Online Now 1976

The House of Blue

The home for all discussion on UK athletics

Online now 93
Record: 6210 (3/13/2012)

Reply

I have to know

  • Why are some of you so insitant on hiring Petrino that every other coach out there you ladh out it. Now I will tell you up front I am not for or against hiring him. Do I think he would win here, probably. Is he the only coach they possibly win here, no. I am a supporter of Macintyre or Jones, but if we get another guy like Dykes or Petrino I woukd not be mad.

    Yet some on here if any other name comes up you blast that coach and talk about how awful he is. It just seems that you can't seem the forrest thru the trees at times. What is that leads you to believe that Petrino is the only optionout there. I get if you think he is the best, everyone has the right to there opionion, but to think he is the only one is mind boggling to me

  • There's a few in either camp that lash out but for the most part i think the fan base is just being supportive of their particular choice. Me personally, I want immediate gratification and I believe there are only a couple of the candidates that offer that. On the other hand I also want long term success as a whole so i don't think any candidate should be eliminated with out consultation.

  • I like Mac and Jones also but heres why people are so insistant on hiring Petrino that they laugh at every other candidate. How many winning season have Mac or Jones put up in the SEC? How many BCS games have Mac or Jones taken their teams to?

    This post was edited by tWhit 17 months ago

  • Because the UK football program is in need of a proven, can't lose, type of coach if we ever want to compete at a higher level, and Petrino is the only viable candidate that fits the bill. We not only need a mastermind of a coach, but one who can either recruit 4 and 5 stars to UK, or win in the SEC with 3 stars. Petrino has proven he can do that!

    For the first time in my lifetime, we had the type of sucess under Brooks that primed us to hire a big time coach that could build on his sucess and take us to the next level. We failed to do so, and instead, destroyed the program, regressing, and returning to a curry like status.

    As bad as that was, and as great of an opportunity missed, the football Gods have given us an opportunity to redeem ourselves by hiring a caalibre of coach that would normally not even consider a program like UK. This is a once in a lifetime chacnce to get the kind of coach that we normally cannot. We let the Bear go, and we let UL's dying program be resurected by Schnelly, our own former player, rather than hire him ourselves. Will we pass a third time on the opportunity to make ourselves a viable football program? Probably, cause when it comes to UK football, that's just what we do.

  • Super, another Petrino thread. banghead For everyone's sake (and sanity) on both sides of it, can we just move on from this discussion? It's not happening. Continuing to talk about it isn't going to make it happen. shrug

  • UK fans have been moving on from such discussions for as long as I can remember. The results are undeniable. I'm glad posters aren't letting this go and are finally holding the UKAA and hopefully the BOT accountable. Regardless of whether you want Petrino or not, the push down economics and cavalier attitude of the administration and specifically MB toward the fan base is beyond disturbing. MB isn't going to consider Petrino, so we should just all move on and let it go? To me it is not an exercise in futility but rather painting the picture, so to say.

    On that note, MB is going to assume culpability with this hire, for better or worse. He's obviously annointed himself an army of one and is refusing to seriously consider any serious suggestions or wishes from other alumni and boosters. Maybe he hits a homerun, but I wouldn't bet on it. And removing coaches like Petrino immediately from consideration more than likely mean the consequences are obvious...

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Caz1072 17 months ago

  • Why must you scold paying customers for starting threads. I don't think any poster should move on until their questions are answered. We get it you don't believe Petrino is the guy. But do you know for a fact?

  • Bobby Petrino is no more a guaranteed success at UK than many other candidates. Nothing in his history has shown he can take a poor program to greatness. Add this in to the valid reasons that administrators may have for not hiring him and he doesn't look all that attractive.

    The legend of Bobby Petrino since his firing from Arkansas has grown to epic proportions, but the actual facts do not back up the legend.

    In the five years prior to BP, the University of Louisville was 41-21 (25-9) and went to 5 straight bowl games. In the four years BP was there, Louisville was 41-9 (24-6) and went to 4 bowl games, including the Orange Bowl. Bear in mind that a BCS bowl was not an option for the John L. Smith era due to conference affiliation, despite the 2001 Cardinals going 11-2 (6-1). So BP did not take over a team that was mediocre in any realistic sense of the word, he took over a team that was having success and improved on that success marginally. He went to a BCS bowl game due to conference affiliation changes, not his immense coaching improvement over Smith.

    In the 10 years prior to BP, Arkansas was 75-46 (42-36) under Houston Nutt, going to 8 bowl games in the process. Arkansas won the SEC West twice outright, and shared the West title two other times in that period. The bowl games included the Cotton Bowl three times and the Citrus (now Capital One) Bowl twice. BP at Arkansas was 34-17 (17-15) and went to two major bowl games (Cotton and Sugar) along with an additional Liberty bowl game. BP never won or tied for the division title.

