Satt was named head coach on Dec 4, 2018. The main signing day was less than two weeks after that. Thinking he’d fill defensive holes with that class is just unreasonable. He does have several true freshmen that he recruited that are cracking into some playing time.
Safe to say the Satterfield honeymoon is over?
- Thread starter CardX
- Start date
Exactly. I like Satterfield, but a guy making $3+ million doesn't get many excuses in my book. He's paid to perform no matter what it takes short of cheating.
And we've got seven games left before any final judgments on this season should be made...
And Mack Brown was (re)hired at UNC one week earlier, succeeding Larry Fedora who went 3-9 and 2-9 his final two seasons. The Heels are currently #5 in the country (AP)...
Larry Fedora’s 2018 recruiting class at UNC was his best one - a top 20 class. If you look at our 2018, there are more defensive guys that are no longer playing than guys getting solid minutes. The bottom line is that the 2018 and 2019 classes were limited, except for skill position guys. It’s reflected in what we are now seeing.
Yea sure because Louisville has great sunny weather, beaches, and pretty co-eds all over the place. Yea, 12 grad transfers that's the ticket.
Good luck with that tactic.
The avg fan doesnt understand recruiting in FB let alone know that fb teams cannot be built over nite . It takes multiple classes and time .
Louisville’s 2017 and 2018 classes were nationally ranked 29th and 31st, respectively. That’s about as good as our classes are ever ranked.
Fedora’s classes those years BTW were ranked 30 and 23...
The average fan also doesn’t understand the validity of numbers. It’s why there are so many metrics in football and sports generally...
The 247 rankings had UNC at 20. Anyways, an unhealthy number of the guys UofL signed are no longer playing.
And they were not DL or OL that built those ratings for UofL. Cards high rankings were due mostly to skill position players. Fake news to go by those ratings.
I don't know nor do I know how much that matters. If you wanna make a point around that argument, bring forth your data...
We're on a Rivals site which is why I use Rivals.
If your argument has moved to roster attrition, let's have your data to make that point...
If the ratings systems were inflated by skill position players (vs linemen), I feel pretty sure that the people contributing to those ratings would account for that.
Rather, I hear fans with biases make that type of argument...
Farr that farr that farr that sonofabeyitch
OK serious response. I haven't watched the game yet today (It was 65 and gorgeous out, so I was doing stuff with my kids) but it looks like the Cards put up a spirited fight today. Satterfield earned quite a bit of capital with me last year, so while I'm as confused as anyone else by the GT blowout I'm willing to let the cake bake a bit and see what happens for the next few years. If Satterfield has to farr a sonofabeyitch or two meanwhile, then so be it.
I think it showed the kids played hard for the coaches. Now that doesn’t always mean the coaches are amazing, but it does show these guys want to play hard and respect the staff
The data say that more defensive players have left than are routinely contributing this year on defense.
You were talking simply about class rankings.
Beyond that, I’ll look at and assess your data, thanks. You present it...
Gone: Troutman, Dumervil-Jean, Plummer, Thompson, M Boykin, A Hayes
Playing: Jones, Abdullah, Hicks, Goldwire, Geather (only on special teams)
Those are simply facts, like today is Sunday. It's not data--at least not quantifiable--that make or break your argument. And it's not comparative, with respect to our historical roster or another team's.
Players leave and come in, and rosters turn over all of the time. It's not sufficient to show where ours has and then say "see?". I know firsthand that one of those kids (Dumervil) should have never seen the field, So what's the impact of losing him?
Bottom line... This team thru five games appears to be playing better this year defensively and worse offensively. And we don't yet have enough proof (if we ever will) to conclude what that's due to, players or coaches...
I’m not trying to solve some grand equation on a message board. I think we can all agree that when over half the guys you sign don’t pan out at all (ie: they aren’t even playing football anymore), that is going to lead to some issues down the line. So here we are...a class of players that would theoretically now be some of your veteran players are gone. Hopefully they’ve been replaced by younger, more talented guys but it takes time to develop them physically and mentally.
We played 74 guys yesterday many of whom were true freshman and redshirt freshman. We played more than a few former walk ons specifically on the D side. More than 1 saw significant playing time when ND was in the red zone. Other than wanting to argue, simply for arguments sake, I have no idea, what the hell your point is.
Last edited:
I heard way too many people last year attribute problems to the roster. And this year it’s more acceptable to criticize the coaches.
