ADVERTISEMENT

Help me understand why Louisville has a better football program than UK

What surprises me about the responses to this post is that the only assertion referenced in my original post that is somewhat disputed is the representation I made that UK has better football facilities than UL. No other representation about the qualities UK has which UL has the lesser of have been controverted. Still, I am surprised to see where a significant number of people believe UL has better facilities particularly in light of our $110 million football facility upgrade. I was not aware UL had superior football facilities, (if they do)
 
Last edited:
I know The Bear left, but UK had something sustainable until Bradshaw. Seems like at that point the writing was on the wall for UKs future
 
What surprises me about the responses to this post is that the only assertion referenced in my original post that is somewhat disputed is the representation I made that UK has better football facilities than UL. No other representation about the qualities UK has which UL has the lesser of have been controverted. Still, I am surprised to see where a significant number of people believe UL has better facilities particularly in light of our just $110 million football facility upgrade. I was not aware UL had superior facilities, (if they do)
Your original post references recruiting rankings as a measure program power. There are those like myself that don't put as much stock in recruiting rankings, and believe that you have been hoodwinked into thinking the team has better players than it does.

What if... Stoops was merely cherry picking the 4 stars that other schools thought were overrated? These players would be easier to recruit (because bigger schools don't value them) and at the same time make Stoops look like a champ and deserve a contract extension. Recruiting agencies never want to admit they missed on kids so the narrative continues to be pushed that the talent is there there when it never really was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TDredbird
While Mitch may well deserve criticism for not hiring Petrino, many UK fans who berate him over and over and over are losing sight of a very important fact. Mitch is hardly the only AD who failed to hire Petrino.

Bobby Petrino was hired at WKU for the 2013 season. For that season, UK hired Stoops. A total of 30 FBS, excluding Western, hired new head coaches. 14 of those schools were Power 5 schools, and they included: Auburn, Wisconsin, California, NC State, Tennessee, Colorado, Texas Tech, Arkansas, and Oregon. Arkansas wasn't going to hire Petrino, obviously. How about the other schools? Why didn't they hire Petrino? Not a single one of these schools (all of which are probably more attractive positions than UK) hired Petrino. If Petrino was willing to go to WKU, and was willing to go to UK, is there any doubt that he would have been interested in Oregon or Auburn or Tennessee? Well, they weren't interested in him. So, how is Mitch uniquely stupid for passing on him?

Next year- he goes to Louisville. Jobs opened up at Penn St., Texas, Washington, USC, all programs considerably more prestigious and attractive than Louisville. Why didn't one of these schools pursue Petrino?

I can understand how the guy is ripped for not getting Coach Cal the first time around. The fact is, that very few schools would have passed him up, and he wanted to come here, and we passed. It's not the same situation with Petrino. No credible program in America in '13 or '14 would have touched him. If they would have, he wouldn't have considered coming to UK in the first place.
First of all Barny didnt get Coach Cal the first time NOR THE SECOND TIME. Lets be clear about the real facts. As to what other schools were doing that is less than a zero to me. I demanded we hire Petrino then. He would never come now and I dont blame him. First Barny needs to be fired and then lets find an AD capable of knowing how to manage ONE MAJOR PROGRAM. Football. He has little or nothing to do with basketball so Football is ALL ON BARNY. So far. EPIC FAIL!!!
 
What surprises me about the responses to this post is that the only assertion referenced in my original post that is somewhat disputed is the representation I made that UK has better football facilities than UL. No other representation about the qualities UK has which UL has the lesser of have been controverted. Still, I am surprised to see where a significant number of people believe UL has better facilities particularly in light of our $110 million football facility upgrade. I was not aware UL had superior football facilities, (if they do)

"After all, UK is the state's "Flagship University" It is Kentucky's largest university. UK is a more prestigious academic university than UL. UK has much more fan support within the state of Kentucky than UL. UK has much better football facilities than UL. During the 3 out of the last 4 years, UK has signed better football recruits than UL based upon Rival's recruiting rankings as set out below:"

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder for academics and facilities for the athlete. Athletes are not recruited because they will graduate with the most prestigious degrees. In fact some universities have their on special majors or course of study for their athletes. If you have a degree program that I like or fits my academic needs then I might accept an athletic scholarship to your school. Having winning sports programs also helps with the name recognition of the school for academics. Every school claims to have the best fans. If fans dictated FB prowess then Miami would not have risen to the top of the FB heap in the Eighties. Rating tens of thousands of high school athletes on a scale of 0-5 is very subjective. IMO you sited some superficial advantages as they relate to college sports.
 
