[RunItUpTheGut]

We beat Louisiana Monroe by 2 and Central michigan by 10 in 06. And that team won more SEC games than any team Kentucky has has since the rich brooks era began. They ended the year 7-5 with a loss to louisville. We then proceeded to beat clemson like they stole something for three quarters, with them making a comeback in the fourth to make the score look close. This right here pretty much destroys your argument. THESE GAMES DON'T MATTER. As long as it is a win it counts towards bowl eligibilty. The staff knew this team would need some time to develop. That is why there were two bad teams to begin the year. Along with a step up in competition for SEC play. went from.

WKU who was awful to
CMU who is alright to
U of L who in the preseason was supposed to be good.

This was not without purpose there is a good reason it was scheduled like this the staff knew that they would have a young team, A young team would be a disaster without a few real games to build on. This also was good in the fact that our line was hurt for the first two week it was pure luck that it happened in this fashion, but will be a huge break for this team. Mainly in that the offense will run differently when the O-Line is intact.

Its sad that were arguing over which UK teams have sucked worse when good teams are asking themselves which teams were better year to year.
Just goes to show yourself in your own statements that it doesnt matter we ssucked in 06 and we suck this year. Theres no reason to nickel and dime it. In all honesty we might win 4 games. Anything over that would be considered a success this year when a losing season should never be considered a success or anything less than an SEC championship or national title should be considered a success. If you expect more you gain more, more risk more rewards, but sadly we dont have the coaching staff to do that.