My point is few if any of us have points to make that assign cause and effect. Neither you nor I know for certain whether performance is related to coaching or the roster at this point.
Fine for anyone to have opinions, but let’s not couch opinions as hard facts. What’s obvious to you is not obvious to me. All most of us see and recognize are results we like or don’t. That doesn’t mean we legitimately can explain any of it.
His second “signed” class (actually not yet signed) has not even suited up. We are primarily going with kids we had pre Satterfield because his signees Are young and constitute a minority of the roster. The players in certain positions are a big problem. Again, you make no sense.
Satterfield came aboard in December 2018 and immediately started cashing $300K monthly paychecks.
He signed the 2019 and 2020 classes so far. He's had transfers into and out of the program, and he's had unrestricted opportunities for more transfers as we sit here less than three months away from 2021.
Stop making excuses and start making objective evaluations...
Its complete BS to think you can remake an entire football team in 1 1/2 classes. Young football players generally take time to develop and their simply arent the numbers to do so.
It’s more the numbers at each position group. Also, class rankings outside the top 10 or so are not that meaningful.
There is this thing called Academic Progress which prevents anyone from having “unrestricted opportunities for more transfers”.
Charlie did that very effectively in his first year, but it also cost us a 3 scholarship penalty. Which was painful because he had to yank 3 scholarships to players we wanted to sign. I distinctly remember at least one of the coaches of those 3 players saying he would never permit Louisville to recruit anyone at his school ever again.
But that was a much less painful penalty than what we’d get now: today we’d get a postseason bowl ban - which is very bad publicity when you have to explain to your potential recruits that you aren’t going to a bowl game because you ran off a bunch of your players before they could graduate.
I really don’t think 5th year seniors in any sport are going to schools because of the climate. I think they are looking for a place they can get exposure. CCM is doing a good job getting graduate transfers and JC players. I was surprised to see Miami have to get so many transfer players that started right away. After all everybody talks about the fertile recruiting grounds down there.
We didn't have any problem on offense last year allegedly because "Petrino left all of his best players on offense."
Strong and Bedford took K-rag's leftovers and fielded a pretty stout defense in Year One.
You coach 'em up or you don't, and good coaching can show immediate results. Mostly excuses beyond that...
If you can make those points with evidence in this situation instead of theorizing about cause and effect, I'm all ears (and eyes)...
"Unlimited" is/was an exaggeration on my part. Suffice to say, we can take more transfers and play fewer holdovers than we're doing.
It's not my job to tell the head coach where he needs better players and how to get them ASAP. I simply evaluate what I see (or don't) and defend against what I view as excuses for inadequate recruiting and/or coaching. How he gets his kids within the rules is his business.
And I guard against narratives that don't hold together. We supposedly had better players on offense last year which explained results on each side of the ball. How's that explanation working this year?...
Last edited:
Strong is a great comparison, taking over a 4-8 team and posting a better than expected 7-6 record in year one.
Who recalls how year 2 started for him?
Game 1: Win over Murray State 21-9.
Game 2: Loss to FIU 24-17 (CSS was FIU OC)
Game 3; Win at UK, 24-17
Game 4: Loss to Marshall 17-13
Game 5: Loss at North Carolina 14-7
Game 6: Loss at Cincinnati 25-16
In Game 7, UofL saved its season by squeaking out a 16-14 win at home against Rutgers.
I’m certain Charlie received plenty of criticism after and during that disappointing 2-4 start, but he turned it around. I’m willing to give Coach Satterfield the benefit of the doubt at this point, too.
Ok, but in year 3, Charlie beat Florida in the Sugar Bowl. Can we have the same expectations if we are making the same exceptions?
Well Charlie was a highly courted coach right? Tenn and TX probably others, so it goes without saying Charlie did a great job here.
It's hard to compare these coaches due to playing completely different schedules, for starters. Charlie never had to go through Clemson.
Strong and Bedford fielded Top 25 defenses starting his first year here. They coached up the players they inherited from K-rag rather than make excuses about what they inherited.
K-rag's final team ranked 65th nationally in yards allowed per game. And although several became really good players, incoming kids on defense made marginal contributions to Strong's first team...
K-rag's final team ranked 65th nationally in yards allowed per game. And although several became really good players, incoming kids on defense made marginal contributions to Strong's first team...
Seriously can’t believe anyone is responding to Zipp knowing that his only agenda is, After Tom everything sucks. Yes we had some left over defense after coaching changes in the recent past. After Bobby two point zero, Not so much.