We Have Posters Emotionally Invested in Our Defeat

[BlueRattie_rivals]

One of the strange aspects about human psychology is the irrational, emotional need of some people to "double down" when they are wrong and their pride or vanity is at stake. A good example is when you publicly criticize a person's seemingly bad behavior only to be proven wrong when the guy turns out to be innocent. The well-balanced adult says, "My bad. I shouldn't have said that", while the "double-downer" says something like, "I still think you're a bad person" or "Just wait, you'll screw up and I'll be proven right." In situations like these, the double-downer puts himself in odd ethical positions, like actually wanting another human being to fail just so he can be proven "right" and intentionally distorting what he sees in his target just to sate his own vanity. It works in reverse as well. If we have publicly praised a guy, we'll keep right on saying that this guy or that guy is a great dude even after he cheats on his wife and beats up an orphan, just to keep from admitting we were wrong in the first place. Like a gambler who stays at the table and keeps loosing hand after hand, many of us simply don't want to admit that we should have never picked up the cards.

This aspect of human nature comes to mind often when I read some of the more negative posts about UK's players, staff, and the UK administration. After the first two and a half games, it was very reasonable to gripe openly about all three. The defense was horrid, the offense misguided, the coaching inept and slow to react, and the players were generally unprepared and unimpressive. Fair enough. We all clamored that adjustments should be made, and by and large there as been improvement.

• Stoops has stepped in and taken over the defense, simplifying the scheme, rotating more players in the game, and holding players accountable for the mental mistakes.
• Gran has adjusted to life without Barker and transformed the offense into a ground and pound attack that focuses on ball control (to help the defense) and power running, essentially playing to our strengths.
• The players seem more prepared and are hustling every play. Both the offense and defense are being more physical and seem to be forging identities for themselves.

The result of the improvement has been pretty good. In the second half of the New Mexico game, the offense found its rhythm and the defense shored up some leaks. Best of all, we won! Against South Carolina we fully embraced the "hit 'em in the mouth" philosophy and manhandled a SEC foe. (Think about that for a moment: how often do we manhandle SEC teams?) Against 'Bama, we were respectable. We played hard, looked prepared, and didn't mail it in when their depth finally started pushing the score out of reach. And yes we got thumped, but 90% of teams in college football get thumped in that situation. At any rate, the last three weeks have shown marked improvement. That's exactly what we asked for and it's what we got.

We should be happy, or at least content, right?

Not if you're a double-downer. The improvement undermines your original "we're doomed" assertions, putting you in a situation were you have to backtrack from your original comments and admit that Stoops and company may have righted the ship. At this point, a well-balanced adult would man up and admit that the team is getting better. But some people are emotionally incapable of such grace and, oddly enough, find themselves making excuses for our success: "SC is so horrid that that win really doesn't mean anything"; "Bama could have scored 100"; NM is a high school team". Once you begin criticizing your team for the crime of proving you wrong, you have to admit that you are emotionally invested in that team's defeat. How utterly, utterly sad.

 

[CB3UK]

The defense has shown progress since halftime v NMSt; still missing basic tackles though and they were definitely winded the second half. Offense is still a work in progress, really unfair to judge them off last nights game. I liked the play calling early on. This team should beat Vanderbilt, no ifs ands or butts. I hope they have their head on straight, put Bama behind them, and focus on getting thar crucial W this coming Saturday.

 

[Saguaro Cat]

I recognize it because i was guilty of this with rich Brooks. The team has been bad, that's not the argument. It's that people get so negative, they look for everything to be negative about. Every phrase in the press conferences are now dissected. Every play call. Every substitution. Some of you need to take a break. Recalibrate.

 

[CB3UK]

Im guilty, and its definitely because its so easy to look at what went wrong in defeat as opppsed to focusing on what went right. I think last nights game is a good barometer to look for both. I was extremely proud of the defense the first quarter, they played Bama straight up and held their kwn. The second quarter you began to see cracks in the dam.

My biggest criticism of last night was probably the inexplicably late inclusion of Snell. Was there a reason he was held out early?

 

[Adolph Rollingover]

@BlueRattie if there were a hall of fame for posts, I would nominate yours. Just opened a thread and was thinking, 'these posters are living a self fulfilling prophesy'

You said it much better

 

[PhattyJ4UK_rivals309166]

When has snell ever played early?

