Poll: Who Wins?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Charleston Southern
Kentucky
* You voted for this item.
Thread Rating:
10-31-2010, 10:17 AM
Lexington, KY
12:30 pm
BBSN
thoughts?
12:30 pm
BBSN
thoughts?
![[-]](https://bluegrassrivals.com/forum/images/lifestyle/collapse.png)
10-31-2010, 10:28 AM
UK falls behind 42-20 at halftime after Charleston Southern piles up 768 yards of offense on them. But UK's Randall Cobb throws for a touchdown, runs for two, catches one, returns a punt for one, returns two interceptions back, and leads UK to a come from behind 69-66 win. After the game, he tweets that UK fans are the worst fans in the whole world, and Josh Harrellson, under his "CalipariSucks" alias says, "Yeah, but basketball season is right around the corner"..
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
10-31-2010, 01:09 PM
Charleston Southern's only victories: North Greenville and Mars Hill
WHO ARE THEY? Is this a High School team??? WHY is this game even on the schedule? A team like UK who needs BCS points schedules something like this? This kind of game gives you a win, but it gives you zero credibility to the voters. A win here and I could see the voters passing even fewer votes their way than if they had not played at all!
WHO ARE THEY? Is this a High School team??? WHY is this game even on the schedule? A team like UK who needs BCS points schedules something like this? This kind of game gives you a win, but it gives you zero credibility to the voters. A win here and I could see the voters passing even fewer votes their way than if they had not played at all!
10-31-2010, 09:37 PM
Stardust Wrote:Charleston Southern's only victories: North Greenville and Mars Hill
WHO ARE THEY? Is this a High School team??? WHY is this game even on the schedule? A team like UK who needs BCS points schedules something like this? This kind of game gives you a win, but it gives you zero credibility to the voters. A win here and I could see the voters passing even fewer votes their way than if they had not played at all!
Not sure Kentucky's program is at a level where they need to worry about BCS points, but whatever. As far as the scheduling of a game like this, a lot of BCS conference teams schedules games like this.
Everyone keeps talking about UK's schedule, yes I admit, the OOC teams are not the most glamorous but you look at most teams' schedules and you will see several ooc games that are not glamorous.
Kentucky after decades of losing is trying to instill the atmosphere of winning and are starting to succeed at that, if you consider the last four years, which are some of the most successful in school history. With a few marquee wins scattered over that period the next plateau will be to go to higher tier of bowl games.But I don't think that this can be done overnight or even in a couple of years. It will take time and if we are persistent, one day we can be one of the elite programs in the country. So for now I say let's just sit back and enjoy the ride. And to some, NO I am not settling for mediocrity, I consider myself a realist.
11-01-2010, 12:49 AM
UK
11-01-2010, 12:52 AM
This one should be over by the end of the 1st quarter.
Don't know why we even have them on our schedule.
Don't know why we even have them on our schedule.
11-01-2010, 02:12 AM
I ended up getting soem tickets in 116 for this game
11-01-2010, 01:24 PM
UK Easy.
11-01-2010, 04:05 PM
Kentucky names the score. I like a game like this this time of the year.....its like a week to get nagging injuries a chance to heal and alot of the non-starters a chance to play and kinda "Rest Up" a little after a brutal SEC schedule. Hopefully there wont be any new injuries and the Cats can rebound and win the rest of our games and they get a chance to play on New Years Day
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
11-01-2010, 04:11 PM
Uk 55
csu 10
csu 10
11-01-2010, 05:12 PM
64cat Wrote:Not sure Kentucky's program is at a level where they need to worry about BCS points, but whatever. As far as the scheduling of a game like this, a lot of BCS conference teams schedules games like this.
Everyone keeps talking about UK's schedule, yes I admit, the OOC teams are not the most glamorous but you look at most teams' schedules and you will see several ooc games that are not glamorous.
Kentucky after decades of losing is trying to instill the atmosphere of winning and are starting to succeed at that, if you consider the last four years, which are some of the most successful in school history. With a few marquee wins scattered over that period the next plateau will be to go to higher tier of bowl games.But I don't think that this can be done overnight or even in a couple of years. It will take time and if we are persistent, one day we can be one of the elite programs in the country. So for now I say let's just sit back and enjoy the ride. And to some, NO I am not settling for mediocrity, I consider myself a realist.
Your point is valid, and I understand it. But, I don't agree with the mentality of the scheduling. Everyone knocks the Boise States, Utah's, Brigham Young's, and TCU's of recent times because their schedules are so week and they are not deserving of BCS consideration. Then, you have a team that is at best, a middle of the pack SEC team, and they schedule games like this. I don't agree that this is the right direction. Your point about getting healthy is valid, but it does nothing for a program that is trying to be recognized as legit. This game has no business being on the schedule. I would disagree that the athletic department and the football program is not concerned about BCS points. UK wants to be in a bowl, and a win helps make them Bowl elligible, but the bowl they are headed to is based on schedule strength. This kind of win gets them into one of the first games in the Bowl schedule, where it is tape delayed after re-runs of MASH just to see the game.
11-01-2010, 05:43 PM
Stardust Wrote:Charleston Southern's only victories: North Greenville and Mars Hill
WHO ARE THEY? Is this a High School team??? WHY is this game even on the schedule? A team like UK who needs BCS points schedules something like this? This kind of game gives you a win, but it gives you zero credibility to the voters. A win here and I could see the voters passing even fewer votes their way than if they had not played at all!
I believe they're both D-2 teams.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
LOSERS QUIT WHEN THEY'RE TIRED, WINNERS QUIT WHEN THEY HAVE WON
LOSERS QUIT WHEN THEY'RE TIRED, WINNERS QUIT WHEN THEY HAVE WON
11-01-2010, 09:33 PM
Stardust Wrote:Your point is valid, and I understand it. But, I don't agree with the mentality of the scheduling. Everyone knocks the Boise States, Utah's, Brigham Young's, and TCU's of recent times because their schedules are so week and they are not deserving of BCS consideration. Then, you have a team that is at best, a middle of the pack SEC team, and they schedule games like this. I don't agree that this is the right direction. Your point about getting healthy is valid, but it does nothing for a program that is trying to be recognized as legit. This game has no business being on the schedule. I would disagree that the athletic department and the football program is not concerned about BCS points. UK wants to be in a bowl, and a win helps make them Bowl elligible, but the bowl they are headed to is based on schedule strength. This kind of win gets them into one of the first games in the Bowl schedule, where it is tape delayed after re-runs of MASH just to see the game.
First off even the top of the pack SEC teams plays these type of games, check Bama's schedule. Second the bowl selection for SEC teams is basically based on the number of wins and placement (ie: second, third, fifth, etc.) within the SEC and not schedule strength. With all of this in mind, at this point in UK's program it is in their best interest to build wins and bowl appearances before worrying about the quality of the schedule.
s
11-01-2010, 09:56 PM
64cat Wrote:First off even the top of the pack SEC teams plays these type of games, check Bama's schedule. Second the bowl selection for SEC teams is basically based on the number of wins and placement (ie: second, third, fifth, etc.) within the SEC and not schedule strength. With all of this in mind, at this point in UK's program it is in their best interest to build wins and bowl appearances before worrying about the quality of the schedule.
s
What is it that I am not clear about. UK can ill afford to have these meaningless games on their schedule. They are NOT a winning football program that can afford to take BCS point knocks. Bama, Oklahoma, and other power teams can schedule these games and get away with it because they won't be battling for a 5-5 record. And the last I saw, UK is already an annual bowl appearance team, so no, they should already be past the point of just getting wins and bowl appearance. It's time to challenge themselves to get past the Motor City Bowl! Been there done that - for way too long!
11-02-2010, 12:28 AM
leecoukfan Wrote:I believe they're both D-2 teams.
They are, a few years back Cumberlands in the NAIA beat NG and almost beat Mars Hill. If UK allows more than 10 points and scores less than 56 i'll be completely shocked, this should be an absolute slaughter.
11-02-2010, 12:39 PM
geauxtigers75 Wrote:They are, a few years back Cumberlands in the NAIA beat NG and almost beat Mars Hill. If UK allows more than 10 points and scores less than 56 i'll be completely shocked, this should be an absolute slaughter.
Ahh....but according to David Turner this is an IMPORTANT GAME!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
LOSERS QUIT WHEN THEY'RE TIRED, WINNERS QUIT WHEN THEY HAVE WON
LOSERS QUIT WHEN THEY'RE TIRED, WINNERS QUIT WHEN THEY HAVE WON
11-02-2010, 08:56 PM
Stardust Wrote:What is it that I am not clear about. UK can ill afford to have these meaningless games on their schedule. They are NOT a winning football program that can afford to take BCS point knocks. Bama, Oklahoma, and other power teams can schedule these games and get away with it because they won't be battling for a 5-5 record. And the last I saw, UK is already an annual bowl appearance team, so no, they should already be past the point of just getting wins and bowl appearance. It's time to challenge themselves to get past the Motor City Bowl! Been there done that - for way too long!
After nearly 40 years of watching UK football, I hardly see 4 consecutive non losing years to use 'annual bowl appearance team' to describe UK's program and justify in changing the schedule, AT THIS TIME.
As I stated, the point you are not clear about is the fact that an improved won-loss record will help UK get past the Motor City Bowl much more than a tougher schedule.
And by the way, 4 years in not way too long! Trust me, I've been there and done that............... way too may times, unfortunately.
11-02-2010, 09:35 PM
64cat Wrote:After nearly 40 years of watching UK football, I hardly see 4 consecutive non losing years to use 'annual bowl appearance team' to describe UK's program and justify in changing the schedule, AT THIS TIME.
As I stated, the point you are not clear about is the fact that an improved won-loss record will help UK get past the Motor City Bowl much more than a tougher schedule.
And by the way, 4 years in not way too long! Trust me, I've been there and done that............... way too may times, unfortunately.
2006 Music City Bowl UK 28 Clemson 20 6-5
2007 Music City Bowl UK 35 Florida State 28 7-5
2008 Liberty Bowl UK 25 East Carolina 19 8-5
2009 Music City Bowl Clemson 21 UK 13 8-6
:popcorn:
It's time to step up the non-conference schedule
hh: If it was four years ago since their last bowl appearance, but NOT when you have been to a Bowl in the last four years!:igiveup:
11-02-2010, 10:55 PM
Kentucky - 56
Charleston Southern - 7
Charleston Southern - 7
11-02-2010, 11:44 PM
zaga_fan Wrote:UK wins big.
Even with this game on the schedule UK has a rougher road than Boise, TCU, or Utah
I agree! playing @ FL, Miss St, Ole Miss, and Tenn is much better than playing Wyoming, Colorado St, Louisiana Tech, and Johnson Co Middle school and beating them all by 45.
11-03-2010, 11:52 AM
Stardust Wrote:2006 Music City Bowl UK 28 Clemson 20 6-5
2007 Music City Bowl UK 35 Florida State 28 7-5
2008 Liberty Bowl UK 25 East Carolina 19 8-5
2009 Music City Bowl Clemson 21 UK 13 8-6
:popcorn:
It's time to step up the non-conference schedule
Been to all 4 bowls with the Cats. You obviously didn't comprehend my statement that UK was questionably an "annual bowl appearance team". Thats not a term I would describe them after only 4 years. Alabama, Florida, etc..... in my opinion would be an 'annual bowl appearance team.
Playing a tougher schedule, at this time, would be like some of us old timers would say putting the cart before the horse. The cart would be the result of winning games(ie: bowls) and the horse would be the number of the games won. If UK struggles,as they do now, winning the amount of games needed to advance to higher profile bowls, then "upping the non conference schedule" would be the last thing you would want to do in order to build your program. All this would do is go back to the days of the losing seasons without bowl game invites.
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
