Grant

[jauk11]

How did we win in 16...u6 defense gave up 28+ with three +40 ppg to 8 different teams on its schedule and lost to a mst team with no coach or qb and we scored a whopping 17 . They were not that good and you are right we should have beaten Fla, but for some reason they had invisible wr playing for them.And u6 is suppose to be little brother...If they have that much more talent, why is that?

Pretty simple really, they became a win at ALL costs program, shown by jurich hiring hurtt to start with, welcoming BP back with a huge contract when no one else was bidding, by keeping Slick Rick after atrocious behavior, followed by worse), by kicking the RB off the scholarship he had for a year before the criminal defensive MVP from the Big 12 became available (When he escaped jail time), by hurtt getting BW away from his devoted poor single mother that could have driven across town to see him play without him even bothering to visit, (although I don't think the poor thing ever missed a one of his games), by getting Five star transfers from Georgia (three transfers that don't show up in recruiting rankings this year plus a half dozen or more JC transfers), by trying to bring in players like Willie, serving life as a habitual criminal but vetted OK personally by jurich, by welcoming all kinds of questionable transfers, by taking players like Hearns that couldn't get in here, (might be in jail now here from the shooting "incident", when will one of the DOZENS of witnesses squeal-----when the LMPD treats them like regular citizens?), by attracting all kinds of good athletes that don't want to deal with the MUCH more stringent rules UK has in place (bunch of scaredy cats at UK, while the incompetent NCAA lets our competition get away with murder).

Pretty simple if you are paying attention, really.

Pay attention, oh, I forgot you slept through mitch's first TEN YEARS, never mind.

 

[jauk11]

Guess it depends on the source...just read an article on sbnation about how LJ went from a 3* recruit to heisman...guess it's meaningless since he was coached to become A 5* talent.

A four star on Rivals, our source on here, along with the other four four stars in the class, all from Miami, hurtt's home town, one had to go to prep school a year.

 

[jauk11]

The U6 heisman winner was a four star.

Don't be trying to get FACTS in the way of his story.

 

[law1127]

I don't want to bad mouth anybody on this site,but jauk11 has to be an stump idiot,to not first be aware that previous athletic directors didn’t fund the football program ,because they (baseball,softball,track& field ,etc.),are “minor” sports and don’t challenge the glow of the basketball program, so it was easier to fund them. So , Mitch hasn’t had control of the check book ,just like all the other ADs didn’t,but the “shadow administration” who ran Bear Bryant off 60 years ago! The loss of the 20000 season ticket holders,maybe was a financial hit,but it also was the catalyst for increasing football funding to more SEC levels,because if not ,the athletic program and it’s financial situation would dramatically deteriorate to a crisis level. The postings by jauk11,just illustrate a complete ignorance of the operations and financing of UK athletics! Best to remain silent ,when thought a fool,then to post ignorance,and remove all doubt!

 

[jauk11]

He most certainly does not agree with you because you don't have a clue and he knows it.. should reread his post above about how clueless you are.

lol.

His take is the same as mine, mitch DESTROYED our football program, the only difference is he thinks mitch was smart enough to do it on purpose while I say he did it because he was clueless AND had no backbone to stand up to the boosters that might have kicked him out of his cushy job.

 

[law1127]

Jauk11,you still don’t get it! Mitch never had the unilateral authority to do anything financially to the UK football program,JUST like all the other ADs ,because the shadow administration,that allowed(ran off) Bear Bryant 60 years,controlled the check book and Did Not want any challenge to basketball supremacy and in turn the fanbase! The minor sports weren’t a challenge,but football,being the most popular college sport,would according to the shadow administration,threaten the laser focus of the fanbase on basketball,thus diminishing their side benefits they got from basketball,that average fans did not know about. Since the Joker fan revolt,all of the financial pressure from that implosion,has made the shadow administration reluctantly,but out of financial necessity,embrace the football program,to the extent that will hopefully be minimumly successful enough,to stop the financial bleeding. Amen,if you don’t understand now!

 

[sluggercatfan]

Pretty simple really, they became a win at ALL costs program, shown by jurich hiring hurtt to start with, welcoming BP back with a huge contract when no one else was bidding, by keeping Slick Rick after atrocious behavior, followed by worse), by kicking the RB off the scholarship he had for a year before the criminal defensive MVP from the Big 12 became available (When he escaped jail time), by hurtt getting BW away from his devoted poor single mother that could have driven across town to see him play without him even bothering to visit, (although I don't think the poor thing ever missed a one of his games), by getting Five star transfers from Georgia (three transfers that don't show up in recruiting rankings this year plus a half dozen or more JC transfers), by trying to bring in players like Willie, serving life as a habitual criminal but vetted OK personally by jurich, by welcoming all kinds of questionable transfers, by taking players like Hearns that couldn't get in here, (might be in jail now here from the shooting "incident", when will one of the DOZENS of witnesses squeal-----when the LMPD treats them like regular citizens?), by attracting all kinds of good athletes that don't want to deal with the MUCH more stringent rules UK has in place (bunch of scaredy cats at UK, while the incompetent NCAA lets our competition get away with murder).

Pretty simple if you are paying attention, really.

Pay attention, oh, I forgot you slept through mitch's first TEN YEARS, never mind.

What the hell is all your dribble drabble b******* got to do with 2016 and 2017? Good grief man you are out there!

 

[sluggercatfan]

Don't be trying to get FACTS in the way of his story.

Doesn't make any difference if he was a 3-star or 4-star... He was coached to be the best football player in college football

 

[sluggercatfan]

lol.

