Oregon, Washington, Boise State all had crap program at one time and are successful right now.
Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, West Virginia & Clemson are programs that do well in states without "huge population booms".
The destiny us "Baby Boomer" UK fans never wanted for our football program.
- Thread starter Kampus Korner
- Start date
Oregon, Washington, Boise State all had crap program at one time and are successful right now.
Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, West Virginia & Clemson are programs that do well in states without "huge population booms".
When you have the best player on the field (maybe the country), sometimes scorescan get lopsided really quick. Like I said earlier, trade 1 position player (qb) bewteen UK and UofL and switch conferences/schedules and they are 5-5 or 6-4 and we are 9-1 and looking at the playoffs. That's how freaking terrible their schedule is.
IMO, Louisville's success is not at all befuddling. Reading your last paragraph tells exactly how they've gone about making ul a winner. The administration did "whatever it takes that will cause (their team) to succeed..."
It's difficult enough for us to compete in the best college Football conference in the country. When our administration adds criteria for selecting coaches that our competitors don't, that puts us in a position to fail. We had potentially a very good coach in Curci. Granted, he screwed up, but fire him? Then we could have hired Howard S. Why hire Caibourne over Schnellenberger? Certainly had nothing to do with qualifications. From what I recall, it had more to do with personal tastes/fears of the administration at the time. Then we had the opportunity to hire BP. Yes he had baggage, but he was a known successful coach. (That to date, has not run the university into trouble with the ncaa)
Interestingly, in the two situations mentioned above, they hired the coach we chose not to hire. In BOTH cases, they benefited. Whereas, in both cases (Claibourne and Stoops), success has been limited and at best marginal.
Oregon has a losing record. They are also propped up by being the flagship school for the spoets equipment in the world and get untold donations from said company. Washington state hasn't beaten anyone relevant this year.
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Clemson are traditional football powers in states with more population and a better recruiting base than us.
WVU is ok. Hasn't done anything significant since joining the b12 (other than repeatedly lose to the top schools).
Wisconsin is the closest thing to an argument you have. They have no one else in state competing for recruits.
Even if you want to accept the bogus "history equals the future" argument you seem to be discounting the 1951 and 1976 teams. If history equals the future than we should be due for another SEC championship soon and maybe a national championship sometime later.
I hear no one on here talking about creating a "dynasty". Honestly how many teams are dynasties anyway? What is the definition of a dynasty? Notre Dame maybe? they're 3-6 right now. How about Texas? do I really have to look up their abysmal record over the last 5 years? Even Alabama had a losing season 10 years ago. What is being discussed is the program becoming competitive in the SEC with a chance to compete for the East occasionally and a major bowl.
What is ridicules to me is to hear these tired old arguments about history and recruiting that are patently false resurrected from people trying to convince the majority of fans to throw up their hands and lose all hope. I guess I can understand a feeling of hopelessness from the more pessimistic types, but what I don't understand is why anyone that claims to be a fan would be so forceful in trying to convince the majority that they should give up hoping for anything except mediocrity, and then express frustration that they are not succeeding. Maybe someday I'll figure it out.
Last edited:
You're criteria was "huge population booms" by any definition these states have not had any huge populations booms, in fact Nebraska's population is 1.8 Million. Kentucky has over 4 million - more than twice that number. Kentucky is within 500 miles of 70% of the population of the US and the current staff has already disprove this tired old myth about our inability to draw talent from outside the state.
You seem to be one of the most respected posters on this board so I'm truly not trying to be a jerk. You say the QB position figures to be much improved. How do you figure ? Stephen Johnson gives it all he's got but he's nowhere near a D-1 QB. From what I hear Barker may never take another snap (my question goes out the window if he comes back 100%). Other than those two I don't think we've got a QB that's ever taken a snap in college. Are you pinning your hopes on one of our current players or banking on another player not yet on campus ? You say we should be much improved when my thoughts are that the QB slot may be one of our weakest. How do you figure that position will be improved ? Seriously, I'm not trying to start an argument here.