Its pretty clear to me that hes being used as a tough bruising 4th quarter back with fresh legs going against hopefully a tired defense. That strategy doesnt really work when youre down 30 but it should in close games. Preparing for the rest of the year is why, i assume they didnt change it up for this game.

 

[DACats86]

Really nice post. The only thing I would take mild exception to is that we should be happy and content with a loss, regardless of foe. The tale of the season, and likely Stoops' future at UK, will be told with this next set of games. Improvements give me hope, but I am not overly optimistic.

 

[Blueaz]

One of the strange aspects about human psychology is the irrational, emotional need of some people to "double down" when they are wrong and their pride or vanity is at stake. A good example is when you publicly criticize a person's seemingly bad behavior only to be proven wrong when the guy turns out to be innocent. The well-balanced adult says, "My bad. I shouldn't have said that", while the "double-downer" says something like, "I still think you're a bad person" or "Just wait, you'll screw up and I'll be proven right." In situations like these, the double-downer puts himself in odd ethical positions, like actually wanting another human being to fail just so he can be proven "right" and intentionally distorting what he sees in his target just to sate his own vanity. It works in reverse as well. If we have publicly praised a guy, we'll keep right on saying that this guy or that guy is a great dude even after he cheats on his wife and beats up an orphan, just to keep from admitting we were wrong in the first place. Like a gambler who stays at the table and keeps loosing hand after hand, many of us simply don't want to admit that we should have never picked up the cards.

This aspect of human nature comes to mind often when I read some of the more negative posts about UK's players, staff, and the UK administration. After the first two and a half games, it was very reasonable to gripe openly about all three. The defense was horrid, the offense misguided, the coaching inept and slow to react, and the players were generally unprepared and unimpressive. Fair enough. We all clamored that adjustments should be made, and by and large there as been improvement.

• Stoops has stepped in and taken over the defense, simplifying the scheme, rotating more players in the game, and holding players accountable for the mental mistakes.
• Gran has adjusted to life without Barker and transformed the offense into a ground and pound attack that focuses on ball control (to help the defense) and power running, essentially playing to our strengths.
• The players seem more prepared and are hustling every play. Both the offense and defense are being more physical and seem to be forging identities for themselves.

The result of the improvement has been pretty good. In the second half of the New Mexico game, the offense found its rhythm and the defense shored up some leaks. Best of all, we won! Against South Carolina we fully embraced the "hit 'em in the mouth" philosophy and manhandled a SEC foe. (Think about that for a moment: how often do we manhandle SEC teams?) Against 'Bama, we were respectable. We played hard, looked prepared, and didn't mail it in when their depth finally started pushing the score out of reach. And yes we got thumped, but 90% of teams in college football get thumped in that situation. At any rate, the last three weeks have shown marked improvement. That's exactly what we asked for and it's what we got.

We should be happy, or at least content, right?

Not if you're a double-downer. The improvement undermines your original "we're doomed" assertions, putting you in a situation were you have to backtrack from your original comments and admit that Stoops and company may have righted the ship. At this point, a well-balanced adult would man up and admit that the team is getting better. But some people are emotionally incapable of such grace and, oddly enough, find themselves making excuses for our success: "SC is so horrid that that win really doesn't mean anything"; "Bama could have scored 100"; NM is a high school team". Once you begin criticizing your team for the crime of proving you wrong, you have to admit that you are emotionally invested in that team's defeat. How utterly, utterly sad.

You are correct. IMO I still don't think Stoops is the answer for UK football, but the team seems to have made improvements from the beginning debacle (of course, the bar was 1mm high)
The next few weeks will show it all.

 

[UKfan2151]

I was all for firing Stoops after the first couple of games this season. But he has certainly found a way to motivate this team. Since he took over the defense, this is obviously a different team. It is a shame that he let Eliot remain in control of the D so long. He had to know he was doing a terrible job. But at least he finally recognized something had to be done and did it. I am now at least willing to take a wait and see approach with Stoops to see how things go the rest of the season. If the team keeps showing the same hustle and fight they have displayed the past few games, then Kentucky could still salvage a decent season. If that happens, I can get on board with bringing Stoops back for another season, though perhaps he still may need to make a couple of staff changes to sure up some of our weaknesses. But I am hoping he can succeed and do well going forward, as obviously that would be a better option than having to start all over yet again.

