08-05-2012, 04:41 PM #11
The records of three of the coaches referenced in the list of slow-starting coaches were listed as follows:
Joker cannot survive any of the above seasons.
All of the referenced coaches came into much worse situations than Joker. Joker was handed a program on the uptick; the winning foundation was laid by Rich Brooks. None of the coaches referenced had been in the programs they took over; Joker has been at UK since Shep was a pup. None of the referenced coaches were coaches-in-waiting and had absolutely no input in the recruiting of the players they inherited. The intended comparison is apples to kumquats and has no basis in reality.
I now understand the intent of the original post to be an attempt to point out that some successful coaches got off to a bad start......worse than Joker's start (which wasn't clear to me in the original post). That is true, but, for the reasons stated above, it is not a valid argument anyway.
The simple fact of the matter is Joker took over a winning program and turned it into a losing program. All the indignant arguments in the world will not change that fact.....not one wit!
Whether Joker can bounce back or not has not conclusively been determined in the minds of some fans - I get that. Taking any position on that prospect is sheer conjecture, but the opinions that he will not prove successful are probably more valid right now than those that he will succeed based on the evidence as it exists today......to wit: the program is now worse off than the day he took over in the W-L column and competitiveness on the field has declined over the last two years. Make all the excuses you want but there is no denying those two facts.
Since there is no way to successfully argue that the program has improved under Joker's coaching, and no proof exists that it ever will, we are now reduced to hearing heated semantic arguments. Ridiculous!
Last edited by kynut; 08-05-2012 at 04:57 PM. Reason: typoQUESTION EVERYTHING OR YOU MAY NEVER KNOW THE TRUTH