His take is the same as mine, mitch DESTROYED our football program, the only difference is he thinks mitch was smart enough to do it on purpose while I say he did it because he was clueless AND had no backbone to stand up to the boosters that might have kicked him out of his cushy job.

read laws post above right above this post and see what law really thinks of your side of the story about Mitch and UK Athletics... Thi.nk you will find it quite interesting

 

[jauk11]

I don't want to bad mouth anybody on this site,but jauk11 has to be an stump idiot,to not first be aware that previous athletic directors didn’t fund the football program ,because they (baseball,softball,track& field ,etc.),are “minor” sports and don’t challenge the glow of the basketball program, so it was easier to fund them. So , Mitch hasn’t had control of the check book ,just like all the other ADs didn’t,but the “shadow administration” who ran Bear Bryant off 60 years ago! The loss of the 20000 season ticket holders,maybe was a financial hit,but it also was the catalyst for increasing football funding to more SEC levels,because if not ,the athletic program and it’s financial situation would dramatically deteriorate to a crisis level. The postings by jauk11,just illustrate a complete ignorance of the operations and financing of UK athletics! Best to remain silent ,when thought a fool,then to post ignorance,and remove all doubt!

Some pretty good points, as i have said before I think you have some pretty good points------except for thinking that someone can throw away probably more than $50,000,000 of UK's money ON PURPOSE and no one would say anything. Of course we don't need it any more, the OTHER SEC schools that DIDN'T destroy their programs are making over $40,000,000 available EVERY year.

So, you insist on sticking to your ridiculous story that mitch deliberately cost UK tens of millions of dollars while DELIBERATELY running football in the ground because he wasn't capable of standing up to the "old guard"-------and they should really be pretty old by now.

mitch had enough control to pour a lot of money into HIS minor sports, which he gets a lot of credit for, and money never seemed to be a problem when it came to the basketball program, hell, he even found $156,000 to hang some pictures on a wall somewhere instead of using it to make a HUGE upgrade to the "recruiting room". Geez, and when he couldn't possibly replace the scoreboards until they were two years older than their scheduled replacement time (lack of money) he managed to find the new money in a day or so when the clueless faculty objected to LOANING the money WITH interest that athletics had GIVEN them in the first place.

Did you or did you not state that mitch DELIBERATELY ran football into the ground because that was the only way to get the needed support for football, and where does Slugger get off denying that you said that?

Of course that is just one of the baseless things he keeps claiming, like saying my FACTS aren't facts, he has nothing to back it up, just in complete denial.

Sorry, but your crediting mitch with that makes no sense at all to anyone with a brain, why hasn't he been fired for DELIBERATELY costing the University tens of millions of dollars?

STILL costing us tens of millions of dollars, last year, with a second consecutive winning season AND second consecutive break even season in the SEC with a TON of players worth paying to see play (lots of them on our team, for a change) they were STILL about TWENTY THOUSAND season ticket holders short of our high mark in 2009.

But, like I said before, if he meant to destroy the football program he did a hell of a job at it. I hope Bama steals him away from us, and does Georgia know what they are missing out on, think of how much better those teams could be if they started over from scratch.

 

[jauk11]

I don't want to bad mouth anybody on this site,but jauk11 has to be an stump idiot,to not first be aware that previous athletic directors didn’t fund the football program ,because they (baseball,softball,track& field ,etc.),are “minor” sports and don’t challenge the glow of the basketball program, so it was easier to fund them. So , Mitch hasn’t had control of the check book ,just like all the other ADs didn’t,but the “shadow administration” who ran Bear Bryant off 60 years ago! The loss of the 20000 season ticket holders,maybe was a financial hit,but it also was the catalyst for increasing football funding to more SEC levels,because if not ,the athletic program and it’s financial situation would dramatically deteriorate to a crisis level. The postings by jauk11,just illustrate a complete ignorance of the operations and financing of UK athletics! Best to remain silent ,when thought a fool,then to post ignorance,and remove all doubt!

Not a bad post, really, agree that the situation of support for football has always been pretty dismal, but to completely destroy a program ON PURPOSE just doesn't make any sense, and the loss of 20,000 season tickets was STILL there last year AFTER two winning bowl game seasons-------just how much money was lost from all those years of losing 20,000 fans season ticket sales, PLUS tons of donations from disgusted fans, witness the long running thread on here.

When did he start to deliberately make sure the Coaches, players, and fans didn't have any chance to succeed, did he tell them, is that why Brooks quit? Did he start after the season sellouts in 07, the program didn't look that bad at that point. Is that why Joker didn't have a chance, and i thought Joker said he and mitch were buddies, even though I think making Hartline ineligible for the bowl game probably lost a LOT of Joker's support from the team-------and while I don't think it is anything Joker would have EVER approved of I think he still got the credit ("credit"/blame) for it publicly, and probably by the players-------while I think the decision had to have come from just a little bit higher up.

And when you steal someone else's line you really should give them credit for it.

 

[jauk11]

What the hell is all your dribble drabble b******* got to do with 2016 and 2017? Good grief man you are out there!

Pay attention, my post was about the FACT that Transfer U has a lot more talent than what shows up in the recruiting classes, a lot of players kicked out of other schools and looking for a place they can have things covered up for them, and jurich probably spent a lot of time looking at parolee's and players kicked out of other schools.