Defense, since I created this thread, allow me to respond to your sweeping generalization. First, I'm not trying to convince anyone, let alone, "the majority of fans" to "throw up their hands and lose all hope." There is nothing in my initial post that remotely suggests that any UK fan do anything of the sort. I merely expressed my opinion in response to other threads on this message board as to whether it was time for UK fans to have greater expectations for its football program.
Secondly, you contend that my "tired old arguments about "history and recruiting are patently false." However, I don't see you citing any supporting evidence that my statements about history or recruiting are "patently false". On the contrary, the statements I made about UK's deplorable football history and comparatively weak recruiting are not even in dispute. They are all factual accurate.
Thirdly, if you can't recognize that a football team's history of winning or losing is important in predicting its future ability to succeed, I'm not sure I or any other poster can share much that will cause you to think differently. Suffice it say, most all of the knowledgeable football fans I know, as well as head coaches, have stated numerous times over the years the important role that a school's winning (or losing) tradition has in securing the better players to attend their school. In large part, Kentucky pathetic losing history in football has been one of the principal reasons it has been unable to attract better coaches as well as better players. However, if you don't find that argument credible so be it.
Finally, contrary to your proclamation, I'm not a "pessimist" who, "claims to be a fan (who) would be so forceful in trying to convince the majority that they should give up hoping for anything except mediocrity, and then express frustration that they are not succeeding. Maybe someday I'll figure it out and understand." Since you are a "Moderator", I am presuming you are aware this is a "message board" where people express themselves. There is nothing in my post to suggest that I intended to persuade other UK fans to "throw up their hands and lose all hope",. Nor, have I become "frustrated" that I am not succeeding in causing you to lose your hope. On the contrary, I expressly stated in my initial post that I hope my opinion about UK's future ability to succeed in football is wrong.
While I am not a pessimist, I am a realist who believes that UK's losing football history, its history of firing coaches who did not succeed, its placement in the toughest football conference in America, Kentucky's lack of enough quality high school football talent, and other reasons have created a situation where it is unlikely that UK football will be any more successful than it has been for the last 50 plus years. Do I ask that you agree with my opinion? NO Am I trying to persuade you to "throw your hands up and give up all your hope?" NO
1951 was 65 years ago. 1976 was 40 years ago (and we were very likely cheating then). Are you listening (reading) to yourself type?
Go ahead and deny that recruiting and history doesn't have 95% to do with a program's success.
You're digging yourself a huge hole by pointing out these storied programs (notre dame, nebraska, texas, etc.) that despite 400,000 advantages over us, still suck. Yet we should compete. Seriously... Read the drivel you're typing.
I really wasn't responding to your post, if you took at that way I apologize.
If I'm responding directly to another member I put it in quotes for clarity.
Kampus your post is right on. We have had a chance in recent years to pull the trigger and get a winning coach - but our AD and Athletic departmen, board of trustees, etc., decided we had to protect our friends and be politically correct I guess. We could have had Mike Leach - which I wanted - but he was tainted and we had to give Joker the chance to go 2-10. Then we could have had Petrino- but again we couldn't do it for morals. We had some good second choices as well that year - like Mike MacIntyre and of course Neal Brown as a head coach initially. Alas, we didn't take any of these guys. I know it is easy to say it was hindsight. But I can say, I really wanted Leach, I was fine with Petrino and I thought Neal Brown would deliver. The interesting thing about this list is this - I know that 3 of these guys wanted and coveted the UK job at the time - think about that one! People have said we can't get a good coach - really??????
Why is it our administration can never figure this out? I think it is because we continually refuse to hire a "football czar" to run the football operation and take football out of control of the AD directly. Football generates more revenue, by FAR, than all of the other sports put together. We finally have caught up with facilities. Let's get Stoops some help and someone that can make a good choice if we have to look for a new coach in the near future. Let's get a football czar!
Go Big Blue!
