Being 'Coach' vs. Coach-ing
"He was a commander at the position," the UK coach said. "That’s the best we’ve seen, maybe, in the two years I’ve been here." Liggins provided "an offensive and defensive presence we probably had not had in two years for a good portion of the time," Gillispie said.
I've now read about 27 stories on the DeAndre Liggins mini-controversy and each time, Kentucky coach Billy Gillispie is back-handedly praised for getting the most out of his disgruntled player while allowing a freshman -- albeit a 21-year-old freshman -- to walk all over him.
I'll admit that at first glance Gillispie's move is a strange one. For a widely acknowledged disciplinarian, letting such a flagrant flouting of the unwritten rules of a team go not only unpunished but seemingly rewarded is baffling. What's to stop someone else from giving Coach the bird from the bench when they don't get their milk and cookies next time?
I suppose the answer is: nothing.
And yet, what do players want as much if not more than coaches? To win, and to look good doing it. This is evidenced by the players' apparently unanimous vote to keep Liggins on the team and in the regular rotation. And sure enough, with him stripping opponents of the ball and driving the offense the Cats stormed back from seemingly dead to grab a huge "gut" win over West Virginia in Las Vegas.
Gillispie is a stubborn guy, but he's not a stupid one. He knows that Kentucky's season hinges on Liggins' development into a 30-minute player. So does Liggins. So what you're seeing in Gillispie's quotes and dealings with the skeptical Kentucky media is a clear example of coaching through the paper.
We should be used to it, having had Rick Pitino, one of the game's master media manipulators, honing his dark art for eight years. Though his successor was about as inept at it as his power forwards mostly were at blocking out. But I digress...
Anyone watching at home honestly believe that Liggins "provided 'an offensive and defensive presence we probably had not had in two years'"? He was good, and way better than anything seen this season, sure. But that four-point, two rebound second-half performance was hardly the second coming of Deron Williams. That's just coachspeak.
But good coachspeak. And necessary. Because the leash is short. Coach has to know it, and hopefully Mr. Liggins will remember it. Because one more moment of childlike over-indulgence from his 21-year-old freshman will likely be the last one. Gillispie the coach will take some heat for "caving" to his petulant point guard once, but Gillispie the man won't accept being anyone's bitch twice, especially not a player pining for attention.
1 recs |
73 comments
|
Comments
I think maybe
BCG would really like to avoid another Alex Legion type dismissal. After all if he has to dismiss too many of his recruits then it also reflects poorly on his recruiting ability.
by gright on Dec 3, 2008 1:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
But he has to dismiss SOMEONE this year
We have three recruits coming in for next year.
Carter is graduating.
Rumor says Williams is going off scholarship.
Which leaves one more person to leave the program… and at the current rate PPat is playing, it ain’t going to be him.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
by chirop1 on Dec 3, 2008 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Stewart
I look for him to transfer at semester break. Just guessing.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 3, 2008 4:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tend to agree...
…he can be a good player. Gillispie’s style is just the wrong fit for AJ.
The Heart & Mind of the Big Blue Nation ...
by JL Blue on Dec 3, 2008 4:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Could be.
I actually expect him to leave at the end of the year. But I do think it’s likely.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Two Words
I too have read, seen and heard many comments regarding the Liggins-Gillispie confrontation and two words come to mind:
Insubordination. Of it Confucius said: “Boldness, without the rules of propriety, becomes insubordination.” Bold Liggins definitely was. Typically bold for a youngster (at 21 not as young as one would expect). Inappropriate? Without doubt, but does it rise to insubordination? Probably.
Expediency. Was Coach’s response pure expediency, i.e. sacrificing discipline and order to the temporary victory god.? Or was it balancing short-term abrogation of authority for long-term success and growth of team and individual? Erwin Rommel, the Desert Fox, had it about right I think: "But courage which goes against military expediency is stupidity, or, if it is insisted upon by a commander, irresponsibility."