 

[Blue Decade]

One of the strange aspects about human psychology is the irrational, emotional need of some people to "double down" when they are wrong and their pride or vanity is at stake. A good example is when you publicly criticize a person's seemingly bad behavior only to be proven wrong when the guy turns out to be innocent. The well-balanced adult says, "My bad. I shouldn't have said that", while the "double-downer" says something like, "I still think you're a bad person" or "Just wait, you'll screw up and I'll be proven right." In situations like these, the double-downer puts himself in odd ethical positions, like actually wanting another human being to fail just so he can be proven "right" and intentionally distorting what he sees in his target just to sate his own vanity. It works in reverse as well. If we have publicly praised a guy, we'll keep right on saying that this guy or that guy is a great dude even after he cheats on his wife and beats up an orphan, just to keep from admitting we were wrong in the first place. Like a gambler who stays at the table and keeps loosing hand after hand, many of us simply don't want to admit that we should have never picked up the cards.

This aspect of human nature comes to mind often when I read some of the more negative posts about UK's players, staff, and the UK administration. After the first two and a half games, it was very reasonable to gripe openly about all three. The defense was horrid, the offense misguided, the coaching inept and slow to react, and the players were generally unprepared and unimpressive. Fair enough. We all clamored that adjustments should be made, and by and large there as been improvement.

• Stoops has stepped in and taken over the defense, simplifying the scheme, rotating more players in the game, and holding players accountable for the mental mistakes.
• Gran has adjusted to life without Barker and transformed the offense into a ground and pound attack that focuses on ball control (to help the defense) and power running, essentially playing to our strengths.
• The players seem more prepared and are hustling every play. Both the offense and defense are being more physical and seem to be forging identities for themselves.

The result of the improvement has been pretty good. In the second half of the New Mexico game, the offense found its rhythm and the defense shored up some leaks. Best of all, we won! Against South Carolina we fully embraced the "hit 'em in the mouth" philosophy and manhandled a SEC foe. (Think about that for a moment: how often do we manhandle SEC teams?) Against 'Bama, we were respectable. We played hard, looked prepared, and didn't mail it in when their depth finally started pushing the score out of reach. And yes we got thumped, but 90% of teams in college football get thumped in that situation. At any rate, the last three weeks have shown marked improvement. That's exactly what we asked for and it's what we got.

We should be happy, or at least content, right?

Not if you're a double-downer. The improvement undermines your original "we're doomed" assertions, putting you in a situation were you have to backtrack from your original comments and admit that Stoops and company may have righted the ship. At this point, a well-balanced adult would man up and admit that the team is getting better. But some people are emotionally incapable of such grace and, oddly enough, find themselves making excuses for our success: "SC is so horrid that that win really doesn't mean anything"; "Bama could have scored 100"; NM is a high school team". Once you begin criticizing your team for the crime of proving you wrong, you have to admit that you are emotionally invested in that team's defeat. How utterly, utterly sad.

Good post. Kentucky played last night without Barker, Baker, Mosier, Bell. Our quarterback was starting the 2nd game of his SEC career, and he ran for his life in our backfield all night. Playing against the nation's top ranked team in their own house, we covered the spread and didn't suffer anymore major injuries. Anyone who expected more than that was deluding themselves. But if you read this board regularly, you know that delusion and denial drive many of our posters. The other emotion at work here is that some of our fans do nothing more than salivate for opportunities to attack our coaches and our athletics department. That's really all those people offer this board. Here is what should be taken from last night. Steve Johnson is still an undeveloped player at this level. When put under pressure, he makes mistakes. A team that can put pressure on Johnson can quickly make our offense 1-dimensional. (But the same was true of Barker.) OTOH, our defense is slowly making progress. That's where we are at mid-season. If people don't like it, they don't have to watch. Next year, 19 incumbent starters and both kickers will be back. Next year's team will be much improved, but 8 regular season wins will probably be their ceiling. Even if they win 10, the same sad people will still complain like children.

 

[GridCats]

I think the OP is right on. None us like what we saw the first two games. But have to say they are giving more effort and playing better football. Let the next few games play out and see how it goes.

I'm now thinking Florida is not that good and we're not that bad.

 

[BlueRattie_rivals]

It is a shame that he let Eliot remain in control of the D so long. He had to know he was doing a terrible job. But at least he finally recognized something had to be done and did it.

