Here's the bottom line. I said this on Twitter and I'll say it here.
Kentucky should trade in the new jerseys, the Air Raid sirens, stop with the player nicknames, quit the blackouts and blue outs and all the bells and whistles that have come to be associated with the program. I'm not saying those things are bad. I'm not saying they're a hindrance. I"m speaking partly literally here but partly on a symbolic level. All the things that Stoops has done to make Kentucky football more attractive to recruits and more marketable to the public are great. Those things have been essential to one of the important parts of building a program. Getting players. Getting fans back in the seats.
Let me make this clear. I'm not saying those things have hurt UK. I'm saying the emphasis from this point forward has to be about fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. Football equivalent of practices with bounce pass lines and dribbling drills. Fundamentals are the byproducts of habits and instincts which are formed by repetitious work in areas of emphasis. You can't fix that in a week but untimely penalties, untimely missed blocks, consistent drops, inability to convert short-yardage situations, etc., are all reflections on discipline and fundamentals.
So I'm not saying they really need to get rid of all those updated, modern things. But I'm saying the message has to be loud and clear, the rest of this year but more importantly into next year, that it doesn't matter how pretty the team is, it doesn't matter how impressed you are with your own athleticism or how people react to your uniforms. Even big plays? Don't matter without the little ones. Early in the game Boom ripped off a 38 yard run. Down to the goal line and it went for naught because four plays from the goal line weren't enough. Not enough push.
Hate to do this but I've got to point out that it was not Mark Stoops' best game. I've generally defended the coaches and coordinators from hindsight criticisms of play calling or this/that. The one thing I'll say is you can't fault Eliot's unit and I liked that Dawson involved the QB run more.
But here are some things that just cannot be explained.
You know what happened at the end of the half against Mississippi State and Tennessee. It's one of the biggest story lines of the year. The games got out of hand and that's where the downward spiral started.
Against Vanderbilt you're down 14-10 with one minute to go. Punt the ball on 4th and 1 and there's almost no chance the half ends worse than 14-10. Going for it on fourth down two times before that was a good move. Your team needs energy and a jolt, they need confidence, they need to know you're playing to win. Even Vandy's fourth down goal line stand -- I think Stoops made the right call. Just didn't get enough push.
But on 4th and 1 from midfield, down 14-10 before half with a minute to go, the same danger zone as before, after your freshman quarterback has thrown a pick six....
But that's not even my issue. My issue is beyond that. They take the play from the sideline. It takes so long that the play clock runs down to one second. They have to hurry the snap to avoid the delay of game. We find out that the play call (or whatever happened) was a relatively high risk throw to a receiver that's struggling with drops, and the QB/WR aren't on the same page. The QB throwing that pass doesn't have any rapport with this receiver because he hasn't played this year hardly at all. So why did you rush that on 4th and 1 in that situation?
To me it was inexplicable. I tweeted before the play that the decision to go wouldn't make sense. The defense had played so well up to that point and you're risking the possibility that you put them in another bad position. And it happened. You should have known from the start of the game 'til that point that Vanderbilt's offense wasn't going to win the game. The defense basically pitched a shut out. They should have had zero points. There was no reason to try to rush a score in that situation. The only reason you were at a deficit was the pick six and the fumble deep in your own territory. Rushing that situation was saying that you had doubts about whether you could outscore Vanderbilt +5 the rest of the way. And they would have. Take away that last score and what's left is 17-14. Okay, that's not fair totally, but you get the idea.
I'm not going to pick on the staff too much for Vandy's receiver being wide open, totally uncovered, but it is what it is. It drives home the narrative from earlier in the year -- the one of disorganization, of blunders, of not being set, of giving up points before the end of the half. These things do happen but they have happened to UK too often.
Then throw in the missed field goal later which resulted from no one motioning to call timeout with the kicker and holder motioning to the sideline and it just doesn't look good. There will be questions and deservedly so.
