And hasn't been for years. I don't think that the UK administration ever thought that when the series was started that Otis would ever get a stadium built much less become the better program as it stands today. I think with all the facilities upgrades the tide can be turned, but not with the current HC...6-6 is the best his tenure will ever bring.
FB Recruiting Why and how has Louisville done what Kentucky hasn't (yet)?
- Thread starter JRowland
- Start date
First of all, props to JR for an excellent (but maybe a bit too lengthy
![[winking]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/wink.r191677.gif "Winking [winking]")
) article!I'll jump in on slugger's above post as I believe it pretty much tells the story of "why" the two programs are where they are today. And in his earlier post he was the first to bring up a huge "turning point" in UofL football aspirations...a point not specifically addressed in JR's thesis.
Let me say I have been a UK football fan longer than I have been a UofL football. I started attending UK games as a high schooler in the Thin 30 days and off and on during my years at UofL. The reason primarily being I like football and there wasn't any good football in Louisville! At least in Lexington I got to see one good team on the field. When I moved back to Louisville in the early 70's UofL had a bright young coach named Lee Corso who produced a couple of pretty good teams (including an AP top 20 team) before moving on to what was actually a "worse" situation in Bloomington. And the Cardinal program fell to new depths under a series of uninspiring coaches. UofL was (again) on the verge of dropping the sport when Olson hired Schnellenberger in 1985.
Up until that time, UK, as bad as they were, would have absolutely beaten UofL back into the Stone Age had they played. And take that as a statement of how bad was UofL football, not a shot at UK. Through his larger than life persona Schnellenberger convinced the school, the community and the very smallish UofL fan base that UofL could be a "prominent" football program. To paraphrase his ambitious quote "the only variable was time".
The roots he planted have continued to grow long after his departure. In discussing the growth of Louisville football I often use a common T-shirt advertisement phrase: "UofL Football, est. 1985". Since the hiring of Schnellenberger the UofL administration, the community and the fans have seized every opportunity to move the program forward. I had the opportunity to meet the guy several times in private meetings and will personally attest to his larger than life presence.
But the real point here is it has taken 30 years of hard work, investment and commitment for UofL football to get to where they are today. I'll say again...30 years. What has happened did not occur in just 4 or 5 years. in a sense the 1985 - 2000 years paved the way for the past 16 years, a period that will likely include 8 Top 25 finishes. And with the recent ACC affiliation, football success is still very much a work in progress. While there have been some setbacks and embarrassments along the way there has been an unmistakable upward trend toward Howard's lofty goals.
There is no question that the SEC posed a far more difficult "road to success" for UK than did UofL's nomadic, low profile football existence over the years. But there is also no question that UK's longtime SEC affiliation provided far more resources to travel down that road. As law1127 mentioned in the second post to this thread, since the departure of the Bear, there has simply been no figure at UK to galvanize the school, the fans and the community at large about the game of football as Schnellenberger did at UofL.
IOW, thanks to Schnellenberger, there is a stronger, all encompassing commitment to winning football in the "UofL community" than what we have seen at UK since the Bear's departure. And in my mind that is the difference between the two programs today. All, of course, JMO.
Peace
Don't know how successful he could have been, but if Brooks had been given what he was promised by Barnhardt and is now Stoop's he may still be here and doing well...I don't really think UK has any excuses any longer except for a HC that can take us there. The sec East has (is) been really done the entire time MS has been here and UK has not been able to take advantage of it ... Next year should be a make or break year for MS, but I don't see it happening. I will be there at every game screaming and yelling, but I think THE major piece of the puzzle is still missingFirst of all, props to JR for an excellent (but maybe a bit too lengthy
I'll jump in on slugger's above post as I believe it pretty much tells the story of "why" the two programs are where they are today. And in his earlier post he was the first to bring up a huge "turning point" in UofL football aspirations...a point not specifically addressed in JR's thesis.
Let me say I have been a UK football fan longer than I have been a UofL football. I started attending UK games as a high schooler in the Thin 30 days and off and on during my years at UofL. The reason primarily being I like football and there wasn't any good football in Louisville! At least in Lexington I got to see one good team on the field. When I moved back to Louisville in the early 70's UofL had a bright young coach named Lee Corso who produced a couple of pretty good teams (including an AP top 20 team) before moving on to what was actually a "worse" situation in Bloomington. And the Cardinal program fell to new depths under a series of uninspiring coaches. UofL was (again) on the verge of dropping the sport when Olson hired Schnellenberger in 1985.
Up until that time, UK, as bad as they were, would have absolutely beaten UofL back into the Stone Age had they played. And take that as a statement of how bad was UofL football, not a shot at UK. Through his larger than life persona Schnellenberger convinced the school, the community and the very smallish UofL fan base that UofL could be a "prominent" football program. To paraphrase his ambitious quote "the only variable was time".