 

[law1127]

Damn,you still don’t understand that Mitch didn’t control the checkbook ,and in turn he couldn’t spend substantial funds on his own. In the simplest terms, the reason Joker was hired after Brooks,was because Brooks quit over the lack of support for football,and Joker would work cheap enough to fit the budget! So logically,if you can understand, Mitch was allowed to spend so much on football,and vetoed on any other major investments. The football program was destroyed in 1953,when Bryant left,and the administration decided to limit its investment in football,because Rupp didn’t like sharing the limelight with a successful football coach,and/or program. So the Joker fiasco,was just the the final conclusions of starving out UK football,for being fully funded to SEC levels,like when Bryant was the coach! If you can’t understand all of the years of neglect ,through several different ADs,after Bryant,then you don’t know UK football history! Keep on your ignorant rant ,it’s just really embarrassing to you,and typifies the myths surrounding the facts of the dismal record of modern UK football,and why we are where the program is ,compared to our peers!

 

[sluggercatfan]

Pay attention, my post was about the FACT that Transfer U has a lot more talent than what shows up in the recruiting classes, a lot of players kicked out of other schools and looking for a place they can have things covered up for them, and jurich probably spent a lot of time looking at parolee's and players kicked out of other schools.

Then why was it that EIGHT other teams could score 28-47 points against them and we score 17 and they still haven't punted yet. Don't we have eight guys that could have gone in the draft? After all the years of watching games in CWS that would be in the top three of the worst UK games I've ever watched especially since who it was against. It was like a college team against a juco team. Saw a total lack of discipline on that field from the top to the bottom.

 

[WildCard]

Damn,you still don’t understand that Mitch didn’t control the checkbook ,and in turn he couldn’t spend substantial funds on his own...

ja, I'm just not sure you recognize and accept the above situation. laws key point is Barnhart had "minimal control" over "athletic revenue" in the time period you often cite. UK was putting A TON of money into the new hospital and had substantial bond indebtedness. The school was simply not in a situation to advocate an enormous athletic fund raiser (unless, of course, it was basketball oriented ).

I'm going from memory from actual prior research, but, during much of Barnhart's "early years" the UKAA ran a balanced budget including a typical $1M "gift" to the school. They usually posted about a $2M-$3M annual carry over and had about $10M-$12M set back in reserve funds. That is really not enough to initiate a $100M+ project without an enormous input of gift revenue. And, historically, most of major athletic gifts were basketball connected.

You often make reference to the UKAA's "major investments" in minor sports and women's sports. Quite frankly I don't know what that was. But I suppose the UKAA threw in some money on top of some major gifts for those projects and facilities. Should that money, whatever it was, gone to football? IDK.

Men's basketball is of course a totally different situation. The UK basketball "budget" would concurrently run several SEC basketball programs. And that will NEVER change.

But, in just the past few years, liquidation of some of the hospital bonding plus a massive SEC TV windfall created both new revenue and diminished (school) debt. That makes it much easier to justify spending money and UK football now has a brand new practice facility and a renovated KCWS (I'm not sure what else they "need"). But I must add this - a pretty big chunk of that SEC windfall is going into a new educational facility. You don't see that at a lot of other places, especially in the SEC.

Now if your question is how could Jurich do what he did at UofL (i.e., facilities) versus Barnhart's situation at UK I would say it mainly comes down to independent fund raising for athletic projects.

Peace

 

[sluggercatfan]

ja, I'm just not sure you recognize and accept the above situation. laws key point is Barnhart had "minimal control" over "athletic revenue" in the time period you often cite. UK was putting A TON of money into the new hospital and had substantial bond indebtedness. The school was simply not in a situation to advocate an enormous athletic fund raiser (unless, of course, it was basketball oriented ).

I'm going from memory from actual prior research, but, during much of Barnhart's "early years" the UKAA ran a balanced budget including a typical $1M "gift" to the school. They usually posted about a $2M-$3M annual carry over and had about $10M-$12 set back in reserve funds. That is really not enough to initiate a $100M+ project without an enormous input of gift revenue. And, historically, most of major athletic gifts were basketball connected.

You often make reference to the UKAA's "major investments" in minor sports and women's sports. Quite frankly I don't know what that was. But I suppose the UKAA threw in some money on top of some major gifts for those projects and facilities. Should that money, whatever it was, gone to football? IDK.

Men's basketball is of course a totally different situation. The UK basketball "budget" would concurrently run several SEC basketball programs. And that will NEVER change.

But, in just the past few years, liquidation of some of the hospital bonding plus a massive SEC TV windfall created both new revenue and diminished (school) debt. That makes it much easier to justify spending money and UK football now has brand new practice facility and a renovated KCWS (I'm not sure what else they "need"). But I must add this - a pretty big chunk of that SEC windfall is going into a new educational facility. You don't see that at a lot of other places, especially in the SEC.

Now if your question is how could Jurich do what he did at UofL (i.e., facilities) versus Barnhart's situation at UK I would say it mainly comes down to independent fund raising for athletic projects.

Peace

Damn, even a card guy gets it!!!

 

[sluggercatfan]

ja, I'm just not sure you recognize and accept the above situation. laws key point is Barnhart had "minimal control" over "athletic revenue" in the time period you often cite. UK was putting A TON of money into the new hospital and had substantial bond indebtedness. The school was simply not in a situation to advocate an enormous athletic fund raiser (unless, of course, it was basketball oriented ).

I'm going from memory from actual prior research, but, during much of Barnhart's "early years" the UKAA ran a balanced budget including a typical $1M "gift" to the school. They usually posted about a $2M-$3M annual carry over and had about $10M-$12M set back in reserve funds. That is really not enough to initiate a $100M+ project without an enormous input of gift revenue. And, historically, most of major athletic gifts were basketball connected.

You often make reference to the UKAA's "major investments" in minor sports and women's sports. Quite frankly I don't know what that was. But I suppose the UKAA threw in some money on top of some major gifts for those projects and facilities. Should that money, whatever it was, gone to football? IDK.