"After all, UK is the state's "Flagship University" It is Kentucky's largest university. UK is a more prestigious academic university than UL. UK has much more fan support within the state of Kentucky than UL. UK has much better football facilities than UL. During the 3 out of the last 4 years, UK has signed better football recruits than UL based upon Rival's recruiting rankings as set out below:"

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder for academics and facilities for the athlete. Athletes are not recruited because they will graduate with the most prestigious degrees. In fact some universities have their on special majors or course of study for their athletes. If you have a degree program that I like or fits my academic needs then I might accept an athletic scholarship to your school. Having winning sports programs also helps with the name recognition of the school for academics. Every school claims to have the best fans. If fans dictated FB prowess then Miami would not have risen to the top of the FB heap in the Eighties. Rating tens of thousands of high school athletes on a scale of 0-5 is very subjective. IMO you sited some superficial advantages as they relate to college sports.

Those advantages aren't superficial. There is no doubt that UK has more fans than UL. It's sheer numbers, that isn't an opinion. You can argue as to how important that is to a modern athlete, though it's often cited as one reason why SEC football is so successful at recruiting the best athletes.

As for academics, I don't buy your argument for that either. If academics didn't matter, then schools like Stanford and ND wouldn't have any advantages, but it's a huge advantage when you're recruiting smart kids that want to graduate with a prestigious degree and have chances to do things outside of football after they finish college (or the pros).
 
  • Like
Reactions: WildcatofNati
If UK wants to get serious about football, they need to hire this generation's Howard Schnellenberger, then give him everything he needs to get the program going in the right direction. Plan on it being a ten year process. Schnellenberger went 2-9, 3-8, 3-7-1, 8-3, 6-5, 10-1-1, 2-9, 5-6, 9-3 and 6-5 at Louisville - not even a winning overall record, but it did not matter because Schnellenberger had won a national championship at Miami and before that had won two Super Bowls with the Miami Dolphins - so UofL knew that the foundation was being laid the right way. A huge part of the foundation is that the coach have a great reputation in a part of the country that has great high school football. You cannot win without great players.

Once the foundation is laid, you then ALWAYS hire coaches who follow the same philosophy and whose strengths are in recruiting the same areas of the country. UofL failed to do this twice, once in 1995 when we hired Ron Cooper, and once again in 2007 when we hired Steve Kragthorpe. The results were disastrous, and the AD's we had at the time corrected that mistake after three years each time by firing Cooper and Kragthorpe and hiring coaches with recruiting ties to Florida (although John L. Smith was primarily a product of western football, he was a disciple of Dennis Erickson, who also won two national championships at Miami).
Rich Brooks laid the foundation for us. Barnhart jack hammered it to pieces by hiring Joker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beasleythecard
The only advantage UofL has over us in football is a win at all costs attitude. That plus the obvious coaching disaster we have going also I would say. Facilities wise we're ahead but once the new renovations for UofL are done then that'll be pretty even imo. One advantage we've always had is having a much larger fan base but that certainly hasn't helped much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beasleythecard
When it com
Those advantages aren't superficial. There is no doubt that UK has more fans than UL. It's sheer numbers, that isn't an opinion. You can argue as to how important that is to a modern athlete, though it's often cited as one reason why SEC football is so successful at recruiting the best athletes.

As for academics, I don't buy your argument for that either. If academics didn't matter, then schools like Stanford and ND wouldn't have any advantages, but it's a huge advantage when you're recruiting smart kids that want to graduate with a prestigious degree and have chances to do things outside of football after they finish college (or the pros).