The roots he planted have continued to grow long after his departure. In discussing the growth of Louisville football I often use a common T-shirt advertisement phrase: "UofL Football, est. 1985". Since the hiring of Schnellenberger the UofL administration, the community and the fans have seized every opportunity to move the program forward. I had the opportunity to meet the guy several times in private meetings and will personally attest to his larger than life presence.
But the real point here is it has taken 30 years of hard work, investment and commitment for UofL football to get to where they are today. I'll say again...30 years. What has happened did not occur in just 4 or 5 years. in a sense the 1985 - 2000 years paved the way for the past 16 years, a period that will likely include 8 Top 25 finishes. And with the recent ACC affiliation, football success is still very much a work in progress. While there have been some setbacks and embarrassments along the way there has been an unmistakable upward trend toward Howard's lofty goals.
There is no question that the SEC posed a far more difficult "road to success" for UK than did UofL's nomadic, low profile football existence over the years. But there is also no question that UK's longtime SEC affiliation provided far more resources to travel down that road. As law1127 mentioned in the second post to this thread, since the departure of the Bear, there has simply been no figure at UK to galvanize the school, the fans and the community at large about the game of football as Schnellenberger did at UofL.
IOW, thanks to Schnellenberger, there is a stronger, all encompassing commitment to winning football in the "UofL community" than what we have seen at UK since the Bear's departure. And in my mind that is the difference between the two programs today. All, of course, JMO.
Peace
I believe it was @brianpoe a month or two ago who linked an old press article that included quotes from the Bear himself indicating that it was his idea. I don't believe the Bear would have done this on his own; he had to have been coerced. I have an autobiography from Cawood Ledford at home and he pretty much gave the credit for this apparently awesome idea to the University President. Talk about unilateral disarmament!!
Regardless of whose brilliant idea it was, it ultimately changed the direction of the program in a negative way that still carries through to the present day.
The mistakes if the late 50's and early 60's are things we are still trying to recover from.it sounds crazy I know but we dug ourselves such a big hole that we are still trying to climb out.
The 70's (with Curci) when it was all said and done caused us to have to start over again.
The article did offer the evidence that this was Bear's decision, although I believe the President at the time was also linked as a supporter if not instigator.
"In a speech to the Louisville Advertising Club, Bryant said "this is strictly my own idea." He told The Courier-Journal that he had been thinking about implementing an out-of-state recruiting ban for years."
(Very odd decision indeed.)
William Hanna, a longtime Lexington newspaper reporter/editor, was working at the Lexington Leader in 1952.
He says "word on the street" at the time was that then-UK president Herman Donovan had provided the impetus for the change.
A few points to consider... UK football was under NCAA investigation for recruiting infractions and players having no-show jobs. (The basketball team's major scandal eventually pulled the NCAA from the football investigation.)
Also, the BOT filled with basketball people were not thrilled with football's recruiting slush fund either.
I respectfully disagree that this is a major cause of current issues.
The ban on out of state recruits only lasted 3 years - when Bear left for A&M.
Coaches, BOT's and AD's throughout the years are more to blame for football ineptness than this 3 year ban 60 year's ago.
Last edited:
Perhaps I was a bit melodramatic in my previous post. Your last sentence pretty much sums it up.
shutzhund, I respectfully disagree with you. Look at the upgrades to CWS, and I really believe that Barnhart thought he was hiring the right person when he hired Coach Stoops. I believe he had Couch, and other former football players helping him with the decision on who to hire. I think Neal Brown was forced on him, since Neal did not run the type of offense that Coach Stoops wanted to run.
I think we all agree he shouldn't have given Coach Stoops the big extension when he did, but most of us were happy initially, but later we said he shouldn't have given him the extension. It's always easy for us to "Monday morning quarterback."
OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!
Yep....that's about it. Much shorter than the JR article....more accurate too.
Agreed. We all agree that how they got to where they are is unscrupulous but they know it doesn't matter because the NCAA is a joke. They were willing to gamble and skirt the edge and it will pay dividends down the roas even more so than it has now. The ends justify the means. UK is not willing to do it.
Will they have enough hookers and strippers to go around?
This was a very interesting and well written article. i agree with most points made by the writer but thought he should of focused a little more on the amount of money in play in college football compared to basketball. Even though UL is the most profitable team in college Bball which seems to be more important to the ADs than the winningest team, if thats even a word, football still rules. TJ recognized this many years ago and i believe thats where Mitch missed the boat.