Men's basketball is of course a totally different situation. The UK basketball "budget" would concurrently run several SEC basketball programs. And that will NEVER change.

But, in just the past few years, liquidation of some of the hospital bonding plus a massive SEC TV windfall created both new revenue and diminished (school) debt. That makes it much easier to justify spending money and UK football now has a brand new practice facility and a renovated KCWS (I'm not sure what else they "need"). But I must add this - a pretty big chunk of that SEC windfall is going into a new educational facility. You don't see that at a lot of other places, especially in the SEC.

Now if your question is how could Jurich do what he did at UofL (i.e., facilities) versus Barnhart's situation at UK I would say it mainly comes down to independent fund raising for athletic projects.

Peace

Card...two things and I stand to be corrected on both. My understanding is that all or the vast majority of the money fot the football practice facility came from individuals who had never donated money for anything other than basketball at the University. Secondly, my understanding is that by state law that U6 has a different bonding agreement with the state then UK is allowed to do.

 

[TeoJ]

ja, I'm just not sure you recognize and accept the above situation. laws key point is Barnhart had "minimal control" over "athletic revenue" in the time period you often cite. UK was putting A TON of money into the new hospital and had substantial bond indebtedness. The school was simply not in a situation to advocate an enormous athletic fund raiser (unless, of course, it was basketball oriented ).

I'm going from memory from actual prior research, but, during much of Barnhart's "early years" the UKAA ran a balanced budget including a typical $1M "gift" to the school. They usually posted about a $2M-$3M annual carry over and had about $10M-$12M set back in reserve funds. That is really not enough to initiate a $100M+ project without an enormous input of gift revenue. And, historically, most of major athletic gifts were basketball connected.

You often make reference to the UKAA's "major investments" in minor sports and women's sports. Quite frankly I don't know what that was. But I suppose the UKAA threw in some money on top of some major gifts for those projects and facilities. Should that money, whatever it was, gone to football? IDK.

Men's basketball is of course a totally different situation. The UK basketball "budget" would concurrently run several SEC basketball programs. And that will NEVER change.

But, in just the past few years, liquidation of some of the hospital bonding plus a massive SEC TV windfall created both new revenue and diminished (school) debt. That makes it much easier to justify spending money and UK football now has a brand new practice facility and a renovated KCWS (I'm not sure what else they "need"). But I must add this - a pretty big chunk of that SEC windfall is going into a new educational facility. You don't see that at a lot of other places, especially in the SEC.

Now if your question is how could Jurich do what he did at UofL (i.e., facilities) versus Barnhart's situation at UK I would say it mainly comes down to independent fund raising for athletic projects.

Peace

Or theft

 

[jauk11]

Damn,you still don’t understand that Mitch didn’t control the checkbook ,and in turn he couldn’t spend substantial funds on his own. In the simplest terms, the reason Joker was hired after Brooks,was because Brooks quit over the lack of support for football,and Joker would work cheap enough to fit the budget! So logically,if you can understand, Mitch was allowed to spend so much on football,and vetoed on any other major investments. The football program was destroyed in 1953,when Bryant left,and the administration decided to limit its investment in football,because Rupp didn’t like sharing the limelight with a successful football coach,and/or program. So the Joker fiasco,was just the the final conclusions of starving out UK football,for being fully funded to SEC levels,like when Bryant was the coach! If you can’t understand all of the years of neglect ,through several different ADs,after Bryant,then you don’t know UK football history! Keep on your ignorant rant ,it’s just really embarrassing to you,and typifies the myths surrounding the facts of the dismal record of modern UK football,and why we are where the program is ,compared to our peers!

Keep going, you are still getting ONE like-----oh, it's him again.

Look, i have no argument about football having a long history of being cheated, everyone knows that, what I am arguing is how did he get the power to DESTROY our football program (and you seem to agree he did, but on purpose for a noble purpose in your version, weak kneed and self serving in my version, with damaging insults to his critics along the way) if he was completely helpless and impotent about doing even the simplest things for it otherwise?

When did he start dismantling the program, from the start? When Brooks had us in what most considered pretty good shape (for us) in about 07, entertaining football and making progress? Was Brooks (and hundreds of others) too stupid to see what was going on, if so mitch is wasting his time, he should be running for President.

Sorry, your scenario of him deliberately destroying the program has too many holes in it, he isn't that smart, and if he did then the overkill was horrendous.

And what would he have done if the OTHER SEC programs hadn't bailed UK out with all their emphasis on football, where would the money for rebuilding have come from after he had cost UK probably about fifty to one hundred MILLION dollars in lost income from ticket sales AND donations?

But then i have always given him a lot of credit for being just plain lucky, Cal one huge example.

I'm gettin tired of this stupid argument, the FACT is that football went to hell with mitch doing nothing above bare minimum for it (VERY lucky Brooks saved his A$$) for over a decade, why doesn't someone start a poll to see how many think mitch is a football hero because he destroyed the program on purpose. I doubt if your version of it would get very many votes, maybe Slugger would sign up a few hundred times.

Have at it, I have wasted enough time for now, things to do.

 

[jauk11]

Then why was it that EIGHT other teams could score 28-47 points against them and we score 17 and they still haven't punted yet. Don't we have eight guys that could have gone in the draft? After all the years of watching games in CWS that would be in the top three of the worst UK games I've ever watched especially since who it was against. It was like a college team against a juco team. Saw a total lack of discipline on that field from the top to the bottom.

FAAR Stoops!!!

How did a nearly forty point underdog Appy State upset Michigan, how did almost 40 point underdog Stanford upset USC?

It is football, and it is the reason we have "some" chance of beating Georgia this year, the reason we beat Transfer U last year, with this same staff.