U of L's classes are around the same rank as Uk. After the 1st of the year they will be playing for the National championship. Why, transfers and Petrino. I know Uk would never go there. That's why nothing will every change for you. If you hit yourself in the head with a hammer for 30 years and it hurts every time STOP with the hammer.
I am really glad we have Johnson, and I respect what he has done for us this year, but he drives me crazy at times. Too many wide open passes over the middle that are ten foot over the target, and how about the wide open receiver he threw it in the dirt on the Wildcat reverse-------to Snell I believe. He does have a lot more potential, if he can throw a fifty yard strike why can't he make the plays he should have no problem making? I think a lot of it has to be confidence, where was he playing last year, how much experience has he had before being thrown into starting in the SEC? I think another spring and fall could do him a lot of good. And I am not knocking him, I think he actually has a lot of talent AND plays with a lot of heart.
BUT the ideal situation would be to have Barker recover enough to play at the level he did at the very start of the season, (not just a four star but a 5.9 four star, and there is a difference) with our new running game, better protection, almost all our WRs (almost all of our everything really) returning that could be special. And I haven't given up on Johnson yet either, he has won some big games for us-------and he could win even more, and if he gains some weight he could improve on his already impressive running threat, probably more carries-------not that we need more RBs, did you notice King's production?.
AND if both of those options don't improve (don't see why Johnson shouldn't improve whether Barker is back or not) then next year we don't have to worry about keeping the redshirt on our promising freshman. I think he was impressive in the Spring game, so we have three chances for improvement, a chance that all three will be better than what we have this year, fortunate to come out of the QB situation this year as well as we did, could have been a real disaster. And we have some very good prospects upcoming.
I don't see why no one sees the steady IMPROVEMENT we are making, we no longer have a "recruiting room" that was a disgrace, we have great facilities finally, AND a very good recruiting staff. Fans forget too soon that we had a top twenty class coming off a TWO win season, I really expect us to be competitive in at least ten games next year, and win our share of those. I also love our staff's evaluation, there is a reason other schools are trying to steal our recruits, and the staff made a miraculous recovery when we lost a lot of our first offer commits in 15, it turned out to be a very good class even though underrated.
I can't wait to see what our staff can bring in when we start winning more than we lose, and I think that starts next year-------a bowl game this year, and a really good recovery after a dismal start, this staff made some big time adjustments and changes at the last minute.
Mitch doesn't deal directly with basketball. You want to take football away too?
If we do, what's the point of having Mitch at all?
Couple things:
1. We have played 4 teams with a winning record and only 1 team currently ranked.
2. I always hear the "flip flop the schedule argument" but people don't realize one reason we are able to get some 4 star players is bc, in fact, many come here to play in the SEC. UL would have that same advantage when recruiting if we flip flopped conferences.
3. I have zero doubt that if you traded our coaches and kept everything else the same, our season would look a little different.
It comes down to coaching. I'm not saying we should have hired Petrino, but it's very obvious to me that if you have one of the best coaches in the game, you're going to be successful.
If you keep doing what you've been doing, you'll keep getting what you've been getting. Our administration has historically handcuffed our Football program and continues to do so.
EXACTLY! As far as I'm concerned, he can have bball. There's not a soul on earth that could destroy the bball program. IMO, we should have a Football only AD and another AD to monitor the lesser sports. R Brooks would have fit the bill nicely.
Some points not discussed here so far:
1) UL's roster has been built with classes ranked around the #30's AND quite a few transfers. Those transfers are largely kids kicked off other teams and/or a history of a minimum of criminal behavior.
2) UL built their program up by playing in very weak conferences winning those conferences and then moving to better conferences when they are ready.
3) One argument that used to be a constant complaint on this board and is no longer is our poor facilities. That argument is no longer valid and that complaint has been put to bed during Stoops time. That is not because of Stoops but it is still a point of progression that is all but forgotten because it has completely fell out of the complaint mindset. Still is is a very positive action that should benefit the university for years to come.