Regardless of the immense respect Claiborne is given and deserves, his style of football did not help the program evolve along with the rest of college football. The passing game was beginning to dominate CF in the 80's and UK was unable to attract a pro style QB in that decade. Claiborne and Curry's emphasis on the running game had some success but never generated much excitement from a recruiting standpoint. Talented offensive players, particularly QB and WR's, found a home in Schnellenberger's pro-style offensive scheme while UK was signing run-oriented signal callers and and wideouts. Remember that Curry struggled with different OC's for several years and attempted to play an option game with Couch.
It was the "safety" of the Claiborne and Curry hires that kept the program from building/growing at the same pace as the winningest CF teams in the country.
It was the "safety" of the Claiborne and Curry hires that kept the program from building/growing at the same pace as the winningest CF teams in the country.
Louisville's is a unique and unparalleled path. College football programs at the highest level are like Old Guard Country Club members and they virulently protect entry into the Club. It started becoming obvious when Penn State went to the Big Ten and South Carolina and Arkansas were added to the SEC that someday down the road College Football was going to be run like a professional league, and that time is upon us. To say that Louisville got the last seat at the table probably isn't hyperbole.
I'm not in WildCard's age demographic, but to me Louisville sold a handful of ex-players like Unitas, Tom Jackson and Joe Jacoby and little else until Schnellenberger came along. Schnellenberger did have a remarkable capacity to make you think something was possible. It was probably more marketing and PR, but somewhere along the line there was total buy in from the Administration--and some really well-helled boosters like Owsley Brown-Frazier and Malcolm Chancey. All of the plot points aligned...and a foundation was laid when Jurich was bought onboard.
The single biggest difference between UK and UofL as it applies to football in the last twenty-five years isn't conference affiliation, academic standards or fanbases. The difference is at UofL the people in positions of real influence and decision making in the Athletic Department with Tom Jurich are football people; Ron Cooper is evidence of what happens when non-football people form Committees to make a consensus decision. John L., Bobby Petrino, Charlie Strong, Petrino II and--gulp--the unfortunate Kragthorpe are the byproduct of one man's vision of what instruments are necessary to be successful in football. I think in Kragthorpe we saw what happens when you stray from a successful template; he turned out to be a terrible cultural fit and practically removed us from recruiting in Florida. UK coaching searches and decisions since the retirement of Jerry Claiborne have always appeared rudderless; in all of the prior hiring instances--including Pitino--Jurich seemed to set his sites on his target early in the game and commit all of his resources to their hiring.
I'm not in WildCard's age demographic, but to me Louisville sold a handful of ex-players like Unitas, Tom Jackson and Joe Jacoby and little else until Schnellenberger came along. Schnellenberger did have a remarkable capacity to make you think something was possible. It was probably more marketing and PR, but somewhere along the line there was total buy in from the Administration--and some really well-helled boosters like Owsley Brown-Frazier and Malcolm Chancey. All of the plot points aligned...and a foundation was laid when Jurich was bought onboard.
The single biggest difference between UK and UofL as it applies to football in the last twenty-five years isn't conference affiliation, academic standards or fanbases. The difference is at UofL the people in positions of real influence and decision making in the Athletic Department with Tom Jurich are football people; Ron Cooper is evidence of what happens when non-football people form Committees to make a consensus decision. John L., Bobby Petrino, Charlie Strong, Petrino II and--gulp--the unfortunate Kragthorpe are the byproduct of one man's vision of what instruments are necessary to be successful in football. I think in Kragthorpe we saw what happens when you stray from a successful template; he turned out to be a terrible cultural fit and practically removed us from recruiting in Florida. UK coaching searches and decisions since the retirement of Jerry Claiborne have always appeared rudderless; in all of the prior hiring instances--including Pitino--Jurich seemed to set his sites on his target early in the game and commit all of his resources to their hiring.
It there coach, Petrino is one of the top coaches in the nation, Stoops is just a very average coach..
How can you say that...Stoops has the same philosophy as JC did... Running game and defense. And three OC in 4 years?
;Yes, didn't they relieve mitch of his basketball responsibilities, and wasn't that requested by Cal?
It's coaching. Vanderbilt hired James Franklin and suddenly had 9 win seasons. Tennessee hired Dooley and they couldn't make a bowl game. Great programs do whatever it takes behind the scenes to get their man, mediocre ones dont.
Not really up for you to debate. All of those teams are/were in crappy conferences, and were able to succeed. Facts are facts.
Brooks was an excellent coach that got excellent results with the FEW fop talent players he was able to get here (most overlooked, a few good ones from Kentucky) with the abysmal support mitch gave him. Joker was a very good coach, not a good head coach, not able to work miracles with the talent he had-------like Brooks did. He also probably made a mistake by firing the very good coaches that Brooks had that wouldn't/couldn't recruit in an effort to improve UK's main problem, lack of raw talent.