When it comes to the importance in having a winning program simply because you are the state university, have a higher academic ranking and more fans then they are in deed superficial. Academics do matter, to those kids that "are going professional in something other than sports." I don't know if Stanford has such a major but ND had an AA named Chris Zorich several years ago and his major was U.S. Cities. Really! This was in the days when tv would flash your college major during the game. They don't do that any more. Most of the top SEC FB schools are the state flagship schools but they are doing it on the field, not lamenting the facts about prestige and fan base.
 
As a long time UK fan, I am puzzled at how the University of Louisville has established a better football program than the University of Kentucky. After all, UK is the state's "Flagship University" It is Kentucky's largest university. UK is a more prestigious academic university than UL. UK has much more fan support within the state of Kentucky than UL. UK has much better football facilities than UL. During the 3 out of the last 4 years, UK has signed better football recruits than UL based upon Rival's recruiting rankings as set out below:

2013 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 29 UL 41

2014 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 18 UL 36

2015 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 34 UL 32

2016 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 29 UL 36

Louisville is now ranked number 3 in the nation after just throttling the nation's second ranked team while we have been getting beat by the likes of Southern Mississippi, annihilated/embarrassed on national television by Florida and finally escaping with a win over lowly New Mexico State. UL is the number 1 ranked scoring team in the country averaging 65 points per game while we wallow at the bottom in almost every team defense category. Of course, UL has beaten Kentucky 5 straight games.

While I understand that Joker may have left UK "relatively" low on talent (we have always been "low" on talent) when he departed, UL has never had a recruiting class ranked higher than 30th in the nation and that was in 2011.

As a long time UK fan, I keep asking myself, with all of the qualities that UK has going for it compared to UL, "How in the hell did the UL football program evolve into being so superior to UK?

UL is better now because of coaches and culture. UK fans breathe basketball and the players know it. Two, 2007-2009 who was better? Brooks against Krapthorpe? Remember, your "horrible" A.D. brought in Calipari... he isn't that bad.
 
UL is better now because of coaches and culture. UK fans breathe basketball and the players know it. Two, 2007-2009 who was better? Brooks against Krapthorpe? Remember, your "horrible" A.D. brought in Calipari... he isn't that bad.

Yes, he is. He hired Demoss (alleged scandal had to leave), Gillispie (scandal got fired), Joker (totally incompetent, got fired) and now Stoops (possible scandal, might get fired). Not exactly a sterling record of hires
 
The ability to control the schedule in perrenial weak Conferences help build Louisville football..UK has played in the Toughest league since 1933 has hampered its progress.UK has made some unfortunate hires at Head Coach and thus the results.

You forgot to say that "Louisville is a sewer"
 
When it com


When it comes to the importance in having a winning program simply because you are the state university, have a higher academic ranking and more fans then they are in deed superficial. Academics do matter, to those kids that "are going professional in something other than sports." I don't know if Stanford has such a major but ND had an AA named Chris Zorich several years ago and his major was U.S. Cities. Really! This was in the days when tv would flash your college major during the game. They don't do that any more. Most of the top SEC FB schools are the state flagship schools but they are doing it on the field, not lamenting the facts about prestige and fan base.

We're talking about why UL football has a better progam, at present, than UK. These criteria all factor in, so I'm not sure why you're arguing them. Do academics play the most important part in football success? No, of course not. But, does one school having superior academics over another school potentially help one over the other? Of course. Same with fanbase. Some kids don't care about fans and atmosphere and passion and those things (otherwise, schools like Miami would never get any recruits); but many of them do and that's why schools like Auburn are successful in getting recruits from bigger cities to come to the middle of nowhere and play football in Alabama.
 