Have you ever played a real game of football in your life?

Have fun, gotta go.

 

[jauk11]

ja, I'm just not sure you recognize and accept the above situation. laws key point is Barnhart had "minimal control" over "athletic revenue" in the time period you often cite. UK was putting A TON of money into the new hospital and had substantial bond indebtedness. The school was simply not in a situation to advocate an enormous athletic fund raiser (unless, of course, it was basketball oriented ).

I'm going from memory from actual prior research, but, during much of Barnhart's "early years" the UKAA ran a balanced budget including a typical $1M "gift" to the school. They usually posted about a $2M-$3M annual carry over and had about $10M-$12M set back in reserve funds. That is really not enough to initiate a $100M+ project without an enormous input of gift revenue. And, historically, most of major athletic gifts were basketball connected.

You often make reference to the UKAA's "major investments" in minor sports and women's sports. Quite frankly I don't know what that was. But I suppose the UKAA threw in some money on top of some major gifts for those projects and facilities. Should that money, whatever it was, gone to football? IDK.

Men's basketball is of course a totally different situation. The UK basketball "budget" would concurrently run several SEC basketball programs. And that will NEVER change.

But, in just the past few years, liquidation of some of the hospital bonding plus a massive SEC TV windfall created both new revenue and diminished (school) debt. That makes it much easier to justify spending money and UK football now has a brand new practice facility and a renovated KCWS (I'm not sure what else they "need"). But I must add this - a pretty big chunk of that SEC windfall is going into a new educational facility. You don't see that at a lot of other places, especially in the SEC.

Now if your question is how could Jurich do what he did at UofL (i.e., facilities) versus Barnhart's situation at UK I would say it mainly comes down to independent fund raising for athletic projects.

Peace

mitch seemed to find a lot of money to invest in "his" sports, at least he got a lot of credit for it------make UK an all sports top ten school--------a lot of that at the expense of NOTHING extra for football, including the completely beserk "recruiting room" in use for 15 years. Love the minor sports, but I still insist that he would have had a lot more money for the non income sports IF he had done more for the source of the money--------football. And how would saddling the athletic department for about a $200,000,000 loan for a $120,000,000 improvement to football have gone over if the football program he destroyed hadn't been bailed out by the OTHER SEC football schools?

So, give me your honest opinion of the theory that he HAD to ruin a pretty decent football program in order to wake people up (at a TREMENDOUS cost in precious money, how would UK have overcome that-----or the loan the athletic department is on the hook for) without the NOT guaranteed tremendous influx of money from OTHER SEC schools from FOOTBALL?

Kudos for him for doing a tremendous job of destroying the program if it was deliberate, quite a bit of overkill IMO, how did he know the OTHER SEC programs would bail him out?

Your opinion, a deliberate sinking of the Titanic, or just blind luck that it worked out, even if it cost a tremendous amount of money.

 

[WildCard]

Card...two things and I stand to be corrected on both. (1) My understanding is that all or the vast majority of the money fot the football practice facility came from individuals who had never donated money for anything other than basketball at the University. (2) Secondly, my understanding is that by state law that U6 has a different bonding agreement with the state then UK is allowed to do.

(1) Probably true, I don't know. While that facility was needed for some time it sort of came about very quickly after the stadium renovation was OK-ed. I don't go over UK financials like I did UofL financials. I assume there is some debt for the current football improvements - I doubt Mitch raised ~$150M in private funds - but have no idea how it is being financed (i.e., UK bonding or UKAA bonding). UK AA probably paying with increased revenue due to big increase in "premium seating". The original stadium expansion was done with an "off the UKAA books loan" from Frankfort and I believe just recently paid off. And, of course, the actual stadium was built with state funds.

(2) I have no idea but I would imagine it is basically the same - both are state schools. UK may well have a higher "limit". However, to my knowledge, UofL has no "state sponsored bonds" related to any athletic facility. The PJCS bond was/is a Jefferson Co. bond that the ULAA services 100%. However, all bonds must be approved bt Frankfort. I'm still pissed that Frankfort delayed approval (just a project "OK" needed, no money whatsoever) to the PJCS remodel thus delaying the start by 1 year and the subsequent need to downsize about 6,000 seats due to construction inflation over the year.

Peace

 

[WildCard]

mitch seemed to find a lot of money to invest in "his" sports, at least he got a lot of credit for it------make UK an all sports top ten school--------a lot of that at the expense of NOTHING extra for football, including the completely beserk "recruiting room" in use for 15 years. Love the minor sports, but I still insist that he would have had a lot more money for the non income sports IF he had done more for the source of the money--------football. And how would saddling the athletic department for about a $200,000,000 loan for a $120,000,000 improvement to football have gone over if the football program he destroyed hadn't been bailed out by the OTHER SEC football schools?

So, give me your honest opinion of the theory that he HAD to ruin a pretty decent football program in order to wake people up (at a TREMENDOUS cost in precious money, how would UK have overcome that-----or the loan the athletic department is on the hook for) without the NOT guaranteed tremendous influx of money from OTHER SEC schools from FOOTBALL?

Kudos for him for doing a tremendous job of destroying the program if it was deliberate, quite a bit of overkill IMO, how did he know the OTHER SEC programs would bail him out?

Your opinion, a deliberate sinking of the Titanic, or just blind luck that it worked out, even if it cost a tremendous amount of money.

ja, first off let me say that "recruiting room" picture that circulated around was almost certainly a picture of either camp weeks or JR day or something that involved 100+ kids on campus - not exactly a true recruiting weekend. I'm sure they could find a better on campus facility to seat half a dozen true visiting recruits and family.

