Blame Should Extend Beyond Coaching Staff...

[Buck_Naked]

The continuing woes of the UK Football program have been discussed ad nauseum for years now, but it's time to finally "call a spade a spade", so to speak. In their careers, both Archer and Brooks have proven they can coach (granted, not during this particular tenure at UK). I agree that Brooks hasn't come close to proving he can recruit, but that's an entirely different post!

The only thing I'm not hearing from either the fans or the media is what I'm about to say (and it pains me to say it)...

Bottom line folks...we simply don't have the talent to run with the big dogs, period. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction to Sunday's butt-whipping. I've been saying for years that you haveto spread the blame farther than the coaching staff. Archer isn't out on the field looking like a statue when the opposing RB runs by, and Brooks isn't on the O-Line getting pushed around like a 98-pound weakling. Yes, we'll get a "blue-chipper" in here once in a great while, but for the most part this team is made up of players that the college football "heavyweights" didn't recruit. Ask yourself this question; if I'm a blue-chip HS prospect, how far down at the bottom of the list will UK be if schools like Tenn, Fla, Ga, Notre Dame, Miami, etc. also come calling?

UK Football is truly in a Catch-22 situation in that you rarely get the "studs" without a winning tradition, and you can't build a winning tradition playing in a powerhouse conference with second-tier players (no disrespect intended). Because of this, I can't see thatit will ever matter who holds the title of Head Coach. In football, UK will always be one of the SEC whipping boys, who's fans consider 6-6 a successful season.

[baldcat]

Do we have the talent on D like Miami, Fla. St. or Texas? Of course not.

Do we have enought talent on D to be better than Petrino's

Edited by KapitalCat: really that that comment was unecessary.
Buck_Naked wrote:

The continuing woes of the UK Football program have been discussed ad nauseum for years now, but it's time to finally "call a spade a spade", so to speak. In their careers, both Archer and Brooks have proven they can coach (granted, not during this particular tenure at UK). I agree that Brooks hasn't come close to proving he can recruit, but that's an entirely different post!

The only thing I'm not hearing from either the fans or the media is what I'm about to say (and it pains me to say it)...

Bottom line folks...we simply don't have the talent to run with the big dogs, period. This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction to Sunday's butt-whipping. I've been saying for years that you haveto spread the blame farther than the coaching staff. Archer isn't out on the field looking like a statue when the opposing RB runs by, and Brooks isn't on the O-Line getting pushed around like a 98-pound weakling. Yes, we'll get a "blue-chipper" in here once in a great while, but for the most part this team is made up of players that the college football "heavyweights" didn't recruit. Ask yourself this question; if I'm a blue-chip HS prospect, how far down at the bottom of the list will UK be if schools like Tenn, Fla, Ga, Notre Dame, Miami, etc. also come calling?

UK Football is truly in a Catch-22 situation in that you rarely get the "studs" without a winning tradition, and you can't build a winning tradition playing in a powerhouse conference with second-tier players (no disrespect intended). Because of this, I can't see thatit will ever matter who holds the title of Head Coach. In football, UK will always be one of the SEC whipping boys, who's fans consider 6-6 a successful season.

[Rollo]

Sorry Buck.

I thought the players tried hard. They madea few good plays on D. I thought they threw their bodies around andtried to get after UofL. What I can't fathom is that after four years, it has arguably gotten worse each year, and Archer still hasn't a whiff of what Petrino might throw at him. From the first play from scrimmage, UK looked unfocused and uncertain of what was coming at them. I think we have some young studs, we're a bit faster and deeper than in years past, but the ground is being lost in the film room.

I haven't given up on this staff entrirely (save Archer), but if they coach against Louisville next year, and we end up a double digit loser again, its time to hand the keys over to a more exciting, innovative staff. I appreciate what Brooks is doing. He's digging out ofa deep hole, but maybe that's where his job ends. Getting us out of the hole then letting someone else take us to the next level.

I hoped we would beat UofL, but deep down I had an idea we wouldn't. But the D play callers never caught on. Never. Sure we had some stops, but it was mostly UofL stopping themselves. Archer has utterly failed those kids at DC. Not as poorly as Majors, but close to it.

I said before the season, even if we only win 5 games, I would give Rich and the gang one more year. I will add one caveat to that. If we fail to stay in the game by halftime in another game all year,I say bring in another staff. Time for someone else to drive this club.

[The Old School JPS]

Is UL's roster alone really 31 points better than UK's at this point?

They didn't beat a 1-10 Syracuse team that badly last year, orstruggling Cincinnati, UConn or Pitt teams either.

If UL's players alone are 31 points better than UK's now, what should be expected when UK plays Georgia, Florida, LSUand Tennessee later this year?