UL is better now because of coaches and culture. UK fans breathe basketball and the players know it. Two, 2007-2009 who was better? Brooks against Krapthorpe? Remember, your "horrible" A.D. brought in Calipari... he isn't that bad.
and we OWN Lil Brother in most sports..troll culture...the West End Linebeard Crown Royal culture..[roll]
 
As a long time UK fan, I am puzzled at how the University of Louisville has established a better football program than the University of Kentucky. After all, UK is the state's "Flagship University" It is Kentucky's largest university. UK is a more prestigious academic university than UL. UK has much more fan support within the state of Kentucky than UL. UK has much better football facilities than UL. During the 3 out of the last 4 years, UK has signed better football recruits than UL based upon Rival's recruiting rankings as set out below:

2013 National Recruiting Rankings
UK 29 UL 41

2014 National Recruiting Rankings
UK 18 UL 36

2015 National Recruiting Rankings
UK 34 UL 32

2016 National Recruiting Rankings
UK 29 UL 36

Your first mistake is you believe that football recruiting rankings are accurate like basketball. The truth is football player rankings are a guess at best. Coaching, player development and a eye for under rated talent are just as important. Teddy Bridgewater was not a top 5 QB but he smoke the #1 qb in the Sugar Bowl. Jackson was just another 4 star QB.
 
This pretty much sums it up.

And to the OP: No disrespect intended, but you DO NOT have better facilities than UofL. If you truly believe that, you're out of touch with reality.
Pizza Pit is a small time potty seat band box well suited to a Mid Major School
 
  • Like
Reactions: WildcatofNati
all the uavel Goobers have descended from their basements to post..Just reinforcing their nickname Little Brother Little Brother the moniker they prove fits over and over..[laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing][laughing]
 
Yes, he is. He hired Demoss (alleged scandal had to leave), Gillispie (scandal got fired), Joker (totally incompetent, got fired) and now Stoops (possible scandal, might get fired). Not exactly a sterling record of hires
Also...Henderson < McDonnell / Mitchell < Walz ..... The latest fiasco in UK Athletics where the women basketball team up and left told me that we have a Department that doesn't have its finger on the pulse... Personally I've lost confidence that Barnhart knows where to find a pulse.
But it's okay by me if you love him......
 
Petrino gets by defensively selling out to the run. It is ridiculous how far up his LB's and Safties play. Watch them when they play a team that has a QB that can hit long posts and outs accurately. Which isn't very often with their schedule every year. Game plan to pass a lot against them and their aggressive attitudes are taken down a notch.

Game plan them defensively to get to the QB time and time again with blitzes. Even if you get beat a lot with deep passes and get 56 points put on you. You be the aggressor and make them beat you deep if they can do it.

Most, if not all, conservative teams will lose against them. If you don't have the mind set going in that you are going to be the aggressor on both sides of the ball, they will. Have to be willing to have the attitude that if you lose 70-0 so be it. But we are coming at you, every play. Whatever happens, happens. Don't change the course.
 
It started out promising. But quickly dying out.

UK will NEVER be better in FB (or any other sport) simply because they are "State U"; or have more fans (across a state that has nothing to do with what goes on inside the football complex); or claim academic superiority (seriously, it might make a difference with a few players at a top 30 or so school); or TALKING about the best facilities; or being sure you have more talent because "UK recruits equal a 3.53 and UofL is only 3.27".

Apparently a lot of people really do believe that these things are what a program is built upon. Keep this attitude and I can almost guarantee that 30 years from now UK will still be looking up to "little brother" in FB.

UK fans are expecting magic in a bottle. Hire the right coach and that's all it takes. Maybe for a season or two. Vandy was good for a while and then The Coach moves on and he's left nothing behind except memories. No culture that represents Vandy. No nothing. Did Curci change the identity? How about Mumme? They gave UK couple good years but changed nothing.

UK needs to forget about 4* Ohio recruits which look good on paper and spend years building a base in the Deep South, a base that last beyond one assistant or one head coach. whether the "star counters" want to admit it or not, a team of Fla 3* is simply more talented than one built on Ohio and Ky 4*.

UK simply doesn't get the work that UofL has invested into their program. The PROGRAM they've built has an identity and pride that I have NEVER seen at UK. Simply a fact. You can claim some sort of right to be better because UK is State U all you want, and UofL will lap UK.