Secondly, I'm pretty sure Mitch knew of the forthcoming SEC windfall. Maybe not exactly how much but knew some good things were going to happen. And as other university debt came under control I'm sure the BoT "allowed" the UKAA to move forward with some projects. There may have been some "hope" by the BoT that some of money to be freely given to athletics just might go to the university if the project was put "on hold" for a year or two. Foolish thinking by the Bot if true. FWIW, I think UofL's new rookie BoT thinks that way.

Without much question, Mitch's worst decision ever regarding the football program was following Brooks "advice" and making Phillips CIW. The bottom line here is Joker just did not have what it takes to be a good HC and he "squandered" what Brooks left him - as good a football program as UK had in decades. As Joker lost, I think the UK fan base demographic (probably older, long term fans) had finally reached a point of "I've had enough" and gave up their tickets. JMO, but I think tickets given up are seldom picked back up a few years later.

Whatever the reason, UK football is still struggling with those ticket losses and realistically may not ever again reach those numbers. Attendance is down everywhere, For many non-traditional programs there may be a new era coming up.

All JMO

Peace

 

[sluggercatfan]

Keep going, you are still getting ONE like-----oh, it's him again.

Look, i have no argument about football having a long history of being cheated, everyone knows that, what I am arguing is how did he get the power to DESTROY our football program (and you seem to agree he did, but on purpose for a noble purpose in your version, weak kneed and self serving in my version, with damaging insults to his critics along the way) if he was completely helpless and impotent about doing even the simplest things for it otherwise?

When did he start dismantling the program, from the start? When Brooks had us in what most considered pretty good shape (for us) in about 07, entertaining football and making progress? Was Brooks (and hundreds of others) too stupid to see what was going on, if so mitch is wasting his time, he should be running for President.

Sorry, your scenario of him deliberately destroying the program has too many holes in it, he isn't that smart, and if he did then the overkill was horrendous.

And what would he have done if the OTHER SEC programs hadn't bailed UK out with all their emphasis on football, where would the money for rebuilding have come from after he had cost UK probably about fifty to one hundred MILLION dollars in lost income from ticket sales AND donations?

But then i have always given him a lot of credit for being just plain lucky, Cal one huge example.

I'm gettin tired of this stupid argument, the FACT is that football went to hell with mitch doing nothing above bare minimum for it (VERY lucky Brooks saved his A$$) for over a decade, why doesn't someone start a poll to see how many think mitch is a football hero because he destroyed the program on purpose. I doubt if your version of it would get very many votes, maybe Slugger would sign up a few hundred times.

Have at it, I have wasted enough time for now, things to do.

And you are getting ZERO BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND YOU'RE COMPLETELY WRONG.

 

[law1127]

Total,absolute ignorance,and I must say, stupidity, by these posters, that don’t have a clue!

 

[jauk11]

ja, first off let me say that "recruiting room" picture that circulated around was almost certainly a picture of either camp weeks or JR day or something that involved 100+ kids on campus - not exactly a true recruiting weekend. I'm sure they could find a better on campus facility to seat half a dozen true visiting recruits and family.

Secondly, I'm pretty sure Mitch knew of the forthcoming SEC windfall. Maybe not exactly how much but knew some good things were going to happen. And as other university debt came under control I'm sure the BoT "allowed" the UKAA to move forward with some projects. There may have been some "hope" by the BoT that some of money to be freely given to athletics just might go to the university if the project was put "on hold" for a year or two. Foolish thinking by the Bot if true. FWIW, I think UofL's new rookie BoT thinks that way.

Without much question, Mitch's worst decision ever regarding the football program was following Brooks "advice" and making Phillips CIW. The bottom line here is Joker just did not have what it takes to be a good HC and he "squandered" what Brooks left him - as good a football program as UK had in decades. As Joker lost, I think the UK fan base demographic (probably older, long term fans) had finally reached a point of "I've had enough" and gave up their tickets. JMO, but I think tickets given up are seldom picked back up a few years later.

Whatever, the reason UK football is still struggling with those ticket losses and may realistically may not ever again reach those numbers. Attendance is down everywhere, For many non-traditional programs there may be a new era coming up.

All JMO

Peace

I have read that it was still being used almost up to the time of the new facility, and the picture that was allowed to circulate was definitely the subject of a lot of ridicule. Then our best recruiter, Tee, admitted that he just lied to recruits about our facilities-----AFTER he left. Easy for him to do, after all he was from Thug U.

That "as good a football program as UK had in decades" might even be close to being true-----BUT Joker had TWO four stars that he inherited playing, both JCs in their last year. AND when we played Florida that year I did a lot of comparisons, an incredible talent mismatch, Florida's TWO DEEP averaged a 5.9 (NOT just a four star, the BEST four stars we have signed lately and that is for FORTY FOUR starters)-----and UK? What did we trot out on the field, MORE two stars starting than THREE stars, with NOTHING much behind those 22, with the TWO four stars we had starting offset by two walkons starting. And a lot of our fans thought we should go down there and beat them.

Joker screwed up by firing a lot of GOOD coaches that he knew didn't want to leave the city limits to recruit, and he added one FOUR STAR (our normal quota) along with three 5.7s to add to the ONE he had signed before. Unfortunately, with the new coaches NONE of the last minute additions did didley here.

Joker upset TOP TEN USC and TOBC AND gave NC Auburn with the Heisman winner their closest game, three point loss, and that NC didn't have TWO losses like the one Brooks upset with some of our all time best talent. Not a bad start really.. But I sincerely think he lost the team when HE suspended Hartline for the bowl game, throwing the whole team under the bus on national TV.-----and if you think that was really his idea I have some swamp land in Florida for you.

