In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 736
Online now 806 Record: 6210 (3/13/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
From an appearance or political standpoint, ending this game would appear as backing down from a hated rival in order to find an easier path to a bowl game. In reality, if the new rule goes into effect, it's better for both programs to secure an easier home game every year than to take turns going on the road into a tough game.
The sad reality of all this is that we likely will trade wins with UofL in the foreseable future - at best - and, given our historical futility in the SEC, that significantly reduces our chances of ever securing a bowl bid under the new rules on any consistent basis.
It's just the damn mentality we've been forced to adapt in justifying anything that will get us to a bowl game while spending as little as possible in resources - of all kinds - to get there. It's as if gaining ground in the SEC is universally seen and accepted as an imposibility so the default grail becomes some entry-level bowl game that we'll do whatever necessary to achieve. Sad, really.
First let me say that I like the UK, UofL football series. I however can understand why UK might find it necessary to cancel the series if the SEC goes to a nine game conference schedule. It has nothing to do with competition and everything to do with economics. I am sure that UofL could ensure that the game continue. All it would have to do is agree to play the game every year at Commonwealth and both teams split the tickets and the gate. The game could be played outside the season ticket packet at a special rate.
The reason I say play it at Commonwealth is because of capacity. The Pizza Pit is just too small for this cash cow game.
Florida may not drop F$U but how often do they play Miami? yeah they don't very often.
We gain zero by playing UL. How many Ky HS recruits do win or lose due to the UL game? Most already know where they want to go well before their soph. year of HS. Some may switch but that percentage is really small.
Ga.Tech wants and needs UGA. It helps with recruiting the state of Ga. Big difference.
Same with the Florida schools. If FSU beats UF it helps with getting the top kids in state. Huge difference.
I for one think if we want to recruit Ohio we should pick up a game with Cincinnati, I know they are very good but if we want a in, in cincinnati step up and take it sure this want be very popular post but that's just a thought.
As far as the Ul game it is a no win for us, win and we're suppose to, lose and people look at us badly, one why to not look bad whoop their ass plan a simple.
But don't pick up UC (or some ohio team) drop Ul pick up another OOC that would come to Uk for another home game and more money for us makes since too.
This could go 100 different ways and they would all make since, IMO
To give that game up so easily just shows the "mediocrity mindset" is still alive and well in BBN. We keep hearing that UK football is committed to competing in the SEC... and raising the bar for what is expected of our level of play. If all we keep hearing is true, then we aspire to be better than a 7 win team anyway... and that's WITH our current schedule. Unless we are full of crap and still expect to be a bottom feeder in the SEC, then we SHOULD NOT allow the idea of "just one more win", to push the panic button and boot the "mediocre" Cards from our schedule. If we just wanna make a bowl by beating OOC pansies, along with the other 4 bottom feeders of the SEC... then, we are not serious about football at all.
Just answer this... what would you rather see, an annual game against the Cards that we KNOW is exciting... or the typical, annual toilet bowl game that means absolutely nothing and garners zero excitement from BBN?
If we drop the Cards and just barely make a sh!t bowl... then we are giving up the ONE GAME, that we can count on (every year) to build excitement. I will take a chance on losing to the Cards over the possibility of winning a sh!t bowl anyday.
We either expect better or we don't... but either way, the Cards MUST stay on our schedule.
This post was edited by JawJacker 2 years ago
We can also look at it this way... what if (dreaming) we do reach a point where we have a title shot, but we are tied for second with another team... and our strength of schedule dictates who'll get matched up with the number one team for the championship (assuming there's no playoff yet and the BCS rules still apply)... a "win" over the Cards (another possible bowl team) could make the difference in that deciding factor, vs a win over a very weak OOC opponent who can't even sniff a bowl. Just a thought.
I'm going to say on this if we go though a 8-9 game Sec schedule and are 2nd that means we are SEC champs or just lost the SEC championship.
If we won it we're in
If we lost that more than likly means we just lost to the SEC champs and I don't see them having another "Rematch" after the bad taste in everyones mouth form the Bama/Lsu game from this yr
Ditch the 'Ville - adding the Missouri Tigers every year (and Texas A&M once in a while) makes our already rediculously hard conference schedule even harder. Having another team as a home game EVERY year (with "regular" prices for tickets) will make up most of the potential revenue loss from an every-other-year home game against the Cards (with "inflated" prices). The only recruits who would possibly "miss" us playing that game are ones from Jefferson County, and they won't go here just because we play UL.