Eliot stint as DC is actually a lesson in the danger of turning virtue into vice, specifically loyalty. Eliot is Stoops' friend as well as his assistant. and nothing will bend your principles to the breaking point like preserving a friendship. Money, sex, power--none of them hold sway over your emotions like loyalty to a friend. Stoops extended loyalty to Eliot by not hijacking his job. In most cases, loyalty is a good thing. In this case, though, Stoops loyalty to his team should have trumped his loyalty to Eliot. It's a gray area, but I think Stoops has done the right thing by taking over play calling duties for the defense.

 

[TankedCat]

IMO, in a football season where the margin of error is 1 or 2 games, you simply can't have a USM game on your resume 4 years into your coaching with no success prior. Even if UK somehow pulls off the miracle to win enough games to see an afterthought bowl game, what does it say about the season? the coach? What's the goal of the program? to say at the end of the season if we played USM again we'd win?

Stoops may be the answer. The issue is - what's the question?

 

[BlueRattie_rivals]

My biggest criticism of last night was probably the inexplicably late inclusion of Snell. Was there a reason he was held out early?[/

1) Misplaced loyalty to Kemp
2) Trust. Snell is a true freshman, and Stoops is slow to pull the veteran for a kid.
3) Stoops likes the "end of game" banger to take advantage of tired legs on the D.

My beef is that Snell should be the hammer that wears them down and then Boom the knife that slices them up. Go back and forth! Run both of them early!

 

[BlueRattie_rivals]

IMO, in a football season where the margin of error is 1 or 2 games, you simply can't have a USM game on your resume 4 years into your coaching with no success prior. Even if UK somehow pulls off the miracle to win enough games to see an afterthought bowl game, what does it say about the season? the coach? What's the goal of the program? to say at the end of the season if we played USM again we'd win?

Stoops may be the answer. The issue is - what's the question?

A fair criticism and question on your part.

• The goal in the SEC, at least for a perennial bottom-half team like UK, is to build a roster that can compete year in and year out. Very, very difficult to do when there are so many talented teams around you. Unlike most top-heavy conferences, where there are two to three elite teams and then a drop off to mediocrity, the SEC has got talent from top to bottom. It takes time to build the kind of depth and talent that can be competitive. The best model, from UK's point of view, was what Spurrier did at South Carolina. SC had bad facilities, no tradition, and a less than ideal campus to lure in recruits. It took time, but at its peak they were very, very good. UK is in a similar spot. The differences? South Carolina has a better natural recruiting base and we have better facilities.

 

[rock264]

If your objective is to pay a man $30 million to occasionally scarf down another SEC cellar dweller and the odd MAC or CUSA team, then you should be mightily pleased with the program's direction and accomplishments. Gotta get back to work.

 

[Deeeefense]

@BlueRattie if there were a hall of fame for posts, I would nominate yours. Just opened a thread and was thinking, 'these posters are living a self fulfilling prophesy'

You said it much better

I'll double down on that.

 

[GridCats]

Got to say that I had a post and made a few comments saying there was no way Stoops was letting Eliot run the defense and not doing anything about it. Now looks like I was wrong, but still can't understand why he let it go so long and put him in hole that's going to be hard to get out of.

 

[Deeeefense]

Got to say that I had a post and made a few comments saying there was no way Stoops was letting Eliot run the defense and not doing anything about it. Now looks like I was wrong, but still can't understand why he let it go so long and put him in hole that's going to be hard to get out of.

My take is the defense hadn't got bad enough to pull the chain until this year. In previous years the defense played fairly well in spots, but the excuse that they were on the field too much becasue the offense was anemic, and we lacked depth drove the thinking that the defense would get better as soon as the offense improved and we got more players. The first two game this year proved otherwise, and Stoops realized that the USM loss might be a job killer.

Better late then never.

If I'm the one pulling the levers and pushing the buttons I go all in to bring in a top flight DC next year. Pelini has been mentioned a lot. I would open up the wallet to get a guy like this. Ultimately it would be MUCH cheaper than changing head coaches again and it would certainly fix an obvious problem.

Failure to fund quality assistants was the primary downfall of Coach Curry. Hopefully this AD learns something from history.

 

[K_TIME]

To be fair. Most fans were not so negative in Stoops first year and those struggles. But in year four and you still are losing to So Miss and hammered off the field by UF and have to outscore NMSU..... what do you expect?