I would be interested to see the results if you took any set of roster ratings - Rivals stars or subsequent NFL drafts or whatever - and compared the differences between UK's teams that beat Alabama in 97, LSU in 98 and 99, Mississippi State in 98, Arkansas in 1999 and 2002 to the difference between this UK team and the UL team that just beat them by 31 points. I think Petrino landed a handful of stellar players and has done an excellent job of developing and making the best use of other kids, but I don't know that he's assembled a group of players that isgood enough to walk all over UK based on talent alone and nothing else.

At any rate, whena program hasa roster disadvantagethe thing to do is tofind a way to utilize those players to score points and win some games andbe competitive. Good coaches do it. Bad ones don't. UK's prior coaches, like them or hate them, were capable of doing it from time to time. This staff hasn't been.

[Buck_Naked]

baldcat wrote: Do we have enought talent on D to be better than Petrino's little prison byotch? You bet your sweet a##.





Of course you're entitled to your opinion -- and I knew mine wouldn't be that popular, but pray tell, what have you seen in the past four years of UK defenses getting manhandled by UL (among other teams) that makes you really believe that statement? When it concerns your favorite team it's perfectly OK to use your heart instead of your head now and then, but when cold, hard facts say otherwise, well...

You can talk until you're blue in the face, but sooner or later the players have to show up for teams other than the Louisiana-Monroes and the Eastern Kentuckys that UK schedules.


Edit: I should add that I bleed as blue as anybody, so don't think I'm just some UK basher crashing the forums. I guess another way to state my opinion is by saying "when the only teams UK consistenly defeats are the "sacrificial lambs" and the Indianas and Vandys of the football world, reasonable thinking alone should tell you that those are the only teams to which UK has similar or greater talent levels". I have never questioned the heart and/or desire of ANY team member, but you simply can't coach speed, strength and instinct. Eventually it all comes down to the individual talents of the guys on the field, and the Cats simply aren't high enough in the "pecking order" to recruit the players that will enable them to become a consistent football power.

[Art Vandelay]

Apparently it's okay for more than one person to have the same screen name on this forum. As unlikely as it would seem, there are apparently two Buck Nakeds posting on this board. This should create a lot of confusion.

[Buck_Naked]

Buck Naked wrote: Apparently it's okay for more than one person to have the same screen name on this forum. As unlikely as it would seem, there are apparently two Buck Nakeds posting on this board. This should create a lot of confusion.

LOL, I guess I should defer to you since you joined 6 months before I did! :blush:

I guess I'll have to be referred to as "underscore"! ;)

[heatwave13]

I see your point about extending the responsibility, but Ithink the coaching philosophy is where it starts and it's one reason why Ron Hudson's "scriptedseries of plays offense" flamed out. Inevitably there will come a time the players will have to make a decision on their own relative to their practice/ training; if they have prepared properly, they’ll be able to make the best choice they can given the options they have. Knowledge does indeed bring power and when you know what to do, it all comes down to just putting in the effort, which makes many things much easier.

For example, in football, every game plan looks great on paper but when game day comes around, you never know what is going to happen. You can drill, drill, and drill certain situations but if the players cant 'be their own coach' and adjust (often in the blink of an eye) on the field when something unexpected comes along, things could get ugly real fast.

When it comes to practice or any kind of training, a good coach can point the player in the right direction but it is the player that ultimately has to do the work. If players are always locked into merely 'following orders' they may not be able to adapt and improvise when the situation calls for it especially in the heat of a real time game situation, when there is nobody there to hold their hand.I hope our players have the freedom to be their own coach in those situations that call for it. Maybe #8 willweigh in on this issue for us.

[Buck_Naked]

heatwave13 wrote: ...Knowledge does indeed bring power and when you know what to do, it all comes down to just putting in the effort, which makes many things much easier.

I agree, to an extent. However, if the guy across the line from you is equally knowledgable but bigger, faster and stronger, the results are painfully predictable.

Granted, Brooks wasn't onanybody's list except Barnhart's, but that isn't reason enough to place all of the blame on the Coaching Staff. After all, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, no matter how good of a seamstress you are.

I also have to admit I'm a little confused as to how this forum actually works. Seems to me that UK's basketball players are apparently fair game and "worthy" of being singled out for blame and criticism when that team struggles (in addition to the coach), but when it comes to football nobody wants to admit that it could be anyone but the Coach's fault? Why is that?

[heatwave13]

You're right about the talent, size, strength, speed points. In the case of the SEC, not only do several teams have superior talent, but they also prepare, coach, etc. just as hard as they train.

My whole rant was just trying to point out that coaches can only do so much and that, yes, much of the responsibility IS on the players. The coach isn't always the mainreason why a team struggles. Execute the game plan and adjust as necessary.

[Buck_Naked]

...whena program hasa roster disadvantagethe thing to do is tofind a way to utilize those players to score points and win some games andbe competitive...