    There is absolutely zero evidence that Petrino can turn around a program, despite the vehement conviction of those who feel he is the only one who can. He has never taken a program that was bad, or even mediocre, and done anything special with it. He has taken two programs that were enjoying success and improved on that success to varying degrees.

    By the same criteria, Butch Jones has much the same resume as Petrino, absent a stint in the SEC. There are several other coaches being mentioned in the search that have a much stronger resume when it comes to improving a program from the bottom. Jones and the other coaches mentioned in the search also have the benefit of not having left their prior employer due to legal concerns.

  • JDH using the stats you provided do the math. You are using Nutt as the example, right? If so Petrino actually was winning at a higher rate than HN 67% to 61.5%. HN had him in conference play 53.85% to 53.13%.

    And when HN left the program was faltering.

    Just concerning the SEC.

    This post was edited by James Mahoney 17 months ago

  • I'm not "scolding" the person who started the thread. I just know exactly where this thread will go, which is the same place 100 other threads have gone in the past two weeks. I'm know that wasn't the original poster's intention, and he clearly wasn't advocating Petrino, but that's where it'll end up, good intentions or not.

    IMO, the conversation should be shifting to realistic candidates at this point. Bobby Petrino isn't a realistic candidate.

  • Arkansas went 10-4 (7-1) and won the SEC West in 2006, ending the season ranked in the top 15. All 4 losses were to top 10 teams, including a loss in the SEC Championship to eventual national champion Florida. In 2007, Arkansas was 8-5 (4-4) and played in the Cotton bowl as a top-25 team against #7 Missouri. Then Bobby Petrino was hired. Doesn't sound much like a faltering program to me.

  • The cruel irony is that Petrino is the coach with the least amount of risk ON the football field. But like Howard years ago, the UKAA is choosing to focus on the risk associated with his personal past. It is deja vu and just once, I wish UK would throw some caution to the wind with football and play to win, or at least seriously entertain the idea...

    The UKAA still won't listen to Howard, who has forgotten more about football and building programs than our brass will ever know. Way to treat your own expert.

    It will be more of the same and you can just see the train coming from miles away.

  • Ok thanks for the clarification on the scolding. I think most know that Petrino isn't a viable candidate but some have given up and some will go down with a sinking ship. I've already stated where stand on the next hire. I just hope they get the right, as best they can, candidate for the future.

  • Great post.

    I really don't think anybody wants Petrino--they want Calipari on Pitino on the football field. They want one guy to come along and make it all better. That's extremely rare in football and it's pretty rare in basketball, too, unless you have the support, facilities, money, tradition, etc. that you find only at one of the handful of premiere programs in the country.

  • I don't post much but I stay current with the HOB and on this one time I feel compelled to comment. One thing that really chaps my tail is that BP coming here isn't "realistic". Hey, if he isn't interested so be it, But, for UK or Mitch Barnhart disqualifying him because of previous sins is simply mindless. Contracts can be built to protect the university from that kind of fallout! Fan interest is at an all time low and with that revenue. To hire a shot in the dark at this point is continuing the cycle that has existed here since Bryant went to A&M. And ANY other candidate is getting into a quagmire like nothing else in American sport. The only "realistic" way for UK to end the cycle is to bring in the only proven winner available-- a-hole or not. As a UK grad, long time season ticket holder and fan who has been through too many years of losing, I honestly feel that any hire other than Petrino is simply the same old same old.

    So, forgive my insensitiveness to an adultress affair, lying to the boss, leaving for greener pastures, et. al, but this is the only reason he's even close to being available. And if you can't forgive me, how about giving Petrino a break! I'm thinking of my alma mater and I hate to see it continue to shoot itself in the foot. And that's exactly whats going to happen with any one other than Bobby Petrino.

  • Matt, when you say Petrino isn't going to happen - Does this mean UK is not interested in Petrino or Petrino is not interested in UK? Is this your opinion or something you have heard Barnhart or someone in the know say? Just curious.

    Who would be your pick out of a list of realistic choices for the UK job? Thanks in advance. GO CATS!!!

  • Matt wasn't trying to ruffle feathers but it has just baffeled me from people I talk with to postets on here how there only choice is BP and every othet coach named is epic failure regardless if they know anything about him or not. I just had to ask the question what made them so loyal to that decsion that evrything else wad wrong.

    Maybe BP won't agree to a rigid contract that is why there is no more interest from us. I don't know. Maybe there was no interest either way.