It only compounds when UL is playing like a top ten team right down the road

 

[BlueRattie_rivals]

Failure to fund quality assistants was the primary downfall of Coach Curry. Hopefully this AD learns something from history.

Is a more painful phrase to UK fans than "Elliot Uzelac" offensive coordinator?

I think not.

 

[Anon1660081258]

Great post.

1) Misplaced loyalty to Kemp
2) Trust. Snell is a true freshman, and Stoops is slow to pull the veteran for a kid.
3) Stoops likes the "end of game" banger to take advantage of tired legs on the D.

My beef is that Snell should be the hammer that wears them down and then Boom the knife that slices them up. Go back and forth! Run both of them early!

I've said once, and I'll say it again. I think the only thing standing between Benny and more PT is probably complete digestion of the playbook. Just a hunch.

 

[Anon1660081258]

To be fair. Most fans were not so negative in Stoops first year and those struggles. But in year four and you still are losing to So Miss and hammered off the field by UF and have to outscore NMSU..... what do you expect?

It only compounds when UL is playing like a top ten team right down the road

I am attributing 80% of the venom directed at the staff to UofL envy. We need to focus on us.

 

[Tomsong]

Long time follower. Haven't posted in years so I picked up a new Username and here I am. Can't sit on the sidelines anymore.

Hopefully I won't be labeled sunshine pumper or Debbie downer either one. I think there's always gonna be signs for Optimism and reason for doubt and you have to acknowledge both.

One thing the OP doesn't consider is that you can't change the past. Stoops had to take over the defense last year so he had to know there were issues on that side of the ball. Plus he managed fall camp. That's his time to get it Right before the first game. He didn't. Offensive short comings are attributed to new OC and lack of OL, RB, and QB performance. Stoops and/or administration may have waited too long to emphasize QB at this school. Our second string QB would have been ready if we had someone here like Henshaw three years ago. Loyalty to Boom doesn't win games. He's a situational back. OL has to gel in fall camp... period.

All of these things are predetermined months and years ago. You can't turn a ship on a dime. You have to set the correct course at launch. I believe these things are an indicator of Stoops' being a new head coach.

Having said all of that, I do believe Stoops is the right person for this job. Why? Signs. And because he has a blue collar nose to the grindstone mentality, much like Saban, who has learned from his first years as a head coach and is going to right the ship in due time. He's proven that with the facilities. He will calm down on the sideline. He will not let this defense slip again (this was the second time it has happened and he knows the third strike means you're out) regardless of who is at the DC position. And he is learning the offensive side of the ball enough to avoid past mistakes. He finally knows what we need in a S and C program. He's even learning more about recruiting character and talent. Not just potential. And he's taken his lumps on motivation and team/coach accountability. All of this is going into the Coach and program that Stoops and UK will be. I see it as being something pretty special. However, it doesn't it mean we can't keep him accountable and keep him on a short leash for the next couple years. This post could be wrong and if so I'll be the first to admit it. At that time I'll be ready to hire Saban.

 

[domino79]

Good point, OP. Instead of actually talking about the game, seems as if we go straight to wanting to pull the coach.
A lot of football left to be played. With the way we had been playing, I was just hoping to escape Tuscaloosa without any season ending injuries to key players.
So disappointed in the loss to So Miss, but that's in the past. The players have played better since then.
The serenity prayer comes in handy.

 

[CoachZ77]

One of the strange aspects about human psychology is the irrational, emotional need of some people to "double down" when they are wrong and their pride or vanity is at stake. A good example is when you publicly criticize a person's seemingly bad behavior only to be proven wrong when the guy turns out to be innocent. The well-balanced adult says, "My bad. I shouldn't have said that", while the "double-downer" says something like, "I still think you're a bad person" or "Just wait, you'll screw up and I'll be proven right." In situations like these, the double-downer puts himself in odd ethical positions, like actually wanting another human being to fail just so he can be proven "right" and intentionally distorting what he sees in his target just to sate his own vanity. It works in reverse as well. If we have publicly praised a guy, we'll keep right on saying that this guy or that guy is a great dude even after he cheats on his wife and beats up an orphan, just to keep from admitting we were wrong in the first place. Like a gambler who stays at the table and keeps loosing hand after hand, many of us simply don't want to admit that we should have never picked up the cards.