I believe the past 6 National Champions (all SEC teams) had at least 3 "cupcakes" on their schedule and still were ranked #1 or #2 in the BCS because of their strength of schedule IN THE SEC. That makes your point moot!
But if Demarco Robinson hangs on to the football last year, maybe UK gets the game to OT and wins it. That would have been 2 straight 6 win seasons for Bear Strong and UaVel....and under the new proposal, home for the holidays for 2 straight years. I'm guessing Turtleneck is willing to give up an additional 10-15K tickets for ONE game EVERY OTHER YEAR to get a guaranteed W.
I was against the series to begin with, and my opinion becomes stronger as time goes by. Only UofL benefits from this series. UK would not benefit if we won 10 years in a row. I'm not in favor of the 7 win rule, but if it goes in, and that gives us political cover to drop the UofL series, then that's at least one good thing that would result from the rule.
I'd like to keep the series, but this combined with a likely 9 game conference slate sometime in the next few years makes it hard to justify.
The UL series has always been more beneficial to them than us. I say drop that game ASAP regardless of whether you need to win 6 or 7 to get bowl-eligible.
Those arguing the "mediocrity mindset" are disproving their own point precisely by arguing to keep U of L on the schedule. By keeping them, they argue we aren't scared of competition and prove we're committed to big boy football. If you want to establish that kind of attitude, you should drop them immediately and then schedule an actual big boy. Pick up Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas somebody, anybody with a big time program. Not Louisville, a perennial 5-7 win program with a few year blip on the radar some, what, six years ago now. Keep them on the schedule and you concede your own point; i.,e., we're afraid to play a big time game. I just don't get the argument that playing THEM every year demonstrates a commitment to big time football or that we're not afraid of a challenge. If you really want to set that mindset , which I have no problem with, then drop them and upgrade the schedule. Don't say keep them to prove we want to play in the big time. Seems a bit oxymoronic to me...
Keeping UL actually is the maintaining of the mediocrity mindset.
Recruits don't give a damned if we play UL every year unless they are from Jefferson County.
Recruits care about WINNING and going Bowling. We can add a sure W home game against a team from an area we recruit to help us get better recruits.
UL is not, and I repeat--UL IS NOT BIG TIME FOOTBALL! If you all truly believed UK should play another BIG BOY in our OOC then you would want to play USC, TX, Oklahoma, Ohio State, etc... You don't and you are just blowing smoke and pretending you want to. And playing any of those teams who are vastly superior to UL who is even more ridiculous. We need the W's and to develop a winning mindset amongst the fans and players to advance up the SEC ladder.
I'm just gonna let Cobby be my official PR agent on this matter.
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/JDrumUK
Cobby and DB4... you are both wrong. I'm not saying Louisville is some power house... nor am I agreeing that keeping them, is accepting mediocrity. The fact is... you and I (and everyone else) knows for certain, that if we do drop the Cards, they will be replaced with a cup-cake ... which in turn, WILL make us appear to be accepting mediocrity. Louisville is not an Oregon or Oklahoma, but they damn sure present a tougher challenge, than what they'd be replaced with.
DB4, you are way off base saying I'm accepting mediocrity by wanting to keep them... cuz you know UK would not replace them with anyone who's actually better. Therefore, by wanting to keep them... I'm admitting that I prefer the tougher challenge we'd get from the Cards, vs that of a cup-cake team. That means... YOU are the one who prefers an easier schedule and thus, mediocrity.
I would agree with you if the other teams we were competing with for bowl games didn't have easy schedules, but the fact of the matter is, the teams that get invited to the types of bowls we get invited to play crappy schedules, while we play in the SEC. Until something is done to level the playing fields, UK should do what it takes within the rules to get to a bowl each year. I don't want to drop the UL game personally, but It has never really done anything but hurt UK and help UL.
Also for those who say we don;t deserve a bowl if we can;t beat ul, don't you realize that UK and UL football have been fairly similar in the modern era. That means a lot of close games where either team could win. Now if you say we should be competitive with UL every year or don't deserve a bowl, I could agree, but it's asinine to think we should beat a program every year that has been traditionally competitive withi us. Especially when we refuse to pony up and do what it takes financially to compete.
JJ, you are wrong as two boys ** on this one bro!
