36 games into Brooks tenure we looked bad too. Were you wanting him fired?
Freddie Maggard on how UK gets to a bowl game
- Thread starter screwduke
- Start date
36 games into Brooks tenure we looked bad too. Were you wanting him fired?
I do agree that Stoops deserves a fourth year, even though the collapses the last two years are embarrassing, but in Brooks fourth year we went 8-5 and won a bowl game. We are being told by some on here that expecting even a bowl game this year, Stoops fourth, is an unrealistic expectation even though Stoops has recruited better and didn't have to deal with the probation that Brooks did.
I just can't use the word collapse as a way to describe losing to teams like Louisville, Tennessee, Georgia, SEC ECC Missouri, MSU, LSU, and Auburn after you had success against UT Martin, Ohio, SC, ULM, UL Lafayette, Eastern KY, and Vanderbilt in 2014. It is a huge jump in opponent strength and not a collapse.
Now I do recognize we crapped the bed with Vandy in 2015 and UL in 2015 ( we were surprisingly ahead in that game) but I still don't think of our team as collapsing, that is to me like a reporter who writes in a spectacular fashion to gain readers even though it does not reflect the actual events accurately.
Now I do recognize we crapped the bed with Vandy in 2015 and UL in 2015 ( we were surprisingly ahead in that game) but I still don't think of our team as collapsing, that is to me like a reporter who writes in a spectacular fashion to gain readers even though it does not reflect the actual events accurately.
I wasn't happy with the wins and losses but at least Brooks teams were well coached. UK was losing then because the talent just wasn't there.
Funny how hindsight is so much better than foresight. At this point in Brooks time very few Kentucky fans were saying how well coached Brooks teams were or how good talent was being wasted.
Since collapse is the wrong word to describe 1-11 the last two years in the final half of each year maybe you have a better word that could spin that lack of success into some sort of achievement. I am sorry to be that way but I am just not very good at burying my head in the sand.
HAHAHAH that is an incredible rewrite of recent history. the offense under Hudson during the first 2 years of Brooks outraged the fans. so disappointed was the base with the play of the team there was the infamous "Ditch Mitch And Rich" movement.
Brooks teams did not look 'well coached' until 2nd half of 2006, midway through his 4th year here.
Rich Brooks' situation was totally different. He still didn't have a full roster to compete with due to probation that he inherited. If I remember correct he had 61 recruited players in year one and still had recruiting restrictions. Stoops started out in a much better situation. Besides Brooks did win in year 4 and probably would have been fired if he didn't. Every coach that UK has hired recently has won within the first 4 years even Bill Curry. Even winning by year 4 isn't enough by itself to establish a coach as a success but failing to do so establishes that you aren't on track.
Yes, if we lose Barker we still should be able to beat Vandy and USC which is all we need to do to win 6. Football teams lose players. It's just something you deal with. I'm not sure either of those teams will still be playing there starters either by the time they face us.
you are vastly overstating the roster Joker left Stoops
vastly
you do remember the choices Stoops had to run out there at QB in yr 1, right? and at wide receiver?
No I'm just being realistic about what scholarship reductions and probation do to a team. Brooks had something like 61 recruited players. That is devastating to a team. Brooks essentially had a third of his roster taken away before he was even hired. And he had restrictions on how he could replace them.
And nobody is saying Stoops' year 1 team should have been good. The statement is that without the scholarship reductions that Brooks had to work with Stoops was in a much better situation to be turned around by year 4. I assure you inheriting a bad team that is on probation is much harder than inheriting a bad team with a full roster.
The word collapse implies that something has failed and fallen down. When a building collapses it had reached a certain elevation and then support weakens and it collapses. We have not reached a very high elevation in football---at least not the elevation needed to beat the teams we have faced in the second half of the last two seasons. Surely you don't believe we would have lost to UT Martin or Ohio in the second half of the season either year. BTW ignoring the strength of schedule between the first and second halves of our last two seasons is exactly described as burying your head in the sand.
The team that Stoops inherited was the least-talented team in my tenure as a UK football fan, and that includes probation riddled (post) Curci and Mumme teams. I keep the media guide from Stoops' first year handy and peruse it on an occasional basis - down right terrifying yet remarkable what Joker did to the program. I wish him the same success at Ohio state...
