coming) and impose your will on them and there's nothing they can do about it. UK did that a lot last year, and I absolutely loved it. I, like you, was one of the naysayers that said UK would never be able to run the ball effectively in the SEC. I was wrong. I think there are several factors that have helped UK in this regard. Most teams are spread or hybrid-spread offenses now and defenses counter by running a nickle or dime as a base defense. It is rare for them to see a pure power-running attack and they are ill-equipped to stop it. Secondly, UK has done a great job recruiting and developing OL. A chronic weakness is turning into a team strength. Also, we got a running back that is tough, doesn't go down easily, powerful and fast enough. And finally, Stephen Johnson is no Lamar Jackson (he's better , but he has good enough speed and maneuverability that teams have to respect his ability to run. Really excited about the evolution of this offense over the next few years.

 

[DACats86]

I will caution you, though, that the "throw it deep, Jarrrud" crowd is alive and well. At several games I heard the familiar refrain of "throw the damn ball" when we were gutting teams on the ground. It's like they think passing yards have more value than running yards, or passing TDs are worth more than running TDs. I don't get it.

 

[THE_OAK]

I've always wanted an offense here where we run the ball down the throats of other teams. Glad it's finally happening, hope it continues going into the future. Now if my hopes and dreams of a top notch defense comes true then I will be absolutely ecstatic.

 

[jgolfparker]

believe me, next year our coaches want to run less than 2016,,, If we can pass 50% of time they will happy. Of course that has to be at a respectable %, say 68 to 73%. Good offense is when the defense has no clue what is coming next.. Then sometimes I heard a wise ole coach say " Untill they stop it, we'll keep doing it"

 

[gamecockcat]

I think much of the evolution has been because our team consists of players who are legitimate SEC-quality. For years, we tried to play smash mouth football with the equivalent of an average MAC OL. Now, that didn't work and won't ever work. Put together an OL like we had last year and should have again this year with quality RBs and an OC who really knows what he's doing and we can and will run well on just about everyone not named Alabama. With a better passing attack this year, especially in the intermediate routes, opponents will be hard pressed to consistently stop our offense. Too much skill position talent, too many options to defend and a tough, athletic OL should result in really consistent offensive production. Maybe a bit less running but still a very effective running attack and a more varied passing attack.

 

[vhcat70]

Nothing gets the blood flowing more than watching the pile continue rumbling down the field.

 

[sluggercatfan]

If 2017 UK offense can score (not avg.) 30 ppg we will be in good shape no matter how it gets done.

 

[Soupbean]

In all off season (and midseason) boards for 20 years, we have frequently seen the argument made . . . . hell, I very frequently made the argument myself . . . ., that "we can't just line up and run the ball against the SEC."

I and others made the argument to support passing, and "system" football, to cloth or hide our evident shortcomings and depth.

I just find it interesting that one of the most common thought patterns from the last 20 plus years of public posting here, and elsewhere, regarding UK Football has regressed without so much as a whimper or complaint, or a mention.

And I'm not ridiculing the ones who have said it, or posted it. I was one of the most fervent in support of that very thought.

I went to the Mizzou game in Columbia. A young fan who spent much of his time on his device looked up when it was 28-7, early in the 4th quarter, and asked me why we kept running the football.

I asked the old rhetorical country smart-arse question in response, "Well, why does a dog lick his balls? . . . . because he CAN."

I waited a LONG time to be able to say that.

I hope I get to say it lots more in '17.

I was one of those who used to make that point and I'm with you. I actually did comment in a thread about the season that the thing that I was most satisfied about was not that we won 7 games but HOW we won those games. I never thought we would have done it by smash mouth football being physical up front.

 

[Deeeefense]

I will caution you, though, that the "throw it deep, Jarrrud" crowd is alive and well. At several games I heard the familiar refrain of "throw the damn ball" when we were gutting teams on the ground. It's like they think passing yards have more value than running yards, or passing TDs are worth more than running TDs. I don't get it.

the one that always made me cringe was "entertaining brand of football" like throwing the ball 60 times a game was more important than actually trying to win. ugh!

 

[The-Hack]

I like to play on Google, and low and behold, found an article that touches on the very subject of this thread.

Apparently, the week after we played Mizzou, the University fired two "experts in avian digestion."

When pressed for the reason, a Chancellor stated, "The next time somebody wants to know what sh!t running through a goose looks like, we'll just give them a video of the 2016 Kentucky football game . . . ."

The Kentucky offensive line! No. 1 in the SEC and saving water foul from useless dissection!

 

[The-Hack]

I think much of the evolution has been because our team consists of players who are legitimate SEC-quality. For years, we tried to play smash mouth football with the equivalent of an average MAC OL. Now, that didn't work and won't ever work.

True. And when I and others said we'd never be able to do it, we were essentially saying that we'd never have that high of a quality O-line.