I don't care if we replace them with little sisters of the poor. We have to win games and that doesn't matter whom it's against. UL built their program by playing a pansy schedule and racking up the W's. Same goes for Utah, TCU, and a plethora of other mid-major programs. People don't blame them for who they play. They forget that they play in a cupcake conference and only look at one thing, "Do they win?" When they are able to see multiple years of winning records and bowl games recruits take notice.
You want better recruits? Win more games against anyone! Once we get to the point that we consistently win 9-10 games a year we can toughen the schedule but until then, UK should be doing anything it can to have a winning season.
I don't care what some lame UL fans say. It's easy for them to crow about dodging them when we are the 2nd toughest team they face all year. We don't have the luxury of playing 5 OOC cupcakes and then a boatload more of cupcakes in our conference. We face the likes of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, TN, LSU, SCAR, Miss St, Ark, TAMU, Mizzo... They face Rutgers, Cinci, USF, Central Florida, Uconn... It's not dodging or accepting mediocrity to want to have built in W's OOC. It's smart economic policy.
This post was edited by cobbycobb 2 years ago
Ouch!!! Now I will admit there's a chance I'm wrong on this one... for economic or other reasons, I'm not taking into consideration, BUT I ABSOLUTELY, UNDENIABLY, NO DOUBT, KNOW FOR CERTAIN... THAT I AM 100% SURE... AND ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, KNOW FOR A FACT... THAT I "AM NOT AS WRONG AS TWO BOYS F***ING"!!!!!!!!
You Army feller's AIN'T RIGHT!!!
Seriously, to be honest... this may boil down to personal preference and flat out selfishness. Nevertheless, I wanna keep Louisville, because I enjoy the excitement that annual rivalry game brings to the Commonwealth. For me, it's not about how it benefits them or hurts us... I don't look at it that way. I think WE SHOULD be better than them.... and SHOULD beat them more often than not. For that reason... I prefer to keep them on our schedule, so we can prove to them (and everyone else) that they are no different or no more of a threat, than any other OOC cup cake on our schedule.
I hate the idea of dropping them, simply because so many in BBN think they present an obstacle that we cannot overcome... to make a bowl game. That's a pathetic attitude... economically smart or not. To prefer a much easier "win" over a mediocre team like the Cards, is proof that SOME expect no more than mediocrity from UK football.
Again, where's the pride in making a bowl... when the only reason we play in a bowl, is because we beat all the cup cakes we (maxi) padded our schedule with? If we are gonna let ONE MORE WIN (to be bowl eligible), be reason enough to run from a team, who we SHOULD beat anyway... and be stomping their asses in the dirt annually... then, this whole idea of UK working toward competing in the SEC and becoming a legit contender, is nothing more than a crock of shit.
With that said, ANYONE (you and JD included) who are willing to give up the Cards for a pansy ass team (who won't fill CWS anyway), are the fans who, not only EXPECT the same old mediocrity, but WELCOME it... and quite frankly... ARE AS WRONG AS TWO BOYS F***ING!!!!!
I still love ya tho... like a brother from another mother.
First, I should apologize for the bomb I dropped. My auto edit failed me...
I prefer to keep the series but for all the reasons that I've listed would have no problem if UK decided to drop them. Nobody, and I repeat NOBODY thinks that UL is some obstacle that we can't overcome. It's about recruiting, $$$, and grooming that winning attitude that is most important. UK had come a long way in the Brooks era in starting to believe and that's and it's because of that belief that people have raised expectations now. Before people were content to just go bowling every couple years. Now, we demand to go bowling evey year and want 7+ wins.
I agree with all that. I think what sparked my rant... or my desire to make a convincing argument, is what I believe to be the inevitable truth... which is, UK will deem it necessary to drop the Cards (if or when the 7 Win minimum rule becomes reality)... and the thought of that just pisses me off.
The fact that our program allowed themselves, to be put in this position in the first place (where they feel the need that we MUST drop a mediocre team like the Cards)... just blows my mind and irks me to no end.
I understand those of you who are making the opposing argument... and the fact that I really (deep down inside) know you, most likely, are absolutely right about what will ultimately be the case, only adds to my "pissed offness"... and "irkness" as well.
That is gonna be a sad day... when I have to say goodbye to the Cards and hello to the Blind Pansy Ass Sissy's of the Poor.
But hey... we just might make a bowl game by golly!!!
Are you calling Blind people pansy ass sissy's. Thats just not right man.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports