UK's Aaron Miller glad to be back

[Radiated]

UK's Aaron Miller glad to be back

By LARRY VAUGHT
larry@amnews.com (mailto:larry@amnews.com)

LEXINGTON - He was a four-year starter at East Carter High School and ranked among the top 10 prep players in Kentucky in 2003. Still, Aaron Miller was not expected to make the impact he did at Kentucky in 2004.

Miller started the last 10 games of the 2004 season at offensive tackle and was named to the Freshman All-Southeastern Conference team by The Sporting News. Kentucky's coaches named him the team's most outstanding first-year player.

However, it was almost a case of too much, too fast for Miller.

"It was just overwhelming for me," said Miller. "It was both athletics and academics. I'm from a small town. Everything just happened so quick."

Link (http://www.amnews.com/public_html/?module=displaystory&story_id=20780&format=html)

[I. Melvin]

Noticed he said, "The offense hasn't changed." Hmmmm ...

Wasn't the last offense Aaron saw the Hudson Hamburger Hill offense? Please tell me it isn't so ...

[Brian McCat]

I. Melvin wrote: Noticed he said, "The offense hasn't changed." Hmmmm ...

Wasn't the last offense Aaron saw the Hudson Hamburger Hill offense? Please tell me it isn't so ...



Nothing changed about the offensive playbook last year, except for a little more creativity in the playcalling, coupled with a flexibility to adapt to the players we have. Take a deep breath, Melvin. It's a good offense, if it's called correctly. Little and Dixon are gonna have monster years. You get that run going, give Andre a little more protection, and you'll see a pretty good, balanced offense.

Don't sweat it, man! Hudson's stale playcalling is gone.

[johnkyblue]

Bad playcalling does not equal a bad playbook.

[T75]

I was happy to see Miller's comment that there are more good players in the O line on hand now than when he played in 2004. We knew that, generally, but it's good to have one of the players point it out also. Since some of those 2004, 2005 buddies of Miller's are gone, he didn't say that the young fellas were better, just that there are more of them that are good. My feeling is that they may also be better as well as more of them.

But just having players in the O-line of the same general calibre, our line will be stouter than it has been simply because we will, for the first time in the last few years, be able to bring in subs, to allow breathers, and keep our best guys fresher. I think we've all seen enough games in which both our D-lines, LBs and O-line were dragging their butts in the grass during the 2nd half. That will improve in 2006 and we'll have quality depth like the big boys in 2007.

I agree with Archer that in our poor recent seasons, there weren't as many things wrong as we might think. Just a mistake here and there and tiredness made some big differences, IMO.