This is the first time I've said it this year but I'll say it. The offense didn't play great but the offense played well enough to win the game. Offense, defense, special teams and coaching, and this was the first time this year that I actually felt like in-game coaching decisions probably decided the game.
The worst political gaffes are the ones that reinforce a narrative. Mitt Romney's 47% comment. John Kerry's voted for it/against it quote (there's meat for both sides, don't fight over it). The problems with the coaching stuff at the end of the first half and on the field goal is that it reinforces the disorganization narrative, and in the case of the decision at the end of the first half, it opened the team up to exactly the kind of situation that everyone talked about earlier in the season. If they execute nobody's talking about this. Fair to say that. But you play the odds. That throw under those circumstances was not a high percentage throw, and in that kind of game against that kind of opponent those were certainly not the odds.
But now I'm saying that it's now very apparent that the most pressing need for the program moving forward, in my mind, isn't to continue to "narrow the talent gap." Kentucky didn't lose to Florida, Auburn or even Mississippi State because they didn't have enough talent. They did. Getting better players is always essential.
Kentucky's task now, and Mark Stoops' task which is now urgent, is to show that they can do the little things. They aren't doing the little things.
Converting on third down: 4-16 (25%)
Passing Accuracy: 15-34 (> 50%)
Turnovers: -1
Points Off Turnovers: -14
Tackles For Loss (Missed Blocks): Vanderbilt 8, Kentucky 3
Dropped Passes: Too many
Missed Blocks: Too many
Blocked Punts: One too many
Penalties: Actually not bad but all in the second half and disproportionately on special teams
I know it's not easy. I know there's no easy fix. I know a lot of the things that people will poke the coaches for are things that happen everywhere. But the difference between winning that game and losing it for UK was not effort. They played hard. It was football IQ, it was discipline on blocks, it was special teams miscues in the second half, it was botched opportunities which largely result from the inability to execute the more simple short-yardage plays on third down and near the goal line.
It's not always fair to level these criticisms but in this game Kentucky's mistakes were disproportionately at bad moments. Penalty on the punt return after scoring to narrow the lead and getting a stop. Just an example. Momentum-killing.
Kentucky should trade in the new jerseys, the Air Raid sirens, stop with the player nicknames, quit the blackouts and blue outs and all the bells and whistles that have come to be associated with the program. I'm not saying those things are bad. I'm not saying they're a hindrance. I"m speaking partly literally here but partly on a symbolic level. All the things that Stoops has done to make Kentucky football more attractive to recruits and more marketable to the public are great. Those things have been essential to one of the important parts of building a program. Getting players. Getting fans back in the seats.
Let me make this clear. I'm not saying those things have hurt UK. I'm saying the emphasis from this point forward has to be about fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. Football equivalent of practices with bounce pass lines and dribbling drills. Fundamentals are the byproducts of habits and instincts which are formed by repetitious work in areas of emphasis. You can't fix that in a week but untimely penalties, untimely missed blocks, consistent drops, inability to convert short-yardage situations, etc., are all reflections on discipline and fundamentals.
So I'm not saying they really need to get rid of all those updated, modern things. But I'm saying the message has to be loud and clear, the rest of this year but more importantly into next year, that it doesn't matter how pretty the team is, it doesn't matter how impressed you are with your own athleticism or how people react to your uniforms. Even big plays? Don't matter without the little ones. Early in the game Boom ripped off a 38 yard run. Down to the goal line and it went for naught because four plays from the goal line weren't enough. Not enough push.
Hate to do this but I've got to point out that it was not Mark Stoops' best game. I've generally defended the coaches and coordinators from hindsight criticisms of play calling or this/that. The one thing I'll say is you can't fault Eliot's unit and I liked that Dawson involved the QB run more.
But here are some things that just cannot be explained.
You know what happened at the end of the half against Mississippi State and Tennessee. It's one of the biggest story lines of the year. The games got out of hand and that's where the downward spiral started.
Against Vanderbilt you're down 14-10 with one minute to go. Punt the ball on 4th and 1 and there's almost no chance the half ends worse than 14-10. Going for it on fourth down two times before that was a good move. Your team needs energy and a jolt, they need confidence, they need to know you're playing to win. Even Vandy's fourth down goal line stand -- I think Stoops made the right call. Just didn't get enough push.
But on 4th and 1 from midfield, down 14-10 before half with a minute to go, the same danger zone as before, after your freshman quarterback has thrown a pick six....
But that's not even my issue. My issue is beyond that. They take the play from the sideline. It takes so long that the play clock runs down to one second. They have to hurry the snap to avoid the delay of game. We find out that the play call (or whatever happened) was a relatively high risk throw to a receiver that's struggling with drops, and the QB/WR aren't on the same page. The QB throwing that pass doesn't have any rapport with this receiver because he hasn't played this year hardly at all. So why did you rush that on 4th and 1 in that situation?
To me it was inexplicable. I tweeted before the play that the decision to go wouldn't make sense. The defense had played so well up to that point and you're risking the possibility that you put them in another bad position. And it happened. You should have known from the start of the game 'til that point that Vanderbilt's offense wasn't going to win the game. The defense basically pitched a shut out. They should have had zero points. There was no reason to try to rush a score in that situation. The only reason you were at a deficit was the pick six and the fumble deep in your own territory. Rushing that situation was saying that you had doubts about whether you could outscore Vanderbilt +5 the rest of the way. And they would have. Take away that last score and what's left is 17-14. Okay, that's not fair totally, but you get the idea.
I'm not going to pick on the staff too much for Vandy's receiver being wide open, totally uncovered, but it is what it is. It drives home the narrative from earlier in the year -- the one of disorganization, of blunders, of not being set, of giving up points before the end of the half. These things do happen but they have happened to UK too often.
Then throw in the missed field goal later which resulted from no one motioning to call timeout with the kicker and holder motioning to the sideline and it just doesn't look good. There will be questions and deservedly so.
This is the first time I've said it this year but I'll say it. The offense didn't play great but the offense played well enough to win the game. Offense, defense, special teams and coaching, and this was the first time this year that I actually felt like in-game coaching decisions probably decided the game.
The worst political gaffes are the ones that reinforce a narrative. Mitt Romney's 47% comment. John Kerry's voted for it/against it quote (there's meat for both sides, don't fight over it). The problems with the coaching stuff at the end of the first half and on the field goal is that it reinforces the disorganization narrative, and in the case of the decision at the end of the first half, it opened the team up to exactly the kind of situation that everyone talked about earlier in the season. If they execute nobody's talking about this. Fair to say that. But you play the odds. That throw under those circumstances was not a high percentage throw, and in that kind of game against that kind of opponent those were certainly not the odds.
But now I'm saying that it's now very apparent that the most pressing need for the program moving forward, in my mind, isn't to continue to "narrow the talent gap." Kentucky didn't lose to Florida, Auburn or even Mississippi State because they didn't have enough talent. They did. Getting better players is always essential.
Kentucky's task now, and Mark Stoops' task which is now urgent, is to show that they can do the little things. They aren't doing the little things.
Converting on third down: 4-16 (25%)
Passing Accuracy: 15-34 (> 50%)
Turnovers: -1
Points Off Turnovers: -14
Tackles For Loss (Missed Blocks): Vanderbilt 8, Kentucky 3
Dropped Passes: Too many
Missed Blocks: Too many
Blocked Punts: One too many
Penalties: Actually not bad but all in the second half and disproportionately on special teams
I know it's not easy. I know there's no easy fix. I know a lot of the things that people will poke the coaches for are things that happen everywhere. But the difference between winning that game and losing it for UK was not effort. They played hard. It was football IQ, it was discipline on blocks, it was special teams miscues in the second half, it was botched opportunities which largely result from the inability to execute the more simple short-yardage plays on third down and near the goal line.
It's not always fair to level these criticisms but in this game Kentucky's mistakes were disproportionately at bad moments. Penalty on the punt return after scoring to narrow the lead and getting a stop. Just an example. Momentum-killing.
Last edited:
