The House of Blue

Great post. If you can't play defense you can't win in the SEC period! If you have any doubts just watch the Bama and LSU game from this past weekend. Man those teams and coaches get it!

You know what they also get? Top 5 recruiting classes. That's the thing about defenses, you HAVE to have great players. The right offensive scheme can make up the difference in talent, see La Tech with WAC players keeping it close against TAMU. I want a solid defensive coach like everyone else, that just may have to come after we get the program back to .500. Right now we need someone that can get us back to the Rich Brooks level before we start trying to compete for a SEC title.

I am not a "THROW IT DEEEEEP JAY-RUD!!!" fan, but bringing in an offensive coach is probably the best route to go right now. Let him bring us back to respectability then try to make a move for a big time defensive guy.

QFT....

You can scheme on offense, but you need real players on defense or you will get exposed.

Do you really want to know what brings the players?? It's pretty simple: winning. Do you know how to win in the SEC? You play defense first, then you have a balanced enough attack on offense.

Guys, one of the great things about being a human being is that we have the ability to learn from our experiences. Again, we tried Mumme ball. Once Tim Couch left and the SEC figured out this new offense, it was over. 2-9, 0-8. Hell, just keep Joker then. Now, Dykes would get us to a bowl game. But we ain't winning more than 7 games. More evidence to support that? How many top 25 offenses have we had at Kentucky since 2000? Four, I suppose (00, 06, 07, 10). What's the best we did? 7-5. Do we really need to try this again? How many losses in 06, 07, and 2010 can we blame on the defense failing to stop the run or get a stop period? A lot.

It's a myth you have to have top level talent to field a good defense. You need talent, but it doesn't have to be Bama/LSU level. South Carolina was in a worse position than we were in the 90's. They hired a defensive minded
coach in Lou Holtz and they began to build their program. Then they hired Spurrier and he continued this. STEVE ORR SPURRIER built his team on defense and balanced on offense. That is the formula. Not throwing the ball 60 times and winning/losing with a basketball score. Until people figure that out, we're not going anywhere.

Hal Mumme was the worst thing that's happened to this program.

It also took Brooks 4 years to get things going. I'll take a guy that can get us back to that level in 2 or so years.

Come on, dude. Do I really need to explain to you why that is a weak argument?

It all depends.

Look fellas, I'm not saying I do not want a defensive coach. If we can get Kirby Smart, we take him in a heartbeat.

If that doesn't work, however, I will take a second tier offensive coach like Dykes over a second tier defensive coach like Tim DeRuyter

100% agree. I'm just saying we have to get a top flight defensive guy. If we get a middle of the road defensive guy I think we will be stuck at the 5-7 win plateau. If we get a second tier offensive guy we can get to the point where will be in position to hire a great defensive coach the next go round.

WOW LOOK AT VANDY. PLEASE WITH THIS. DID MUMME NOT TEACH YOU ANYTHING.

Uh, yes it is. It's a huge deal actually. Again, I don't know how to simplify this enough for you. Defense is absolutely essential to win in the SEC. Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, (insert other top 25 SEC team we play weekly) will play defense, and they will stop the air raid eventually. Then what? You gotta play defense. I've honestly never heard any other person say having a bad defense isn't a big deal in the SEC.

We had a top 25 defense in 2006. We had the second worst defense. We only won 7 games. The only reason we won that many was because we had a ridiculous turnover margin for that season. That cannot be counted on year after year.

Running a balanced offense is important, but defense is priority #1. There's no other way around that. This isn't playstation.

This assumes that every defensive-minded coach will take four years to show improvement and that every offensive-minded coach will only require two.

That assumption is patently false.

Hiring a coach based on his offensive production in the Sun Belt is a ridiculous criteria to base a coaching search on. Any coach that succeeds at Kentucky will have to make improving the worst defense in the SEC his first priority.

In 2008, our offensive production was pretty terrible, but the team made a bowl game and was competitive because of a solid defense. Even as recently as 2011, with one of the worst offenses in the nation, the games UK won were won because of solid defensive play.

Hal Mumme and his ability to lose games after scoring 40-50 points was the worst thing to ever happen to Kentucky football. An exciting offense becomes much less exciting when you can't win. A balanced team with steady defensive play and a ball control offense that wins games is much more exciting.

lots of risk. Dykes could be wildly successful like Sumlin at TAMU, or he could fall flat on his face like Kragthorpe or Dooley.

Part of the problem isn't that they don't put emphasis on the defense, it's that the offenses are on the field for a very small portion of time thus leading to serious fatigue on defense. It's tough to be at the top of your game when you've been on the field for 80% of a game.