VolunteerHillbilly
Spike Drinks, Not Trees
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2005
- Messages
- 40,790
- Likes
- 15,233
Clearly you’re blind or refuse to look at the big picture.
Program was already in bad shape before Pruitt arrived.
The players aren’t SEC caliber and doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
Not a lazy take. Had Locke not pulled the most boneheaded play of all time and throw the ball OB instead of falling down or taking a sack...keeping the clock running or forcing UK to use their final TO, UK doesn't sniff a TD at the end.Lazy take.
UK should have been up 21+ when the terrible call happened at the end. UK was the one that allowed Mizzou in the game.
Vandy game was pure trash from UK. We got up a score and made little effort to do anything offensively. But to act like Vandy let it slip away is silly.
Not a lazy take. Had Locke not pulled the most boneheaded play of all time and throw the ball OB instead of falling down or taking a sack...keeping the clock running or forcing UK to use their final TO, UK doesn't sniff a TD at the end.
Mizzou played a meh game. But go back and look at how many points UK left on the board up until the last 5 minutes. UK did everything to lose for 45 minutes, and then Mizzou did everything to lose in the 4Q.
OK, but the bottom line is if Locke holds onto the ball forcing UK to use their last TO then UK, most likely, loses that game.
I'm way too lazy, but somebody should go back and check Vandy and Missouri's recruiting rankings the last three or four years and compare them to our current roster. I'll bet we have more talent (@ least on paper) than both. Maybe it's just the learning curve, but I think coaching is the difference this year.He isn’t the one who is blind. Are you suggesting Vandy, and Missouri are full of elite players because neither game was competitive?