The fans enable UK administration. They don't have to work for you. Just hire somebody else and announce "we're better". Face it, most people are hoping for UofL to fail rather than UK figuring out how to do this. Hard truth but it's the truth.

My suggestion: Go check out UofL athletic and academic campus. Most of you have no idea what's going on there. Consider their trajectory - they are crushing almost everything to GET BETTER - and compare to UK trajectory which appears to be standing still in comparison. Bottom line, UofL out works UK because they've had to earn it while UK simply expects it as some sort of inherent "right".

The guys in the locker room - they could care less about the fans in the boondocks; being a student athlete at State U doesn't make them suddenly better; they aren't working harder because they're going to the 116th ranked academic institution rather than the 160th. Those star ranking mean nothing once you're on the field.

The attitude, pride, ethic, and belief inside the locker room and between the lines - those things DO win games and build programs. Everything else is just empty talk. Which university do you think is winning in the locker room?
 
It started out promising. But quickly dying out.

UK will NEVER be better in FB (or any other sport) simply because they are "State U"; or have more fans (across a state that has nothing to do with what goes on inside the football complex); or claim academic superiority (seriously, it might make a difference with a few players at a top 30 or so school); or TALKING about the best facilities; or being sure you have more talent because "UK recruits equal a 3.53 and UofL is only 3.27".

Apparently a lot of people really do believe that these things are what a program is built upon. Keep this attitude and I can almost guarantee that 30 years from now UK will still be looking up to "little brother" in FB.

UK fans are expecting magic in a bottle. Hire the right coach and that's all it takes. Maybe for a season or two. Vandy was good for a while and then The Coach moves on and he's left nothing behind except memories. No culture that represents Vandy. No nothing. Did Curci change the identity? How about Mumme? They gave UK couple good years but changed nothing.

UK needs to forget about 4* Ohio recruits which look good on paper and spend years building a base in the Deep South, a base that last beyond one assistant or one head coach. whether the "star counters" want to admit it or not, a team of Fla 3* is simply more talented than one built on Ohio and Ky 4*.

UK simply doesn't get the work that UofL has invested into their program. The PROGRAM they've built has an identity and pride that I have NEVER seen at UK. Simply a fact. You can claim some sort of right to be better because UK is State U all you want, and UofL will lap UK.

The fans enable UK administration. They don't have to work for you. Just hire somebody else and announce "we're better". Face it, most people are hoping for UofL to fail rather than UK figuring out how to do this. Hard truth but it's the truth.

My suggestion: Go check out UofL athletic and academic campus. Most of you have no idea what's going on there. Consider their trajectory - they are crushing almost everything to GET BETTER - and compare to UK trajectory which appears to be standing still in comparison. Bottom line, UofL out works UK because they've had to earn it while UK simply expects it as some sort of inherent "right".

The guys in the locker room - they could care less about the fans in the boondocks; being a student athlete at State U doesn't make them suddenly better; they aren't working harder because they're going to the 116th ranked academic institution rather than the 160th. Those star ranking mean nothing once you're on the field.

The attitude, pride, ethic, and belief inside the locker room and between the lines - those things DO win games and build programs. Everything else is just empty talk. Which university do you think is winning in the locker room?

A lengthy dissertation you just posted, to which I retort with two words, Katrina, and hos.

Your program is the scum of the earth.
 
Also...Henderson < McDonnell / Mitchell < Walz ..... The latest fiasco in UK Athletics where the women basketball team up and left told me that we have a Department that doesn't have its finger on the pulse... Personally I've lost confidence that Barnhart knows where to find a pulse.
But it's okay by me if you love him......

Huh? Nothing in that said I love Barnhart, I have absolutely no use for the man. He is so far outclassed by Jurich it's not funny. I have zero confidence fball is going to get any better as long as he's the AD. As I've said before, the SEC is a bare knuckles brawl and Barnhart is a tiddlywinks player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mayoman
Huh? Nothing in that said I love Barnhart, I have absolutely no use for the man. He is so far outclassed by Jurich it's not funny. I have zero confidence fball is going to get any better as long as he's the AD. As I've said before, the SEC is a bare knuckles brawl and Barnhart is a tiddlywinks player.