This aspect of human nature comes to mind often when I read some of the more negative posts about UK's players, staff, and the UK administration. After the first two and a half games, it was very reasonable to gripe openly about all three. The defense was horrid, the offense misguided, the coaching inept and slow to react, and the players were generally unprepared and unimpressive. Fair enough. We all clamored that adjustments should be made, and by and large there as been improvement.

• Stoops has stepped in and taken over the defense, simplifying the scheme, rotating more players in the game, and holding players accountable for the mental mistakes.
• Gran has adjusted to life without Barker and transformed the offense into a ground and pound attack that focuses on ball control (to help the defense) and power running, essentially playing to our strengths.
• The players seem more prepared and are hustling every play. Both the offense and defense are being more physical and seem to be forging identities for themselves.

The result of the improvement has been pretty good. In the second half of the New Mexico game, the offense found its rhythm and the defense shored up some leaks. Best of all, we won! Against South Carolina we fully embraced the "hit 'em in the mouth" philosophy and manhandled a SEC foe. (Think about that for a moment: how often do we manhandle SEC teams?) Against 'Bama, we were respectable. We played hard, looked prepared, and didn't mail it in when their depth finally started pushing the score out of reach. And yes we got thumped, but 90% of teams in college football get thumped in that situation. At any rate, the last three weeks have shown marked improvement. That's exactly what we asked for and it's what we got.

We should be happy, or at least content, right?

Not if you're a double-downer. The improvement undermines your original "we're doomed" assertions, putting you in a situation were you have to backtrack from your original comments and admit that Stoops and company may have righted the ship. At this point, a well-balanced adult would man up and admit that the team is getting better. But some people are emotionally incapable of such grace and, oddly enough, find themselves making excuses for our success: "SC is so horrid that that win really doesn't mean anything"; "Bama could have scored 100"; NM is a high school team". Once you begin criticizing your team for the crime of proving you wrong, you have to admit that you are emotionally invested in that team's defeat. How utterly, utterly sad.

I know I'll get bashed for this, because you make some good points in this original post, but you say the coaching was inept and slow to react. Why is it that four years into his tenure, that's still the case starting out the season? The problem with this whole emotional investment theory is that some people want to set the bar for success so low that sucking a little bit less than how we started the season is cause for celebration. We get destroyed in the second half of the season opener against Southern Miss and we're supposed to be happy Alabama didn't name the score against us? After four years of "better" recruiting classes, isn't it ok for us to come out and compete against Florida? Are we that beaten down as a fan base that we're going to celebrate any type of improvement, no matter how small? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the season hasn't gone completely in the toilet, but if that's going to be all it takes to satisfy a large portion of the fan base, then UK doesn't need to bother investing the money in football.

 

[Deeeefense]

Are we that beaten down as a fan base that we're going to celebrate any type of improvement, no matter how small?

I don't see it as a celebration, more of an observation. Just about all fans have coaching change as either in the front of their minds or the back of their minds. For those that think Stoops still has an opportunity to succeed here, notable progress is something of interest.

 

[foggyblue]

The overall contribution of the 2014 class is part of the problem.

 

[fromthe25ydline]

This is the soundest, most practical thread I've read in a long while. While I too get impatient with this coaching crew, I realize that there is very little historical ballast in this program to keep things in perspective and rational thinking afloat. The long suffering Kentucky fanbase tends to be very critical of the home team while other programs thrive.

 

[weezul]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This program has to overcome the negativity and ridicule from its fan base as much as anything.
While I'm not happy with the way the season started, I do see improvement and I hope they can continue that trajectory and get to a bowl this year. I want Stoops to succeed unlike many who seem invested in his demise at this point.

 

[GridCats]

Being as down as most are, have to think his first year he came in late and not much recruiting. And the 014 class didn't pan out either. Also the bad decisions from learning on the job cost Stoops from winning games and support from the fans.

