I don't know how durable he will end up being but Wilcox looks like he could be the lead back in a platoon of RBs. There are evidently preparation issues with him but it appears to me that the talent is there.
Has the coaching staff improved our football team?
- Thread starter Rembrandt90
- Start date
Just a gut feeling, but Wilcox feels like the one that will be cut loose if we reel in this new rb. We all see what he does on game day, so there must be some serious issues behind the scenes. If hes a casualty to fix our culture issues, im all for it.
As always, one guys opinion, mine. That would be a mistake, seems there is nothing serious going on, they continue to play him, they kept him on the team through the offseason. Reading between Stoop’s comments, he doesn’t study on his own like he’s expected to. His blocking needs to be better, you can’t let guys loose on your quarterback, he was really good talent, I’m hoping his prep work and commitment get better and he is on the field more.
Difference between realizing one’s potential or not. Probably applies to over half of D one athletes. That’s why there are 1000s of D1 athletes and only 1500 or so pro.
Good point on my opinion. I only preface that all of the time to point out that I don’t know squat, I observe everything from afar.
No, it's because there are only around 2000 NFL jobs regardless of how many D1 and other athletes there are even if they meet the potential.
Disagree with that to some degree. There are guys that would absolutely make it to the league or stick in the league with better work habits. That doesn’t mean that those guys are problematic for their team or culture problems as you suggested, just means another player is going to out work them and realize their potential.
Thanks for your in-depth analysis and optimistic outlook. We all know the SEC is so tough, so I’m not measuring our season on wins and losses but rather how we compete.
Thanks for the breakdown. I expect the defense to be terrible. If the coaches were satisfied with the younger guys at DL, then they wouldn't be shopping the portal for more DL. The LB core will have little to no SEC starting experience. All new starters at CB. The safeties were terrible last season, and we return the same players. I just don't see much to be optimistic about the defense.
Excellent job of analysis, really appreciate the update. I’ve been very pessimistic about this year, but you give me hope. I know last year‘s problems was mainly offensive line, but I questioned a lot of play calling. I’ll be supporting the players through thick and thin, and hope our offensive coordinator is better than I think he is
I will play the wait and see with this team. I have lost a ton of confidence in the fact that Stoops will not allow the offense to actually open up and play. If he can, he will run the ball like old school football. I do not mind the run game but we seem to be behind the times (recently in the run department, probably oline and such). We are going to have a 30+ million dollar Texas team roll in here. Not sure we have the guys to compete.
I will take it one game at a time, heck one play at a time. I will probably go back to listening to Tom on the radio and not actually watch the games. Just to switch things up this year. It will be like I am in the back yard in the 70s, radio in the garage cranked up and enjoying the afternoon that way.
I will take it one game at a time, heck one play at a time. I will probably go back to listening to Tom on the radio and not actually watch the games. Just to switch things up this year. It will be like I am in the back yard in the 70s, radio in the garage cranked up and enjoying the afternoon that way.
That's truly preposterous. This may not be a great UK team. But, to say this will be one of UK's "worst ever" football teams reveals a remarkable ignorance of UK football history.
Most all the complaints about stoops over the years has been about his offense not being exciting. You can smell it from a mile away with some of these posters.
As a long time uk fan i can assure people winning 8-10 games a year was exciting as hell no matter the fact we did it on the ground. Imo any actual uk fan would agree. Everyone else is just someone wanting something to do during basketball off-season.
Got to be the dumbest post ever. 0-10-1
I'm sure there are some that want 'excitement'. The style has never mattered to me except to find what it takes to win games, make improvements, etc.... And while we need to regain our toughness etc, the reality is that the game has changed in the last 7 years with styles of more sophisticated offense and where more points are produced. Do we need to get more physical again, yes. But the reality is that all teams have needed to do the last few years is get a lead because we aren't capable of playing any sort of football that can get back into a game. It's a style of football that requires you never to let the other team get up two scores which has become increasingly difficult in a more offensive era. I just think it's a mistake to think that we can go back to Bennie Snell ball and recreate that glory in today's game. I often point out that our best stretch was predominantly due to the ability to play tight/physical games against unsuccessful Missouri and SC coaches known to coach themselves out of games. We didn't have to worry about satterfield at UL. And UF became a 50/50 game for us in their recent stretch of mediocrity. The only one of those things that still might exist is whether UF is coming out of the woods or still in them. I just don't see us being a total one side of the ball team that can reach where we once did. So we have to step it up. We haven't been able to and last year, without the East schedule of the last decade, was a car crash.