"but it's okay by me if you love him"... Was for those that like the guy (many), not you... I know where you stand and... I wasn't clear/sorry.... We are in agreement...
 
"but it's okay by me if you love him"... Was for those that like the guy (many), not you... I know where you stand and... I wasn't clear/sorry.... We are in agreement...

No worries, just wanted to clarify.

Barnhart is the reason I haven't spoken out about getting rid of Stoops this year. First you have the ridiculous buyout UK would have to pay because of him. Then you have to contend with Barnhart doing the actual hiring. For my money Barnhart is more detrimental to the football program than Stoops could ever be.
 
It started out promising. But quickly dying out.

UK will NEVER be better in FB (or any other sport) simply because they are "State U"; or have more fans (across a state that has nothing to do with what goes on inside the football complex); or claim academic superiority (seriously, it might make a difference with a few players at a top 30 or so school); or TALKING about the best facilities; or being sure you have more talent because "UK recruits equal a 3.53 and UofL is only 3.27".

Apparently a lot of people really do believe that these things are what a program is built upon. Keep this attitude and I can almost guarantee that 30 years from now UK will still be looking up to "little brother" in FB.

UK fans are expecting magic in a bottle. Hire the right coach and that's all it takes. Maybe for a season or two. Vandy was good for a while and then The Coach moves on and he's left nothing behind except memories. No culture that represents Vandy. No nothing. Did Curci change the identity? How about Mumme? They gave UK couple good years but changed nothing.

UK needs to forget about 4* Ohio recruits which look good on paper and spend years building a base in the Deep South, a base that last beyond one assistant or one head coach. whether the "star counters" want to admit it or not, a team of Fla 3* is simply more talented than one built on Ohio and Ky 4*.

UK simply doesn't get the work that UofL has invested into their program. The PROGRAM they've built has an identity and pride that I have NEVER seen at UK. Simply a fact. You can claim some sort of right to be better because UK is State U all you want, and UofL will lap UK.

The fans enable UK administration. They don't have to work for you. Just hire somebody else and announce "we're better". Face it, most people are hoping for UofL to fail rather than UK figuring out how to do this. Hard truth but it's the truth.

My suggestion: Go check out UofL athletic and academic campus. Most of you have no idea what's going on there. Consider their trajectory - they are crushing almost everything to GET BETTER - and compare to UK trajectory which appears to be standing still in comparison. Bottom line, UofL out works UK because they've had to earn it while UK simply expects it as some sort of inherent "right".

The guys in the locker room - they could care less about the fans in the boondocks; being a student athlete at State U doesn't make them suddenly better; they aren't working harder because they're going to the 116th ranked academic institution rather than the 160th. Those star ranking mean nothing once you're on the field.

The attitude, pride, ethic, and belief inside the locker room and between the lines - those things DO win games and build programs. Everything else is just empty talk. Which university do you think is winning in the locker room?
I liked your post as it was thought out. I also liked it as it reflected Coach Schnellenbergers words: "UK must first admit it has a problem". Like you said, I don't think our fans and administration have admitted that clearly and loudly enough.
 
Reasons on display in this post.
1. Denial - it might make you feel better about the situation but Louisville is not a "sewer"
2. Being the "State University" entitles UK to absolutely nothing. In fact it only makes uofl"s achievements look that much more remarkable.
3. "Katrina and ho's" has exactly what to do with football?
4. Our stadium is nicer due to a $110 million upgrade that downsized it. Over the last 6 years they've spent that amount upgrading too, only they've added (2018) 20,000 seats.
5. "They're a dirty program". Where is the PROOF of anything relating to that. It's all speculative and as pathetic as them shouting $250k for Anthony Davis. Glass houses, although there are currently no cracks in our panes it would be wise for us to pocket our stones.
6. Fan Base. In the state they might be a minority but in the city they are not. That very city is the population and economic hub of the state. Although not as big as BBN, their fanbase is passionate, large and financed.
 