 

[SanAntonioCat]

I think much of the evolution has been because our team consists of players who are legitimate SEC-quality. For years, we tried to play smash mouth football with the equivalent of an average MAC OL. Now, that didn't work and won't ever work.

True. And when I and others said we'd never be able to do it, we were essentially saying that we'd never have that high of a quality O-line.

We are coming to play whether it is Gainesville, Knoxville, Baton Rouge, Fayetteville, Starkville, Nashville, Athens, Auburn, Columbia, SC, Oxford, or Columbia, Mo. Oh yes, Aggies we're coming to College Station in 2018. I'm not predicting victory, but I promise you we will compete at the highest level.

 

[Poetax]

I will caution you, though, that the "throw it deep, Jarrrud" crowd is alive and well. At several games I heard the familiar refrain of "throw the damn ball" when we were gutting teams on the ground. It's like they think passing yards have more value than running yards, or passing TDs are worth more than running TDs. I don't get it.

In their defense it would have been nice to be able to throw a short tight end pass when there was 8 in the box.

 

[3kidsandme]

In their defense it would have been nice to be able to throw a short tight end pass when there was 8 in the box.

Yes the intermediate game needs improvement. I think with a whole off-season smitty can get over 60 percent.

 

[Oldtrainer]

I think teams that pass well run well. CATS offensive game plan versus Cards last November is a good example. Remember announcers kept talking about Cards highly ranked run defense! Boom, Stephens, JoJo, and Benny had stellar rushing games. I thinker both passing and running success was because CATS o. line must of the game was better than Cards d. front!
I believe this fall CATS o. line will be their strength!

 

[The-Hack]

Some like to point out that several of our victories were by a narrow margin.

It's true.

But looking back on the Mizzou, Vandy, South Carolina and Miss State games, we really ran lots of clock and went extremely conservative for lots of the respective second halves/fourth quarters. We damn near fluked away the Miss. State win with the fumble returned for a TD in the 4th Q, and we did fluke away a very likely win against Ga. when Badet failed to hold on to a TD catch that would have put us up 15 points with three minutes to go in the 3rd Q. Had he caught that and scored, we would have been treated to lots of clock eating running plays in the 4th Q. to preserve a likely narrow win.

Not making excuses for narrow wins, but just stating facts. Stoops and Co. are neither stupid nor flashy. They know when to salt a game away, and generally it works. But by doing so, you are damn near guaranteeing that teams will huff/puff and throw their way back into a respectable score by the end.

God knows, the last 50 years we have been on the losing end of tons of games where we made the score respectable, when an SEC power just ran clock for most of the second half after building a lead.

 

[SanAntonioCat]

Some like to point out that several of our victories were by a narrow margin.

It's true.

But looking back on the Mizzou, Vandy, South Carolina and Miss State games, we really ran lots of clock and went extremely conservative for lots of the respective second halves/fourth quarters. We damn near fluked away the Miss. State win with the fumble returned for a TD in the 4th Q, and we did fluke away a very likely win against Ga. when Badet failed to hold on to a TD catch that would have put us up 15 points with three minutes to go in the 3rd Q. Had he caught that and scored, we would have been treated to lots of clock eating running plays in the 4th Q. to preserve a likely narrow win.

Not making excuses for narrow wins, but just stating facts. Stoops and Co. are neither stupid nor flashy. They know when to salt a game away, and generally it works. But by doing so, you are damn near guaranteeing that teams will huff/puff and throw their way back into a respectable score by the end.

God knows, the last 50 years we have been on the losing end of tons of games where we made the score respectable, when an SEC power just ran clock for most of the second half after building a lead.

And, brought fresh legs into the game with their quality depth to wear us down.

 

[RV2]

...

I went to the Mizzou game in Columbia. A young fan who spent much of his time on his device looked up when it was 28-7, early in the 4th quarter, and asked me why we kept running the football.

I asked the old rhetorical country smart-arse question in response, "Well, why does a dog lick his balls? . . . . because he CAN."

 

[redbudman]

In all off season (and midseason) boards for 20 years, we have frequently seen the argument made . . . . hell, I very frequently made the argument myself . . . ., that "we can't just line up and run the ball against the SEC."

I and others made the argument to support passing, and "system" football, to cloth or hide our evident shortcomings and depth.

I just find it interesting that one of the most common thought patterns from the last 20 plus years of public posting here, and elsewhere, regarding UK Football has regressed without so much as a whimper or complaint, or a mention.

And I'm not ridiculing the ones who have said it, or posted it. I was one of the most fervent in support of that very thought.

I went to the Mizzou game in Columbia. A young fan who spent much of his time on his device looked up when it was 28-7, early in the 4th quarter, and asked me why we kept running the football.

I asked the old rhetorical country smart-arse question in response, "Well, why does a dog lick his balls? . . . . because he CAN."

I waited a LONG time to be able to say that.

I hope I get to say it lots more in '17.

Just go back to what the BAMA SEC Defensive player of the year said the toughest O line he had faced! And we will only be better! Even without Wills!