I think the poorest part of Stoop's adaptation to this new era of buying players is not making sure the team had an above average pass rush every year. I really like JJ Weever and the loyalty he showed UK for five years, however, he should have been a backup for the last three years. The style that Stoops wants to play requires turnovers, especially against the teams you mentioned, I would add Vandy to those other three you listed. Stoops needs to have at least two pass rushers on his DLine to try and play that style, I like that style, I think it mirrors the 49ers pretty closely and to me it's good football.
The most disappointing loss to me last year was watching USCe beat Stoops playing Stoop's style of football. I agree with you that the game has changed and teams are focusing more scoring points, in the SEC it seems like Joe Brady might have started that trend. Anyway, I think Stoops needs to get back to his roots of running the ball and playing physical on defense. Once that is established then a special season or two might be back on the table based on getting a special player or two, like landing a kid like that Jack USCe landed last year.
We tried the more modern style but couldn't get the players.
Also Michigan and OSU won the last two titles. The first with almost exclusively rushing and defense and the latter with defense and distribution.
In today's cfb, there are only a handful of truly elite qbs. We cant afford them, so back to physical inside zone is our best bet.
Texas leads college football NCAA Re-Rank 1-136 after spring practice
Spring practice is wrapped up, so it's time to start projecting the top teams for the 2025 college football season in the first NCAA Re-Rank 1-136.
www.usatoday.com
U6 16
----------
WKU 49
----------
UNC 80
UK 81
Vandy 82
Not sure if they will finish there or not but Illinois being number 11 is impressive.Texas leads college football NCAA Re-Rank 1-136 after spring practice
Spring practice is wrapped up, so it's time to start projecting the top teams for the 2025 college football season in the first NCAA Re-Rank 1-136.www.usatoday.com
U6 16
----------
WKU 49
----------
UNC 80
UK 81
Vandy 82
My take isnt even about style. It’s about being competent in the pass game. Which is a rarity under stoops. My only point about style would be to be able to play at a decent enough pace that the game isn’t essentially over when you go down 10-14 points even in the first half. At some point there is also no way around never finding chunk plays.
You are right regarding chunk plays... it's partially why the offense was pretty effective with Benny and Boom several years back. Badet, Garrett Johnson and Dorian Baker were a legit WR crew.
Similar the year w/Wandale at WR. The defense had to respect both the run and pass
We don’t have anywhere near the caliber of player to play like that Michigan team did. They also had a first round QB lol. And Ohio state could absolutely throw the ball. They were loaded too.
I think that argument misses the forrest for the trees. That brand of football is the easier path for UK to get back to being a competitive team is the debate. If UK could land players like OSU or UM, they could play whatever style they chose and be successful at it. I do think people get too hung up on the offensive output, UGA is the hunt every year because of their defense, OM went on a spending spree last year in the portal, the lion's share spent on the defense. This off season, PSU broke the bank and hired Knowles away from OSU, who had done the same to OKLA St. a couple of years prior. The vaunted UT offense was very competitive last year, carried by their defense, not the offense. UK absolutely needs to get back to being a physical running team that plays stout defense, it's the best route to being competitive in this league.
Of course we dont have national title talent. Michigan won a game where they didn't throw the ball an entire half. Their dominance was on the ground despite the weird qb selection.
Osu was led by defense. They had playmakers for sure but defense led the way.
Defense and running the ball will always be a chance to win. Thats what we can recruit and coach to. We have to use the tools we have.
There were several come from behind wins even in the Gran era. Even the belk bowl win drove down the field at the end running the ball.
In today's nil environment, we will not have enough money to have a high caliber passing attack.
I’m pro running the ball but all I’m saying is all those those teams could score lol. It wasn’t just 3 yards and a cloud of dust. We aren’t even competent at throwing the ball.
Ohio state when their defense wasn’t playing well could win a shootout. Defense and running the ball are important and I don’t disagree with most of what you’re saying but those teams don’t play like we used too. Will Howard threw for 4000 yards and 35 tds. And they had a WR with 1300. We’ve been decent at throwing the ball like twice in the stoops era. 2021 and 2016. And in today’s game I’m not sure that’s gonna be enough.
The most successful teams in college football are equally versed at running and passing consistently to move the ball. But in order to do that you have to have multi-talented players especially with you O-line. Some linemen are maulers that can run block especially well, but are weak in pass pro, and vice versa. The elite teams like Bama and OSU have lineman that can do both well. We had a successful run oriented offence during the Gran era but we didn't have the players to effectively pass the ball. It worked about as well as a one dimensional offense could work. Stoops attempted to upgrade the offense to a multi-facitaed unit that could do a lot more put bumped into a lot of issues. I don't have to reaped the history of the O-line but it was devastating then the rotating door of OCs really made it even more difficult. Then it became harder to run the ball.
You could make the case of just being a ground and pound unit that would win 8 games year - 10 would be a stretch IMO, but I don't find fault with Stoops trying to upgrade the offense to a balanced unit that could compete at a higher level. I still think that should be the ultimate goal.