Here is what I'm not understanding about some reasoning here. Stoops has not played year four so how can anybody at this time draw a comparison between stoops 4th year and Brooks 4th year? That's ridiculous.
BTW Brooks was 9-25 his first three years and Stoops is 12-23 plus Brooks had a year his team record regressed Stoops has not.
BTW Brooks was 9-25 his first three years and Stoops is 12-23 plus Brooks had a year his team record regressed Stoops has not.
Last edited:
and I would be willing to bet, that if you polled the team, you wouldn't find one single player or coach that thought the bar should be set at 5.
Folks have a right to express their opinion of course, but to say this team is only good enough to win 5 games, is disparaging IMO, at least that's the way I would take it if I were a member of the team in any capacity.
I renewed season tickets this year not expecting to go 5-7 and get blown out embarrassing bad in several games. I am not expecting to have to go to overtime at home to beat what is expected to be a big underdog opponent. I am not expecting to see one of our "star" receivers go on the field and waltz through a blowout loss with a smile on his face.not expecting a comedy of errors on the field such as fielding 7 on a punt. If those things do happen,, I will watch from the comforts of my living room in 17. I am hopeful things look better this year,, not in '17 THIS YEAR!!!
members that post here - I'm not calling anyone out - they know who they are.
I think they will and one of the reasons I think that is because I believe the team will be more unified this year.
yep, that's my recollection too - as bad as the first Brooks teams were talent-wise, what Stoops got was worse. Kinda like arguing about the tallest midget in the room, though.
I've said two things about Stoops. One, once he got here and took off like he did, I said if this guy can't get it done, we ought to just give it up. Two, I said if he ultimately fails we'll look back on year 3 as the crucial time, when we had a manageable schedule and the infighting and dysfunction on the team, including the staff, was too much to overcome. I still believe both those things to be true.
Last edited:
I mean for gods sake Brooks inherited a 3 year starter/senior starting QB in Lorenzen who would be on an NFL roster for a couple years, then the next season had 5th yr senior former highly recruited Shane Boyd at QB. Stoops options at QB have not been as quality.
Stats are great. But only two of them really matter, wins and losses. I don't see 7 wins on the schedule, I don't see 6 wins on the schedule. I see 5 wins on the schedule: SMiss, NMexSt, SCar, Vandy, and AustinP. South Carolina makes me nervous because I think there is a lot of talent on that team and a Coaching Staff that is well capable of putting it together.
We are not that far from being relevant again. If we had a decent OC last year we win two more games. Stoops' biggest mistake was hiring Dawson, no question about it and that mistake may ultimately end up costing him his job. On the other hand, the coaching upgrade on offense this year was remarkable and I think we get over the hump. I think we have the real stuff on this staff now.
After reading both Lindy's and Phil Steele, the reticence to rank us higher is (1) untested and immaturity issues of a very talented RS sophomore QB and (2) a young though very talented defensive line and linebackers. I did notice as others in this thread the margin of difference between UK and Mizzou, SC, Vandy and MSU is very little. UofL, UGA and UF are very good, but UK can be competitive with the potential of an upset. In my opinion, UT and Alabama are very difficult, if not unlikely to win. As I've mentioned in earlier posts, take care of business with Southern Miss, NMSU, APSU with competitive games against USC, Vandy, Mizzou and MSU and potential upsets against UGA, UofL and UF. Another 5-7 season is a given, 6-6 very likely and 7-5 possible. Anything more is icing on the cake and the momentum for UK to be a player in the SEC.
Missouri qb is highly thought of and he was only getting his feet wet last year...same as Barker. Barker has wayyyy better weapons around him though. They still have some tough guys on D too.
Scar probably has the least talent in the sec by a good margin. I'll be shocked if they win more than 4 games.
Climbing the hill is easier if the climbers are working together for a common goal.
What are you going by on that statement? Looking at Rivals ranking USCjr has 24 players on their roster for the '16 season that are 4 stars and UK has 16+1 five star.
That is why SC is rated a smidgen better than UK. Or, at least that is how the football magazines see it.