Irresponsible or wise? Time and performance will tell.
by Wild Weasel on Dec 3, 2008 1:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Good write up Tru....
His comments about Liggins’ performance is one of the reasons why I take what BCG says with a grain of salt. His perception of things seemingly always are the opposite of what a lot of people see with their own eyes. I think Liggins made great strides against WVU and no doubt he will continue to improve. Lord knows with a good point guard UK will be much better.
by SevenRings on Dec 3, 2008 1:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Based on what?
Gillispie the coach will take some heat for “caving” to his petulant point guard once, but Gillispie the man won’t accept being anyone’s bitch twice, especially not a player pining for attention.
Sheesh, how do we know what he will do? For that matter, how do the OTHER players know what he will do? …and that my friends, is the issue.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 1:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Believe me...
It will not be another Pitino-Caracter situation.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 1:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Says who??
It will not be another Pitino-Caracter situation
How do you know? Based on what? I prefer to make judgments and predictions on what I see people do. What people say means nothing. Billy can say all he wants about ‘punishment in practice’. Whatever…. What I saw was him giving a player a complete and total break that required some sort of public punishment.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 4:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't speak for her ...
… but I will speak for me.
Based on the fact that Liggins has no history of disruptive behavior. Caracter not only had that history, Rick Pitino had many people who knew Caracter advise him not to offer him a scholarship. Not only that, Caracter blew many opportunities for a turnaround, and his transgressions were considerably more disruptive than refusing to play after being embarrassed.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That explains one side...
…good point regarding Liggins v. Caracter, but it still doesn’t explain Gillispie. Again, he brought the shining light of publicity on Liggins but failed to respond publicly. That is Gillispie’s issue.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Search our roster...
for a young man named Dusty Mills. Coach G certainly did something in that situation.
Still not a crook!
by TrickyD26 on Dec 3, 2008 6:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea the effort...
That Liggins puts forth into practice everyday, only Coach and teammates know that, and this was a decision made with the team. I can go with that family decision. I have reared teenagers and I know one cannot just throw them out of the family (house) because of immature mistakes. Yes, with tough love attitude, sometimes it gets to the point where one has to say it’s done. I have been there. But as far as I know this was only one mistake by Liggins, and I am sure he regrets it. Kids are kids and it happens.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 11:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice one JL
I will say I was very disappointed and perplexed in Liggins decision to sit the bench Friday night. But none of us know what goes on in practices or off the court when this team gets together to relax. I do know that Liggins worked his butt off to qualify academically.
I am glad that Coach took the situation to the team and let them decide whether or not Liggins played Saturday. We all have heard about the family atmosphere the team has this year and that means a lot to these players and Coach. Even though Coach has no children of his own, his players have always been his sons so to speak. Yes, he is tough in getting the best from his players, but he does have a genuine heart and I see no problem in taking this mistake from Liggins and letting the young man mature further. I am sure he will learn from this error in judgement.
We will never know his punishment but I would not want to be in his position at practices this week.
I fully trust BCG to handle anything that arises.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 1:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
"Worked his butt off to qualify academically"?!!!!
I have to call BS on that one.
The fact that he had to take the ACT test nine freakin’ times to get the MINIMUM acceptable score is proof positive that he did NOT work his butt off, but in fact screwed around in high school, not taking care of business, expecting the world to bow down to him because he has athletic talent. And it’s the same thing he’s doing now, trying to make BCG his bitch.
It is the same collossal immaturity and insolence that makes him think the players get to run the team instead of the coaches, and I am ashamed that BCG has decided to value wins over discipline. It is demeaning to the rest of the team, and demeaning to the program. Can you imagine Rupp accepting that behavior? Unthinkable.
This is the same coach who kicked Mills off the team for smiling the wrong way, but when DeAndre bitch-slaps him in public, he bends over and says, “Thank you, sir, may I have another.” The difference? One of them had more talent than the other, so he got to boss the coach around. You see, if you have talent, you don’t have to obey the rules. You don’t have to study, and you don’t have to play if you disagree with your coach’s substitution patterns.