 

[El Gato Calvo]

One of the strange aspects about human psychology is the irrational, emotional need of some people to "double down" when they are wrong and their pride or vanity is at stake. A good example is when you publicly criticize a person's seemingly bad behavior only to be proven wrong when the guy turns out to be innocent. The well-balanced adult says, "My bad. I shouldn't have said that", while the "double-downer" says something like, "I still think you're a bad person" or "Just wait, you'll screw up and I'll be proven right." In situations like these, the double-downer puts himself in odd ethical positions, like actually wanting another human being to fail just so he can be proven "right" and intentionally distorting what he sees in his target just to sate his own vanity. It works in reverse as well. If we have publicly praised a guy, we'll keep right on saying that this guy or that guy is a great dude even after he cheats on his wife and beats up an orphan, just to keep from admitting we were wrong in the first place. Like a gambler who stays at the table and keeps loosing hand after hand, many of us simply don't want to admit that we should have never picked up the cards.

This aspect of human nature comes to mind often when I read some of the more negative posts about UK's players, staff, and the UK administration. After the first two and a half games, it was very reasonable to gripe openly about all three. The defense was horrid, the offense misguided, the coaching inept and slow to react, and the players were generally unprepared and unimpressive. Fair enough. We all clamored that adjustments should be made, and by and large there as been improvement.

• Stoops has stepped in and taken over the defense, simplifying the scheme, rotating more players in the game, and holding players accountable for the mental mistakes.
• Gran has adjusted to life without Barker and transformed the offense into a ground and pound attack that focuses on ball control (to help the defense) and power running, essentially playing to our strengths.
• The players seem more prepared and are hustling every play. Both the offense and defense are being more physical and seem to be forging identities for themselves.

The result of the improvement has been pretty good. In the second half of the New Mexico game, the offense found its rhythm and the defense shored up some leaks. Best of all, we won! Against South Carolina we fully embraced the "hit 'em in the mouth" philosophy and manhandled a SEC foe. (Think about that for a moment: how often do we manhandle SEC teams?) Against 'Bama, we were respectable. We played hard, looked prepared, and didn't mail it in when their depth finally started pushing the score out of reach. And yes we got thumped, but 90% of teams in college football get thumped in that situation. At any rate, the last three weeks have shown marked improvement. That's exactly what we asked for and it's what we got.

We should be happy, or at least content, right?

Not if you're a double-downer. The improvement undermines your original "we're doomed" assertions, putting you in a situation were you have to backtrack from your original comments and admit that Stoops and company may have righted the ship. At this point, a well-balanced adult would man up and admit that the team is getting better. But some people are emotionally incapable of such grace and, oddly enough, find themselves making excuses for our success: "SC is so horrid that that win really doesn't mean anything"; "Bama could have scored 100"; NM is a high school team". Once you begin criticizing your team for the crime of proving you wrong, you have to admit that you are emotionally invested in that team's defeat. How utterly, utterly sad.

There's a lot of truth in this post.

 

[Lionel_Hutz]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This program has to overcome the negativity and ridicule from its fan base as much as anything.

That negativity has been well-earned. The fans are not the problem...

 

[LadyCaytIL]

just curious ... who's been proven wrong yet and wrong about what? Because I thought the two sides were......... Stoops can get us to a bowl game and Stoops cant get us to a bowl game.

 

[UKWinsAgainYep]

Great post OP. I'm sure most fans on this board will be very disappointed if we beat Vandy and they have nothing to whine about for that day.

 

[dreadpirate_rivals241225]

Are we that beaten down as a fan base that we're going to celebrate any type of improvement, no matter how small? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the season hasn't gone completely in the toilet, but if that's going to be all it takes to satisfy a large portion of the fan base, then UK doesn't need to bother investing the money in football.

Celebrating improvement does not necessarily mean that you are satisfied. I can't recall seeing one single poster being satisfied with the season. I've seen lots who would sell their soul to Petrino, and I've seen lots who want to give Stoops every opportunity to succeed. I haven't seen anyone satisfied, however.

 

[TBCat]

Failure to fund quality assistants was the primary downfall of Coach Curry. Hopefully this AD learns something from history.

Don't agree with this part. Tommy Bowden was the first OC. Uzelac, as bad as he was, wasn't a cheap hire. He was Colorado's former OC. Same with Archer. He was a former HC, LSU if I remember right. Those guys sucked for sure but they were bargain basement hires. Just bad decisions. Ultimately Curry was the bad hire and I don't think we would have every had stability with him regardless of the assistants.

 

[TBCat]

That negativity has been well-earned. The fans are not the problem...

Agreed. There are a lot of things to blame for UK football. The fans are the least of them. Besides if we were invested in losing wouldn't we want Stoops to be brought back?