I agree 100%.

Brooks (like Morris, Curry and Claiborne before him) wants to play smashmouth ball-control football, and you just CAN'T do that in the SEC with the level of recruits UK is able to land year after year. IMO that's why Mumme was relatively successful at UK; his game didn't rely on size as much as it did speed, which played more to the roster's strengths.

[uk7274]

Buck_Naked is a very wise person. I hope we can salvage this season...it's not about improvement anymore; it's about winning. Petrino and his staff didn't even throw the full range of plays at UK on offense. He didn't have to since, we could not stop basic football plays. This whole mess is Dr. Todd's to figure out, since he is the guy responsible for the AD and the coaches we have. If you make the big bucks in America today, you'd better be right or start looking for another job. Dr. Todd has done a good job at UK, except he is the architect of a football program that is an embarrassment to UK fans and players. He needs to make some serious contingency decisions now in the event this football black hole continues. Almost all UK fans really and trulysupport our players...we are simply way too tired of incompetent coaches who have not shown even one iota of improvement. Excuses, excuses and more excuses...just figure how to win with the players you have. All good coaches figure it out.

[UK78ALUM]

but that isn't reason enough to place all of the blame on the Coaching Staff.
I don't care about "blame", but the responsibility lies fully and totally on the coaching staff. It's what we pay them to do.


After all, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, no matter how good of a seamstress you are.
Then don't take the job. They knew that the expected deliverable was in fact a silk purse when they accepted the position and the $$$.

Dave

[Spanish Moss]

The responsibility lies totally with the coaching staff. They recruited these players and they have had them in training since the day they arrived in Lexington.

If a player is not doing what he is suppose to do off season to get ready for the season, that is the responsibility of the coaches. A player will want to get into the best playing shape possible if he has pride. He must have pride in his school, his coaches and his own being.

Sunday night I only saw a handful of UK players who had any pride. It is the coaches job to make sure the pride is in the individual before they put on the uniform and get on the field.

It all goes back to the coach.

[Buck_Naked]

UK78ALUM wrote: After all, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, no matter how good of a seamstress you are.
Then don't take the job. They knew that the expected deliverable was in fact a silk purse when they accepted the position and the $$$.

Dave



"Then don't take the job?"

Do you actually believe that Brooks was the one and only choice all along? No Coach is going to come right out and say "I don't think I can win there", so they just don't apply for the job or say "no thanks" if UK comes courting.

Think about it; this has been a Coaches graveyard. To the best of my recollection neither John Ray nor Fran Curci were ever head coaches again, though both were relatively young when they left. Claiborne never coached again (granted, he retired), and Curry got out of coaching altogether after UK. Now,both Mumme and Morris are languishing in relative anonimity. Morristook a similar job in a different conference, again at a school that can't compete for recruits against his conference rivals, and hasn't come anywhere close to the modest success he had here.


I think some out there have misconstrued my position; all I'm saying is that "blame" for the way this team looks/has looked can't be placed solely on the coaching staff; there comes a time when you have to realize the players aren't a huge help to the cause either.

[Buck_Naked]

UK78ALUM wrote: but that isn't reason enough to place all of the blame on the Coaching Staff.
I don't care about "blame", but the responsibility lies fully and totally on the coaching staff. It's what we pay them to do.


Yeah?You seem toforget the players are getting paid too, only it's called a scholarship instead of a paycheck!!

[UK78ALUM]

Do you actually believe that Brooks was the one and only choice all along?

No. Unlike most on here, I actually know what happened. We had Parcells, who then was offered $12M or so to go to TX. We then had Norm Chow and actually had the announcement press conference scheduled when a family member came to him with a very personal issue and asked that he stay in California for a while.

Brooks was always intended to be merely the consultant for the hiring process, never the end product. But unfortunately for us, we had no "Plan C". We would have been far far better off to simply meet the $$ demands of his predecessor Morriss.

Dave

[biglabcatdaddy]

UK78ALUM wrote: Do you actually believe that Brooks was the one and only choice all along?

No. Unlike most on here, I actually know what happened. We had Parcells, who then was offered $12M or so to go to TX. We then had Norm Chow and actually had the announcement press conference scheduled when a family member came to him with a very personal issue and asked that he stay in California for a while.

Brooks was always intended to be merely the consultant for the hiring process, never the end product. But unfortunately for us, we had no "Plan C". We would have been far far better off to simply meet the $$ demands of his predecessor Morriss.

Dave


AMEN! Morris may not have been the ultimate answer but he was a heck of a lot closer to Mr Right than what we have now! This has to be evident.

The real question is "where do we go from here"? Don't think it can't get any worse, because it can. Don't think it couldn't be better, because it can (and should). The problem as I see it is that we seem unwilling to do what is necessary in order to get better.