You could make the case of just being a ground and pound unit that would win 8 games year - 10 would be a stretch IMO, but I don't find fault with Stoops trying to upgrade the offense to a balanced unit that could compete at a higher level. I still think that should be the ultimate goal.
You make some good points, especially about the merits in upgrading to a balanced offense. But the points about our past difficulties are overly broad in some cases. It isn't precisely true to say Stoops hasn't had skill guys who could throw and catch. He just hasn't had enough of those under the circumstances that developed. Drew Barker, Will Levis, Stephen Johnson, and Terry Wilson showed they could manage a passing attack pretty darn well when given the chance and a little time. Wandale Robinson, Lynn Bowden, Juice Johnson, Josh Ali, Dane Key, and BB were very capable receivers. Luke Fortner, Landon Young, Logan Stenberg, and Darian Kinnard became NFL linemen. Bunchy Stallings was an AA. Drake Jackson and Dare Rosenthal were also mostly excellent. But all the above-named QBs got hurt bad enough to impact their performances, and Wilson also entangled himself in an unwise social issue about which nobody speaks to this day. So it isn't that the multitalented players were missing. It's just that we didn't have enough of them. When Carson Beck got hurt, GA had Gunner Stockton. When Hendon Hooker got hurt, TN had Joe Milton. Stoops just hasn't historically had enough quality depth to overcome injuries and smart SEC DCs.
You hit the nail on the head about the necessity of a balanced offense. The idea is to spread out the defense and force defensive players to execute (or not) at the point of attack. You run the football to draw the safeties nearer to the box, so you can throw the ball over the top of the defense next. You throw the ball to force secondary players to cover, so you can run against 6 or 7 man box next. You keep the defense guessing. No team has done this better than GA and TN. Josh Heupel has made an artform out of making defenses guess and forcing defenses to execute on every snap.
Problems with loading up your run game at the expense of developing a credible passing game are multiple. SEC DCs are the top coordinators in the country. Opposing defenses will bring safeties up into the box and force you to run against 8 or 9 defenders. Then you have to be able to throw the football or else an SEC defense eventually jams up your running lanes. So you have to spread out the defense. You can't do that without offensive balance. Another problem is that you can't recruit receivers and QBs unless you throw the football. That's self-evident. So Stoops had the right idea. He is still trying to implement it.
Last edited:
Being better but not having a better record or even a worse one can also happen. I’m just not sold on the OC or the HC.
Imo that will happen this year. We'll be better but struggle to win more games. Im ok on stoops but i too am not sold on bush.
I will wait to see how we look without stoops cowing to nil guys. Tough spot when you're told to get barion so many touches a game and have to rotate in an nil backup qb that is playing way out of position.
This might be a sour opinion but this is not the question to be asking. Oh, I understand good coaching is important...always was. But, in this modern era of semi-pro football with the transfer portal and the nil landscape that is very slippery and sometimes difficult to understand, I think the question should be something like this:
"Has UK football secured the endless amounts of nil funding to field the most potent and deepest roster within the $EC on an annual basis?"
If that answer is "no", "I don't know", or something like "well, you can't compete with UK bball for nil money, blah blah blah", then nothing else really matters since all UK's opponents are outspending them and digging into the tp to rebuild a roster probably 10 times during the year.
I am sick of what has become an era where UK was starting to succeed (think 2016 - 2021) and gain traction with the big boys only to be gut punched and kicked in the nuts by nil/tp bullshit. Yeah, I have invested a lot over the years but am now passed being pissed - just apathetic.
"Has UK football secured the endless amounts of nil funding to field the most potent and deepest roster within the $EC on an annual basis?"
If that answer is "no", "I don't know", or something like "well, you can't compete with UK bball for nil money, blah blah blah", then nothing else really matters since all UK's opponents are outspending them and digging into the tp to rebuild a roster probably 10 times during the year.
I am sick of what has become an era where UK was starting to succeed (think 2016 - 2021) and gain traction with the big boys only to be gut punched and kicked in the nuts by nil/tp bullshit. Yeah, I have invested a lot over the years but am now passed being pissed - just apathetic.
I agree with you, as a UGA fan I think we had the best recruiters in college football as a head coach. But we certainly don't have the richest fanbase and will be outbid multiple times. But it's the rules we have and have to play with. Schools like Texas, ATM, have big money boosters and will use that advantage. The question is can other teams overcome the advantage.
I don’t think they will be one of the worst but I also have very low expectations going into next season. Have a bet with a friend for $100 they win 3 games or less. The program is regressing under stoops and I just have no confidence in him to turn this around. Been a good run but think it’s time for a change. Certainly hope I lose my $100 which only takes 4 wins but will see.
Last edited:
Similar threads