I truly, truly hope this is not a sign of things to come.
The only part of the explanation I credit is that the proximity of the Vegas game to DeAndre’s former prep school meant that many of his buddies from last year were getting to see him screw up, get pulled, and sit the bench. That’s what got him really steamed; he was wanting to show-boat for his buddies, and instead was looking like a goat. Yes, that’s a powerful influence on a punk kid, and being the father of five punk kids, I know whereof I speak. But if you can’t put that influence below orders from your coach, you do not possess the maturity to play any position for the University of Kentucky, much less the point guard, the coach’s alter ego.
by Ken Pomeroy on Dec 3, 2008 10:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope your punk kids
Eventually turned out ok.
I had some too, but with a lot of patience and tough love they are fine today.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chicago Public Schools
Maybe the worst in the nation. It’s not ALL Liggins’ fault.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 4, 2008 6:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bitter, much????
Sounds to me that your extreme “pro-Porter” status (as we have scene multiple times in your posts) is contributing to your extreme “anti-Liggins” attitude. Yes, what he did was VERY wrong, but BCG is the coach and he makes the calls. Now you are calling (or “strongly suggesting”) that Liggins is “stupid” and a “punk” that thinks the “whole world should bow down to him” and is now “trying to make BCG his bitch.” Pretty harsh synopsis you’ve got there. Could it have anything to do with the fact that Liggins is SO MUCH BETTER than Michael Porter and will more than likely be taking over that starting PG spot sooner rather than later???? Hmmmmmmm…
by kentuckygirl0724 on Dec 4, 2008 9:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Uh, Ken
Obviously, Liggins hails from Big Ten country, and in fact, I followed his recruitment quite a bit. It was always known that he was going to be a tough kid to get qualified. Further, it was somewhat of an open secret that (how do I say this without being mean to the poor kid?) it wasn’t his fault, that maybe no matter how hard he worked, this was not someone who was ever going to score a 25 on the ACT. If you can’t read between the lines here, drop me a line and I’ll send you a note.
As for what he pulled in the game though, different story altogether. I don’t see a reasonable excuse there, and frankly, I’m shocked BCG let it slide. Things like this have a way of piling up quickly. Ask the people in Bloomington, IN about that.
by bigtengeek on Dec 4, 2008 5:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
UK Had A Player In Early 1970's Who Scored 6 On His ACT
He worked hard, studied hard, and graduated from UK.
The ACT is one measure but not the only one. Maybe not even the best one.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 4, 2008 5:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not saying his ACT score determines his capability
Quite the opposite, actually. To put it differently, it didn’t surprise anyone that it took 9 tries. The surprise was the 9th one was enough.
by bigtengeek on Dec 4, 2008 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm From Chicago Area
Well aware of Liggins’ academics. I was quite surprised that he qualified.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 5, 2008 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm confused ...
… you’re telling us the young man is academically challenged not because he was lazy, but because he wasn’t that capable. And then you wonder why Gillispie showed empathy for the young man’s mistake?
That’s curious. Maybe I misunderstood you.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 4, 2008 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see what one has to do with the other
The cause of Liggins’ struggles on the classroom doesn’t really have much to do with his ability to follow directions and walk over to the scorer’s table.
If Billy G gives him a pass for failing a test, ok. But refusing to follow a coach’s uncomplicated instruction? If he has a good reason for that one, I’m certainly unaware.
by bigtengeek on Dec 4, 2008 7:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
just that Coach is aware that this “kid” requires a different type of approach. It seems to be working. I think BCG knows what he’s doing and “we” should all just let him do his job.
by kentuckygirl0724 on Dec 5, 2008 9:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I see the two ...
… as possibly related, although not necessarily so.