Not knowing who the opponent will be there is about a 50% chance that your prognostication will be proven wrong within a few weeks, LOL.
Central Florida won a BCS bowl in 2013. Cinci has 2 ten win seasons in the past 5, and 5 straight bowl appearances.
The reason more schools haven't worked their way into a P5 conference is because there's a limited number of spots. Louisville got hot at the right time and showed the most potential to bring in revenue. That doesn't mean what louisville accomplished from an on the field perspective heading into the acc was especially unique...it wasn't.
Its a shame Brooks wasn't able to get some real awesome recruiters on staff, and that Mitch didn't see that he needed to make the kind of commitment to football then that he has for Stoops with all of the upgrades. Keeping Brooks through the Joker years could have cemented the stable foundation we are missing. Instead Stoops has had to spend the last four years pouring fresh concrete.
Do you scream and yell that Stoops should be fired now there like you do on here, LOL.
Brooks did have one pretty awesome recruiter on his staff, Joker (top five both years as RC at Florida I believe), they just had NOTHING else going for them, commitment to football, facilities (think, "recruiting room"), recruiting budget, operating budget,keeping Brown on to save the buyout, etc etc. Tee was a pretty good recruiter for Joker, but apparently a lot of his success was based on lying to recruits, from what he said later on.
I think Gran has done a nice job and what we are doing with the kempcat with our three rbs and MS is probably in 7th heaven with running the ball so much, but do you honestly believe you can build a sustaining offense like this going forward?
Yeah, I think that was more BS from the AD, similar to it being Joker's idea to bench Hartline for the bowl game.
The Bear took advantage of every rule he could, several rules changes were brought about by him, like not allowing the stashing football players on "rifle team" scholarships.
We should have an EXCELLENT offense next year, the only weak spot this year is probably our passing game (not the deep pass, and I appreciate Johnson very much). next year we will have very good talent, EXPERIENCE, and depth at EVERY position, AND I believe we will have a much better QB------whether it is a more experienced and confident Johnson, (definitely should improve a great deal), a recovered Barker (that could take advantage of all our weapons), or even a very promising RS freshman, really liked him in the Spring game.
Stoops WILL be here next year, why not support him and maybe help recruiting? At least one parent of one of our players has voiced her opinion of the negativity of some of our fans, no doubt a lot of them don't want to get involved with some of our fans.
Like I said, I will be at EVERY game screaming my head off...I think I'm doing my part. Just have a different opinion of MS than you do. If it makes you feel better I hope like crazy you turn out to be right and I'm wrong so you can get on hear and make me eat all the crow you want because it that is the case you WILL NOT be any happier than me... Hope you had a great !
This year maybe. The discussion is over the last few decades. In most seasons UL doesn't even come close to the strength of schedule UK has.
Also I'm not so certain this year's schedule is stronger than UK's either. According to Sagrin UL's schedule is #62 while UK's is #66. That's not much of a difference and what difference is subjective. The one thing that is different about UK and UL's schedule is that UL's is very top heavy. The top 3 teams on UL's would out rank UK's top 3 opponents but the mid level opponents for UK is much stronger. I'd rather play Wake Forrest, or Virginia than play Georgia and Tennessee for example.
Too much pettiness by fans. Transfers, second chances, coaches with second chances, weak conferences are fan fodder. All teams take transfers, give second chances that we may never know about, coaches have skeletons. As for weaker conferences, we play in the SEC but we do not beat the bottom dwellers on a regular basis and lose to less than stellar OOC teams. The question is not whether Louisville could when in the SEC, but we have not proven to be able to when in or out of it.
For me the real difference, as I have said before, is the chances Louisville took 10 - 20 years ago. They would play anyone any day of the week. It put them on ESPN Tuesday night, Wednesday night, Thursday night and Friday night when they were the only football game on.
EXPOSURE.
For me the real difference, as I have said before, is the chances Louisville took 10 - 20 years ago. They would play anyone any day of the week. It put them on ESPN Tuesday night, Wednesday night, Thursday night and Friday night when they were the only football game on.
EXPOSURE.
There,s one factor that I wish JR would have included in his analysis, I wish he would have included the missed opportunities for timely hires of Claiborne and Schnelly! What a difference this could have made in the trajectory and success of UK,s. Brand!!!
My question is what do you hope to accomplish with all of your bashing of Stoops at this point? Maybe you ought to take a step back and look at what you might actually be accomplishing.
I don't doubt you are a UK fan, but man, you have really gone over to the dark side. NOTHING he does is good enough.