4) The long steady approach vs the quick flip. Compare how the Oregon Ducks program took a long steady approach with Rich Brooks and then improved that success with Brooks OC in Belotti. Nike money certainly did help but that gold mine was built more by Steve Prefontaine that Oregon football. Va Tech is another program to build over time. Compare that to Vanderbilt, Miami, and I would posit Baylor as examples of programs that caught lightning in a jar rather than build over time. Baylor spent many years hiring and firing coaches every couple of years and it seems found short term success with criminals as student/athletes.
1) UL's roster has been built with classes ranked around the #30's AND quite a few transfers. Those transfers are largely kids kicked off other teams and/or a history of a minimum of criminal behavior.
2) UL built their program up by playing in very weak conferences winning those conferences and then moving to better conferences when they are ready.
3) One argument that used to be a constant complaint on this board and is no longer is our poor facilities. That argument is no longer valid and that complaint has been put to bed during Stoops time. That is not because of Stoops but it is still a point of progression that is all but forgotten because it has completely fell out of the complaint mindset. Still is is a very positive action that should benefit the university for years to come.
4) The long steady approach vs the quick flip. Compare how the Oregon Ducks program took a long steady approach with Rich Brooks and then improved that success with Brooks OC in Belotti. Nike money certainly did help but that gold mine was built more by Steve Prefontaine that Oregon football. Va Tech is another program to build over time. Compare that to Vanderbilt, Miami, and I would posit Baylor as examples of programs that caught lightning in a jar rather than build over time. Baylor spent many years hiring and firing coaches every couple of years and it seems found short term success with criminals as student/athletes.
Thanks dockholiday51; Very good addition to what Kampus Korner posted. You have to live it to get it. Love those Cats! Go Cats!!
As you CHAMPCAT11, I am just posting my opinion to this very interesting thread. I will be terribly disappointed if Hinshaw doesn't help Johnson improve between now and next year. He will have the added practices, spring and fall. And he will have the experience from this year. Next year I would expect Johnson to be able to hit the TE and a lot more of the short throws!! And that will make a big difference. Go Cats!!
He doesn't have bball. You're not understanding. And that seems to be a theme on thia board.
Louisville and Kentucky really aren't doing anything different when hiring coaches. I guess it just comes down jurich's eye vs. Mich's eye. I guess we can all admit that jurich blows mitch out of the water in this regard.
The biggest hire for UofL in the last 25 years I guess would be petruno the first time around (when he was OC at Auburn). Probably for Kentucky would be Curry from Alabama (though that didn't work out, obviously).
Both schools rely on hiring coordinators or lower tier head coaches. It's just that UofL's hires have worked out for the most part and UK's hasn't.
I think the argument could be made that the disparity in success of those coaches is largely due to schedule. Other than Petrino (who is admittedly a good coach, though I would never leave any female relative alone in a room with him) UofL's hires have been brought back down to earth at other higher profile stops. John L. flamed out at MSU. We all know what is happening to Cholly.
I am not one of the nimrods that thinks Kentucky isn't trying to compete in football. I mean, it's ludicrous to assert that our program is some sleeping giant that the athletics department is intentionally holding back, yet a huge swath of our fanbase believes that. We just haven't hit that one coach that is so great that he is abke to overcome our recruiting disadvantage and the disadvantage that 7-8 teams on our s.chedule are trying to succeed at football more than anyone else in the country. Put a rotation of duke, bc, virginia, wake, north carolina on our schedule (teams that may be good on OCCASION, but are largely inferior) and we probably swing between 6 and 9 wins instead of 4 to 6.
I think I do understand; Cal has bball (but for all I care, they could give bball to a street person). We'd be much better off if mb didn't have Football either.
Cliff Hagan's tenure was not the best of our numerous basketball oriented AD's. His disdain for Howard further set us back in football and began Louisville's rise to today's top ten program.
I have heard that story for years but is there any credible "evidence" (i.e., news report, books, memoirs, etc.) that actually happened?
Well, the one in Louisville was very mediocre.
![[winking]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/wink.r191677.gif "Winking [winking]")
Peace
If they had hookers to help select athe cut of meat you got it might have been betterI have heard that story for years but is there any credible "evidence" (i.e., news report, books, memoirs, etc.) that actually happened?
Well, the one in Louisville was very mediocre.
Peace
Unfortunately, your generation was the problem with UK football being so bad. Before your generation took over, UK actually had a fairly respectable football program. Your generation accepted mediocrity for so long that you've passed it down to us and have made it much harder for us to demand the change needed.
There are so many good things that the baby boomers gave us that I love, unfortunately this isn't one of them.
So, we are the problem,what would you have us done differently,stop supporting the team,print up some signs and march around the administration building,spray paint the stadium?
Most of the posters in this thread stuck with the team thru much worse years than we have seen in the past 2 or 3 years.Probably the last Joker year is a close approximation of what we lived thru in most of the 60's.As stated UK hired different types of coaches from different backgrounds with pretty much the same results.
We were fans,individually or collectively the vast majority of us had very little or no influence on what the administration did or didn't do.
I am glad you and fans like you are here to save us old guys,now quit talking and get to it, I expect 10-2 next year and 12-0 + a national championship the year after that, I'll try to hang on long enough to see it.
Doc, excellent response. I had to laugh at the post stating our generation is responsible for UK's sorry football history. I guess instead of occupying UK's administration building while protesting the Vietnam War, we should have occupied the Athletic Director's office until he hired Ara Parseghian as UK's coach.
Last edited:
BigBlueCatNation, a simple question then? If our actions created this fate, what are you doing personally to assure the opposite? Merely Biatching on a message board isn't much, and I would point out to you even that recourse was not available until rather recently in our fanhood experience.
Your post reveals more about the author than its intended targets.
I will consider your relative youth as a defense, given it's egocentrism, and simplicity of thought.
Your post reveals more about the author than its intended targets.
I will consider your relative youth as a defense, given it's egocentrism, and simplicity of thought.
I would offer up that had UK hired Jerry Claiborne when they hired John Ray in 1969, UK's football future would probably have been much better. Claiborne led Virginia Tech and Maryland to much football success plus he wanted to coach his alma mater. Had Jerry been the coach we would not have had to suffer the consequences that Curci's probation brought us.
I agree. For some reason the administration wanted to go after the Notre Dame assistant I suppose because they were the dominant college team at that time. I remember his first press conference when he produced a book with the names of players Notre Dame was recruiting. I don't know if he signed a single one of them. John Ray did a lot of talking and raised expectations. He was a success in building Commonwealth though. But he never coached a game there as far as I can remember.
Claiborne would have been a solid choice. Howard Snellenberger may have been even better, But it doesn't matter anymore because history is history.
Sawnee, you are right. Ray pushed hard for Commonwealth Stadium to be built but was fired before it opened. Ray's career in coaching football, like so many other UK head football coaches after Blanton Collier was fired, went on a downward slide to national irrelevancy. Charlie Bradshaw went to Troy State for awhile then got out of coaching, Ray went to the Buffalo Bill's coaching defensive backs before getting out of football.
Curci went to the Arena football league then out of coaching. Claiborne grew weary of trying to compete in the SEC and retired at 61. Curry ended up a Georgia State. Mumme is at some small college in Texas after failing at several other larger schools. Guy Morris got fired from Baylor, and wound up in Lexington Christian School. Brooks is the only coach in the last 54 years to leave on his own. He simply retired from football. Joker is now a "quality control" assistant at Ohio State, after being let go by Florida as an assistant and later as a Brown's assistant. He reportedly makes $35,000 a year.
UK head coaches are not sought after like other programs. Even Louisville has had Howard Schellenberger, John L. Smith, Bobby Petrino and Charlie Strong who became highly sought after coaches while coaching U of L. Nobody has wanted UK coaches with Guy Morris being the only former UK head coach in 54 years who was lured away from UK to to another school. Morris would have stayed at UK had Barnhart matched Baylor's salary but Mitch said no. Quite a sad history for these coaches and UK fans.
Last edited:
