Clearly you are not a serious person. That said, I think Louisville's DBs have the chance of being better despite not surpassing their 2014 INT total.
Boom has a message for James Quick
- Thread starter Brock28
- Start date
Clearly you are not a serious person. That said, I think Louisville's DBs have the chance of being better despite not surpassing their 2014 INT total.
Clearly you aren't a serious person, I expect Chuckie Williams alone to intercept at least 15 passes next year, don't you. LOL
How many TDs does UL return from it WRs? Besides Ratcliffe, how many yards and TDs does UL have at RB? How many yards receiving does it return at TE? And, did UL fans not have questions about QB LAST YEAR? Those are gone now? Did you name a starter in the spring?
Do you know your own team?
Gotta love the annual tradition, UK fans! Football season simply cannot arrive until the annual spring/summer tradition of Little Brother Fan coming over to shoot off their mouth about how last year's backups are actually BETTER than the starters they are replacing. Lost 10 guys to the NFL draft, no problem, the 2nd & 3rd stringers behind them will be SUPERIOR to them this year, as always with UL fan!
The only thing your post is missing is claiming that you are returning 20 out of 22 starters (when as usual UL fan counts a guy who started the first or second half once out of 13 games as a "starter").
This is UK's best chance in a while. One cannot ignore 10 draft picks leaving the program and so this year's team will have a lot of inexperience and question marks going into it. I can see why UK fans are confident. On the other side, the recruiting classes have been good (on paper) for a while now so there should be considerable depth in the pipeline, and the good recruiting (on paper) seems to be continuing under Petrino. If we are going to be honest here, the OL is the biggest question mark in 2015 by far and how they perform will dictate how the season will go.
And, lost in the above, is the fact that UK is continually building a stronger team. They competed well last year with the Cards and will be better this year.
Fair enough. The good classes (on paper) should have some excellent depth for you at this point, no doubt.
No I don't but, I didn't expect Holliman to pick 14 last year and look how that turned out.
Ghost is delusional about the secondary and possibly the DL. The linebackers will be great. WR takes a step back, TE is a wash, QB and OL are MAJOR ???
Yes, of course that's possible. I simply said that based upon the personnel, they had "a chance to be better". The reality is that had JHC and SW been eligible last year - they would have started. The RCB position needs to work itself out but, the other staters are a 5* and 2-4*s - clearly talented players.
Is humor lost on people without using emotions? I used an excessively large number to show how crazy the statement was. We get a fair share of ul fans over here and I have read a few threads over there. No one believes the 4 to 5 dB spots are gonna be an upgrade. Your the first I've seen suggest that. So either you are not being honest in your assessment or you lack knowledge in the facts and are just going with the default position of "the backups are better than the starters "
Yet all over this board are predictions from UK fans that Kentucky will be markedly better in large part due to highly rated but unproven recruits getting on the field for the first time - that's your "reality".
Simply not true unless you see people saying they believe UK will be better at the DE position. And I haven't seen that at all.
Every other replacement/would be new starter has played except for the Tight End position...and we had very little production out of that position last year.
It's not delusional to suggest that JHC & SW would have started last year. It's not delusional to suggest that Devonte Fields will have a major impact at DE. Whoever steps forward at QB will have two years in Petrino's system which is important.
"I think they have a chance to be better". What part of that statement is confusing to you? Again, JHC & SW would have been starters last year and CW is a talented 4*.
I get the jab, but will still respond. The good classes are not just on paper. UK played a bunch of talented youth on the O side of the ball last year and before. The talent on the field, in addition to that which has yet to get on the field, will make UK better.
Do you think Bonnafon will be better or the same this year in relation to last? I think most UL fans expect him to be better. UK fans feel the same about their talented sophs.
It wasn't a jab at all. A few posts up, I mentioned the last few UL classes being good (on paper) as well because we haven't seen them on the field that much yet so it is a questionmark. One we feel good about because of the supposed strong recruiting, but a question mark. This year we will see.
Bonnafon should be better, but if he's on his back b/c of the OL then it won't matter. Question marks!
I am not sure either would've started...Wiggins a long shot for sure (last word I heard about him was of his getting kicked out of multiple practices)...Fields is 2-3 years removed from playing good football...last report I saw was of him getting dominated in JUCO and kicking ants off of his shoes during halftime.
If you want to elevate them above Samples, Gaines, Holliman, Maulding - be my guest. Samples and Mauldin were well rounded players and leaders...I don't see that from the players you keep listing. JHC will be good, but he is also a tweener size wise and definitely has questionable decision making...Wiggins is smallish and slower than you'd want...Fields beat up his girlfriend, then was upset about the Ray Rice situation saying it would hurt his draft stock...then was last seen kicking dirt in JUCO - a far far far cry from Mauldin...I'll wait to crown them.
Exactly what I said - good post.
Said JHC will be good...already said the linebackers will be great. I didn't say Wiggins is terrible, but if Grumpyoledawg comes around, I am sure he will.
I think a lot of Samples and Mauldin...obviously you don't. That's OK - backups and transfers from other schools that either couldn't cut it football wise or legally are better than those guys...I get it.
I appreciate the clarification. The point on Bonnafon is that then same expectation exists for the true freshmen that dominated UK's skill positions last year. Not on paper, but those that actually demonstrated their skill and potential on the field. Much as did Badet and Montgomery the year before (medical RSs last year). We expect improved play, as you do for Bonnafon.
No problem explaining, this administration will not take a chance on any "troubled", (and you left that out of your question to me), transfers. If they were part of domestic violence, drugs, rape, or robbery, there is a very small chance that they would be considered part of any of our sports programs. You will have to admit, ul has never had a problem taking any transfer, if he was a great player, for any reason or crime that he had be connected with. I know you can explain it all away, but here we have Mr Tubman, went through the process was not found guilty and still was asked to leave school, see my point?
Of course the statement "they have a chance to be better" is an opinion - my god, who's being intentionally obtuse now? It's all conjecture until it happens - even (and especially) the recruiting rating systems that UK fans have clung to for the last three years as "proof" that Kentucky was surpassing Louisville.
Hear ye hear ye Winner Winner Chicken Dinner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! UofL is the only team in college football that can lose 12 or more starters and return 22 starters. Than again why would they want to return starters when we all know that they had back ups and players in the pipe line better than those they lost. Pay no heed to the fact they have 10 starters gone to the NFL this year. Pay no heed to the fact that some of those replacement were such bad actors that they were kicked off their former teams. We all know they will be choirboys at rehab U.
That's a lot supposition right there. When did I say that I didn't think a lot of Samples, Mauldin or any other UofL player? For that matter I didn't say that Fields would have started over Mauldin - I don't think he would have. I do however think that JHC would have started at S over Holliman (particularly because he was familiar with TG's defense) and I think SW would have been at the other corner position alongside of Gaines.
Not going to try to explain anything away. Louisville has offered 2nd chances to several players to be sure - with one or two notable exceptions, those players in turn lived up to their end of the bargain, even if that did not translate into great on field contributions - as in Dyer's case. There have been some cases over the years that Louisville did not pursue players (recruits or otherwise) because of the issues surrounding them. Of course those instances are less publicized- particularly by rival fan bases than the ones where UofL takes a 2nd chance kid. The Tubman case is an interesting one for sure. For clarification sake, he wasn't indicted but, wasn't his dismissal from UK come as a result of of a student governing decision? Did the athletic department dismiss him from the team before that?
I am not sure either would've started...Wiggins a long shot for sure (last word I heard about him was of his getting kicked out of multiple practices)...Fields is 2-3 years removed from playing good football...last report I saw was of him getting dominated in JUCO and kicking ants off of his shoes during halftime. JHC... is also a tweener size wise and definitely has questionable decision making...Wiggins is smallish and slower than you'd want...Fields beat up his girlfriend, then was upset about the Ray Rice situation saying it would hurt his draft stock...then was last seen kicking dirt in JUCO"
You're right - how could I have misconstrued those glowing reviews?
Looking back at the first article that I could find, I wanted to be accurate, it said that when he was arrested and charged, the university suspended him from school. And if you are not in school you are not on the team. Later it was the student ethics board that refused his option to be readmitted. Someone else may know more but this is what I found in another article.
That was my understanding of the situation as well. So while it is as I mentioned before a curious situation, I don't think it's one that can be pointed to as Kentucky's athletic department not giving a kid a second chance because of their moral compass as relates to some player's off field issue. Had the ethics board come to a different conclusion, Tubman would most assuredly (and deservedly so) be on the the roster as we speak.
Please post what is false in my post...also see where you edited out that I said JHC will be a good player...why is that? Are those not the most recent football reports of Wiggins and Fields?
Basically my stance on 3 players - 1 would be good, 1 is slower and smaller than desired and not as good as advertised, and 1 hasn't played meaningful football in multiple years so its best to temper expectations...pretty fair - sorry it hurt your feelings...feel free to edit my post so it looks how you'd like it to.
“On Saturday, Fields hardly looked like a potential first-rounder, let alone a college star,” the story said. “He jogged on many plays, stood and watched passes downfield, and even got pancaked by an undersized left tackle. Fields spent most of halftime standing outside the locker room, briefly killing ants climbing on his cleats. He stood a few feet away from a tented concession stand in the stadium’s south end zone where conies, sausage-on-a-stick and Frito pies were in high demand.
“Fields’ play didn’t get any better after halftime and he admitted it was ‘somewhat’ hard to remain motivated. ‘That’s not really an excuse,’ Fields said. ‘Just being lazy.’”
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews...ields-struggling-to-regain-form-at-juco.html/
You said the reality was that the transfers would have started last year. That is not reality. That is pure unsupported opinion.
Show me were I have said UK has surpassed UL.
Basically your stance is a wholly subjective one - one that comes from the glass that is 3/4 empty with regard to Louisville's roster. I have zero doubt that your stance on those players would be much different if they would be wearing blue and white this fall.
My feelings weren't hurt and my expectations are (while optimistic like every fan's) always tempered. While I believe - and have said that this year's team has personnel groups that could be as good or better than last year's groups (with a lot of that being due to them having in many cases a second year with TG's defensive scheme) the results one way or the other wont be known until they start playing.
It is absolutely reality that JHC and SW would have started in the DB - choose to believe it or not - it matters not a bit to me. I never said you said anything - I stated that Kentucky fans have routinely pointed to MS recruiting classes being higher than CS/ BP's as to why UK would be surpassing UofL. This board is rife with posts that opine exactly that. To deny it is being disingenuous.
Similar threads