  • Did anyone ever think that quite possibly, Petrino would not have any desire to come here? What if Mitch did offer him the job and he said thanks, but, no thanks? Would MB still get hammered by all the BP lovers who felt he was the only choice we could make and had to make it or Mitch is a failure? IMO, I think BP and Auburn have already struck up a deal, behind closed doors and they're just waiting for the season to end to make it known, so, I don't feel BP was ever really a player with UK..I could be wrong, but, that's what I think..

  • History tells me 3 years from now we will still be what we are and BP will be coaching somewhere having been forgiven and given a chance to coach and probably winning games and probably beating us, what will everyone think then? ah we could have got him.

  • History tells you the future? What a unique talent.

  • You ever learn anything from the past? I certainly have.

  • So there is no evidence Petrino can build a program, so where is the evidence that he can't? He is the best name out there. MB should have went all in from the get go if he was serious about taking UK football to the next level.

    It is obvious he isn't, no matter what any media or website editors will tell you, until MB makes a serious move to upgrade the football program there is no evidence it is on his priority list.

    This post was edited by TheTurnaround13 17 months ago

  • What do you mean, the evidence that he can't? You want evidence of something that has never happened? What sort of irrational demand is that?

    As far as history goes, Petrino's history suggests that he is successful when taking over from successful coaches at programs enjoying success. That is what history suggests about Petrino. It also suggests he will either lie to or expose his next employer to legal liability. You can deny it, or get frothy-mouthed and make nonsensical demands for evidence, but it won't change anything. You call him, unequivocally, the "best name out there" despite the fact that there is no "best name" for every coaching situation, which demonstrates the level at which you are ignoring reality.

    Maybe what you mean is "most recognizable name" or "most polarizing name" or "most oft-uttered and revered name on Kentucky message boards." Those are all accurate descriptions. "Best name" is a fantasy that many toss around as if it is reality, despite history lending no credence to that theory.

    In fact, history suggests that Petrino would have a marginally better OOC record and a marginally worse conference record at UK. After all, that's what happened at Arkansas. Or maybe he would have a marginally better record both OOC and in conference, as happened at UL? Or maybe he would be fired after two weeks of employment after cultivating a relationship with a female athletics department employee, or worse, hiring someone over more qualified candidates due to a sexual relationship with her. If history is our guide, don't we apply that guide faithfully? Or do we ignore history in this instance because it doesn't fit the little fantasy some of us have crafted in our little heads?

    Bobby Petrino guarantees nothing that would pull UK up from its current state. He doesn't guarantee a commitment from the administration to football facilities funding. He doesn't guarantee wins at a school that is not already winning. He doesn't guarantee stability. He doesn't guarantee a commitment to improved recruiting, as his classes (historically) have fallen in line with what prior staffs were able to do at the school. He doesn't guarantee improved booster relations. He doesn't guarantee increased marketing for football.

    As a matter of fact, no coach guarantees any of that. Not a single one. Pretending that this coaching hire will be completely free of any negatives is folly. Worse, picking a candidate and ignoring his history while emphasizing the history of every other potential candidate makes you look like a fool.

    This post was edited by JDHLaw11 17 months ago

  • Bobby Petrino is the best in the business at the following:

    Putting together a game plan
    Finding and exposing a teams weakness
    Play calling.

    That is why he is so good with average talent. His hard nose coaching and discipline added in puts his teams in posittion to compete in almost every game.

    Not to mention he would change the loser mentality around the football program immediatley.

    That is the bottom line.

    None of that can be argued.

    This post was edited by TheTurnaround13 17 months ago


  • So you're telling me that the only head coach in this country that can turn UK around is Bobby Petrino? Really?

    What happens when Mitch brings him in and he pulls the same crap here he's pulled everywhere else he has been? Not just one of his jobs, not just twice but every where he's been he has left a mess in his wake.

    As a manager, hiring an employee, are you going to go after a guy that will build it right, with a clean track record and skills to do the job? Or are you going to hire a guy that has screwed over the last three companies he's worked for and put your head on the chopping block with his?

    I think that pretty much sums up why he won't be here. Mitch would be made a laughing stock for hiring a guy that screwed his last three bosses over and expecting him to come here and be completely different.

  • By whose criteria? Yours? Again, the legend of Bobby Petrino as told by anonymous forums poster TheTurnaround13 takes on a life of its own. The best in the business of football at doing these three things? We are talking about the same guy who had a worse winning percentage in the SEC than Houston Nutt at the same program, right? Are we ignoring every other coach still employed that is successful just to perpetuate the fantasy that Bobby Petrino is the greatest coach in the nation?

    It's perfectly valid to say that he is good at those things. It's perfectly valid to say he sustained and built upon the successful situations that he was handed at his last two coaching stops. It's perfectly valid to say that he is a good head coach, and even to expect that he would do well at his next program. What you are saying is just crazy talk.