I don't understand how anyone can say he inherited good talent with TWO four stars playing when all but ONE (Vandy of course, BUT including the two Misses) of the SEC teams we played AVERAGED 38 four star commits the previous four years PLUS a lot of FIVE STARS------and of course, the east was a lot tougher then.

Back on subject, do you really think mitch deliberately ran football into the ground to get more (problematical) support? And if he did, when did he start, did he lie to all our sucker coaches all that time? DON'T avoid the question, if Slugger never speaks to you again you are way ahead of the game, wish I could be so lucky. No more likes from me unless you answer the question.

What a costly and incredible conspiracy that would have been, people have gone to prison for less. Well, not at Transfer U, of course, they still can't find out who the shooters were with a roomful of witnesses. .

 

[ukalum1988]

mitch seemed to find a lot of money to invest in "his" sports, at least he got a lot of credit for it------make UK an all sports top ten school--------a lot of that at the expense of NOTHING extra for football, including the completely beserk "recruiting room" in use for 15 years. Love the minor sports, but I still insist that he would have had a lot more money for the non income sports IF he had done more for the source of the money--------football. And how would saddling the athletic department for about a $200,000,000 loan for a $120,000,000 improvement to football have gone over if the football program he destroyed hadn't been bailed out by the OTHER SEC football schools?

So, give me your honest opinion of the theory that he HAD to ruin a pretty decent football program in order to wake people up (at a TREMENDOUS cost in precious money, how would UK have overcome that-----or the loan the athletic department is on the hook for) without the NOT guaranteed tremendous influx of money from OTHER SEC schools from FOOTBALL?

Kudos for him for doing a tremendous job of destroying the program if it was deliberate, quite a bit of overkill IMO, how did he know the OTHER SEC programs would bail him out?

Your opinion, a deliberate sinking of the Titanic, or just blind luck that it worked out, even if it cost a tremendous amount of money.

I’m not reading your posts anymore. Sorry but you’re a threadkiller.

 

[law1127]

Jauk11,you are about as clueless a poster as I’ve ever witnessed, and your ignorant rants will shut this site down faster than the Chinese . Just shut the hell up, you’re like those low information voters! Just quit!

 

[jauk11]

Total,absolute ignorance,and I must say, stupidity, by these posters, that don’t have a clue!

Geez, hundreds of posters on here, and so far only TWO of you that support that stupid conspiracy idea that turns mitch from a dunce to a hero------a VERY costly hero, but a football hero never the less, much higher on the totem pole than Brooks, that took so long to catch on, or Couch, or Cobb, or----

 

[law1127]

You’re not smart enough to even have a clue,as evidenced by these clueless posts! Now, on to put you on ignore !

 

[jauk11]

I’m not reading your posts anymore. Sorry but you’re a threadkiller.

Thanks, more truth than I would like to admit.

But I have a lot of help,lots of things I just can't ignore.

Do you think mitch pulled off that incredible conspiracy?

I will let it rest for a while, I'm sure others won't.

Jauk11,you are about as clueless a poster as I’ve ever witnessed, and your ignorant rants will shut this site down faster than the Chinese . Just shut the hell up, you’re like those low information voters! Just quit!

I thought you had said that before, about a dozen times, how about expounding on your theory that mitch deliberately cost UK probably from about FIFTY to a hundred million dollars in order to be a football hero. Tell me more, the details don't fit together yet.

You suckered me in again, was watching the national outdoor track meet, Duckworth the indoor AND outdoor Decathlon champion, and McLaughlin a marvel to watch.,

 

[jauk11]

You’re not smart enough to even have a clue,as evidenced by these clueless posts! Now, on to put you on ignore !

Thank you, what a relief not to have to read some of these conspiracies.

Can you talk to your buddy and get him to do the same, the whole board would appreciate.it, I can't quit responding when i am right..

 

[sluggercatfan]

Thank you, what a relief not to have to read some of these conspiracies.

Can you talk to your buddy and get him to do the same, the whole board would appreciate.it, I can't quit responding when i am right..

Thank you, what a relief not to have to read some of these conspiracies.

Can you talk to your buddy and get him to do the same, the whole board would appreciate.it, I can't quit responding when i am right..

Oh you can't quit responding all right, but it most certainly is not because you are right... You aren't even in theballpark... You definitely have a serious, serious problem. This whole board would be better if you would keep your ignorant ideas off here.

 

[jauk11]

Jauk11,you are about as clueless a poster as I’ve ever witnessed, and your ignorant rants will shut this site down faster than the Chinese . Just shut the hell up, you’re like those low information voters! Just quit!

Speaking of clueless, tell us more about how mitch deliberately ran the football program into the dirt, costing us millions in the process, when lack of money for support was supposed to be the big problem to start with Make sense?.

Look, you are a decent poster except for that brain fart and joining up with Slugger, do you think Stoops should have been fired last year also?

 

[jauk11]

Oh you can't quit responding all right, but it most certainly is not because you are right... You aren't even in theballpark... You definitely have serious, serious problem. This whole board would be better if you would keep your ignorant ideas off here.

So, wasn't talking to you, but you agree that mitch deliberately ran the football program below dirt and cost us untold millions (still is) in order to try to get more millions for football? Interesting. I see you endorse every attack law launches but I haven't seen you endorse his radical idea, lol, do you just pick and choose what you like about his post, ie, any attack on me?

The reason we have more millions for football now is because OTHER SEC ADs weren't asleep at the wheel, NOT because mitch deliberately lost the University all that money, most of it not likely to return anytime soon, still almost 20,000 season ticket holders below the 09 high, and as others have stated, likely to NEVER be the same.