First of all Barny didnt get Coach Cal the first time NOR THE SECOND TIME. Lets be clear about the real facts. As to what other schools were doing that is less than a zero to me. I demanded we hire Petrino then. He would never come now and I dont blame him. First Barny needs to be fired and then lets find an AD capable of knowing how to manage ONE MAJOR PROGRAM. Football. He has little or nothing to do with basketball so Football is ALL ON BARNY. So far. EPIC FAIL!!!
That is where the revisionist live. Fire Barny FIRE BARNY.

Go back and look at all the ringing endorsements Stoops had from everyone. I have yet to see an article that questioned his hiring PRIOR to his first game.

He was considered a rising coach. We all thought it was a coup when we signed him. Barnhart hired the right person according to nearly everyone. It just has not worked out.

Still trying to see how this is Barnhart's fault. Now if you want to say the contract extension is the issue, fine. Agreed.

Another place the argument fails is,if Barnhart is so bad, then why does Capilouto keep him around. Cappy must be just as bad as Barnhart for keeping sub-quality personnel on board.
 
Those advantages aren't superficial. There is no doubt that UK has more fans than UL. It's sheer numbers, that isn't an opinion. You can argue as to how important that is to a modern athlete, though it's often cited as one reason why SEC football is so successful at recruiting the best athletes.

As for academics, I don't buy your argument for that either. If academics didn't matter, then schools like Stanford and ND wouldn't have any advantages, but it's a huge advantage when you're recruiting smart kids that want to graduate with a prestigious degree and have chances to do things outside of football after they finish college (or the pros).
UK has more fans, but this is do to carry over love from the basketball program. If you are discussing pure football fans, those numbers are not so certain.

You are also cherry picking when citing Stanford and ND. Duke is prestigious, Georgia Tech is highly rated, MIT, Cal-Poly, UVA, USC, Harvard, Yale, all Ivy League. The most prestigious SEC school is Vandy #15. Florida #50.

Bottom line, academics has very very little to do with recruiting top talent. Every Catholic boy wanted to play for ND at some point.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
 
Last edited:
As a long time UK fan, I am puzzled at how the University of Louisville has established a better football program than the University of Kentucky. After all, UK is the state's "Flagship University" It is Kentucky's largest university. UK is a more prestigious academic university than UL. UK has much more fan support within the state of Kentucky than UL. UK has much better football facilities than UL. During the 3 out of the last 4 years, UK has signed better football recruits than UL based upon Rival's recruiting rankings as set out below:

2013 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 29 UL 41

2014 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 18 UL 36

2015 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 34 UL 32

2016 National Recruiting Rankings

UK 29 UL 36

Louisville is now ranked number 3 in the nation after just throttling the nation's second ranked team while we have been getting beat by the likes of Southern Mississippi, annihilated/embarrassed on national television by Florida and finally escaping with a win over lowly New Mexico State. UL is the number 1 ranked scoring team in the country averaging 65 points per game while we wallow at the bottom in almost every team defense category. Of course, UL has beaten Kentucky 5 straight games.

While I understand that Joker may have left UK "relatively" low on talent (we have always been "low" on talent) when he departed, UL has never had a recruiting class ranked higher than 30th in the nation and that was in 2011.

As a long time UK fan, I keep asking myself, with all of the qualities that UK has going for it compared to UL, "How in the hell did the UL football program evolve into being so superior to UK?

This isn't easy. Their administration cares about football and ours does not.
 
This is why there is ZERO reasons for the fb field being named after CM Newton!!!!!
Ok but what AD had a focus on football. Is it really accurate to say none of the Ads cared, because football has been down forever.

Our best years were with Papa Brooks. That was our best sustained years. Other than that we had excitement with Mumme. From there it drops back to Curry and Curci.
 
Ok but what AD had a focus on football. Is it really accurate to say none of the Ads cared, because football has been down forever.

Our best years were with Papa Brooks. That was our best sustained years. Other than that we had excitement with Mumme. From there it drops back to Curry and Curci.
I know CM and Hagan both turned down the chance to hire HS
 
ADVERTISEMENT