Quit distracting me, the track meet is over but Ancient Aliens: Declassified is on the History channel, besides, I still have other things to do.

 

[WildCard]

...(1) I don't understand how anyone can say he inherited good talent with TWO four stars playing when all but ONE (Vandy of course, BUT including the two Misses) of the SEC teams we played AVERAGED 38 four star commits the previous four years PLUS a lot of FIVE STARS------and of course, the east was a lot tougher then.

(2) Back on subject, do you really think mitch deliberately ran football into the ground to get more (problematical) support?...

OK, last go round in this thread

(1) I didn't say he was left with FL's roster. I said he was left a program in pretty good shape. As I noted in another thread the ONLY UK coach since Collier to take over a UK program coming off 4 consecutive winning seasons.

(2) Oh, hell no! That's a crazy notion. Why on earth would he do that?

He had a very tough time hiring a football coach when he ended up with Brooks. Brooks had actually created a situation at UK where they just might have been able to get some interest from some guys with established HC experience and good "coaching resumes". For whatever reason he went with someone inside the program and it blew up on him like a MK 82 (that is a 500 lb bomb ). Unfortunately, it also came at a time when "older fans felt like they had enough". And there are (were) a lot of "older fans" down there. And, I promise you, the new generation fans will have nowhere near the patience as did their predecessors.

Peace

 

[jauk11]

OK, last go round in this thread

(1) I didn't say he was left with FL's roster. I said he was left a program in pretty good shape. As I noted in another thread the ONLY UK coach since Collier to take over a UK program coming off 4 consecutive winning seasons.

(2) Oh, hell no! That's a crazy notion. Why on earth would he do that?

He had a very tough time hiring a football coach when he ended up with Brooks. Brooks had actually created a situation at UK where they just might have been able to get some interest from some guys with established HC experience and good "coaching resumes". For whatever reason he went with someone inside the program and it blew up on him like a MK 82 (that is a 500 lb bomb ). Unfortunately, it also came at a time when "older fans felt like they had enough". And there are (were) a lot of "older fans" down there. And, I promise you, the new generation fans will have nowhere near the patience as did their predecessors.

Peace

Thank you! I have always respected your intelligence (and info) if not your choices of teams to follow, #1 incredibly bad, #2 incredibly good, lol.

Man, these two guys have been calling me all kinds of an idiot for fighting about that, an incredible reach proposed by a fan that seems fairly well informed in other respects, and backed up to the hilt by Slugger, probably just because it is something to fight with me about, I don't really believe he believes that, "That's a crazy notion. Why on earth would he do that?" sums it up about perfectly IMO. Kind of bothered me with everyone else sitting in the corner on the subject, letting us dominate the board with a stupid subject, IMO.

Are you listening Slugger,? Of course you are, you follow me around worse than I follow you around, and I follow you around because I think you do harm to the program with your constant "FAAR the Coach" blarney, (and trying to make mitch out to be a football hero when that is absurd, he has done what he HAD to do with the money rolling in, someone noticed losing 20,000 season ticket holders) not happening even in your dreams anytime soon. And I do think you might have backed off some, it was constant for a while, particularly bad when we were trying to close out the recruiting class.

I also agree with the rest of your post, I think Brooks rescued him from a very embarrassing situation, AND did a hell of a job with the support he had.

But I didn't say it was JUST Florida that had a tremendous talent advantage, top ten USC that he upset had 39 four stars in the previous four classes plus a five star, to Joker's two playing, and the AVERAGE for the others minus Vandy was 38 four stars PLUS their five stars--------a tremendous talent deficit for everyone except Vandy. Florida's advantage was extreme, over 50 four stars and a dozen five stars at the time IIRC, even the two Misses that everyone thought we should beat because of our talent "advantage" each had 20 or more.

 

[sluggercatfan]

OK, last go round in this thread

(1) I didn't say he was left with FL's roster. I said he was left a program in pretty good shape. As I noted in another thread the ONLY UK coach since Collier to take over a UK program coming off 4 consecutive winning seasons.

(2) Oh, hell no! That's a crazy notion. Why on earth would he do that?

He had a very tough time hiring a football coach when he ended up with Brooks. Brooks had actually created a situation at UK where they just might have been able to get some interest from some guys with established HC experience and good "coaching resumes". For whatever reason he went with someone inside the program and it blew up on him like a MK 82 (that is a 500 lb bomb ). Unfortunately, it also came at a time when "older fans felt like they had enough". And there are (were) a lot of "older fans" down there. And, I promise you, the new generation fans will have nowhere near the patience as did their predecessors.

Peace

The next hire won't be so tough now that Mitch has overseen a great renovation of ALL the facilities across the UK campus. We should be able to make a serious upgrade when the time comes.Congratulations to the great job the men and women's track team are doing.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

The next hire won't be so tough now that Mitch has overseen a great renovation of ALL the facilities across the UK campus. We should be able to make a serious upgrade when the time comes.Congratulations to the great job the men and women's track team are doing.

I think UK's AD has done an exceptional job. BB was always on top and in reality probably is with a majority of the UK fanbase, but he has elevated the baseball program, football program and several of the ladies programs. All the while having to fight like crazy for funding because many of the old guard was afraid he would pull a dollar the BB program might want.

 

[sluggercatfan]

I think UK's AD has done an exceptional job. BB was always on top and in reality probably is with a majority of the UK fanbase, but he has elevated the baseball program, football program and several of the ladies programs. All the while having to fight like crazy for funding because many of the old guard was afraid he would pull a dollar the BB program might want.

Amen to that!!