My feeling is that Liggins academic struggles can be indicative of other difficulties, both emotional and cognitive. While simple “go in the game” has little room for interpretation, I suspect that Liggins’ embarrassment a the time was the major factor in his act of apparent defiance, which in reality was simply trying avoid more embarrassment in front of his former teammates. That kind of insecurity is common among those with learning challenges. I will suggest that Gillispie’s light touch in this case is likely to be evidence of that fact.
I strongly suspect, though, that if it becomes a recurring problem, things will be different.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 5, 2008 9:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lamar Breakdown on straitpinkie.com
Nice preview of the Lamar Cardinals on straitpinkie.com. Find out about point guard Kenny Dawkins and even who Lamar is named after. I advise checking it.
by catsfanyo on Dec 3, 2008 1:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Encouraging
The article said that Kentucky “blitzed through” the tourney in Vegas. (Then questioned the phrase “blitzed through” in the next line, but whatever – they still used it!) The article also mentions (infers) fear of Meeks and Patterson. Maybe we are already in their head a little??
by kentuckygirl0724 on Dec 3, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I will take
Liggins and his one mistake over Porter and his OVC talent.
by MyBloodRunsBlue on Dec 3, 2008 1:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Porter
He is a capable back-up SG and PG. That’s how he was used in 2006-07.
Not his fault the current coach uses him wrong.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 3, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Uses him wrong
I dont think he is really being used wrongly we just have no one else to man the point until Liggins matures.
If Liggins were capable of handling that much time this second I think you would see Porter in that backup role and I think he would excel at it. As Liggins matures I think you will see Porter being used more as a backup. I only think G is using Porter “wrongly” because there is no other choice right now.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
by davw83 on Dec 3, 2008 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Liggins AND Galloway
Are PG. The OOC schedule is developed so they can learn ON THE COURT.
Porter can be an effective back-up but not starter.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 4, 2008 6:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Capable?
Based on what? The coach uses him wrong??? BCG gets paid millions to coach, I think he knows how to use him better than you do. Porter would be a backup guard in the OVC, god love the kid but he just isnt good at this level.
by MyBloodRunsBlue on Dec 3, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Porter is a back-up at both G positions.
He played that role behind SG Crawford and Meeks and PG Bradley and Jasper in 2006-07 and 2007-08.
He is not a starter. Gillispie uses him wrong.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 4, 2008 6:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry JL....
but I’m gonna have to give you a thumbs down on your angle here.
First of all, we don’t really know the specifics of why Liggins decided not to go into the game. However inappropriate his decision was, his performance would likely vary greatly depending on what repercussions it had. Let’s say for sake of argument that he was embarassed because his old prep school buddies were clowning him already and he knew it would be worse later on if he continued his poor play through the remainder of the game. Obviously this isn’t an acceptable reason for his refusal to participate, but we are talking about an 18 year old kid who has just entered most likely the most stressful period of his life thus far. Having a mental breakdown isn’t the worst thing that could have happened. Gillespie could have embarassed him like he did to Porter in that game last year where BCG refused to take him out of the game no matter how much he screwed up. I think that would have been a much worse situation for Liggins and I’m sure he would not have had the performance on saturday that got him the accolades from BCG, deserved or not.
If you say that Billy’s primary objective is to win games, which most UK fans do, then I would say that Billy made the right decision because they came away with two much needed wins. This situation could have easily turned in to a 5 game losing streak and the collapse of whatever semblance of team chemistry that existed if Gillespie had decided to implement his typical form of martial law in the situation.
GO BIG BLUE!! Long Live Coach G (so long as he wears KY blue)!!!
by bluebloodtoo on Dec 3, 2008 2:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
oops,
i missed the age in your last paragraph. Why is Liggins a 21 yo freshman?
GO BIG BLUE!! Long Live Coach G (so long as he wears KY blue)!!!
by bluebloodtoo on Dec 3, 2008 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to tell
The whole situation seems impossible to call from beyond the computer screen. The whole situation seems odd, who knows why Liggins acted out and what went on behind closed doors. I assume the coaches and team captains talked some sense into him. His refusal may have not even been an outright act of rebellion, it could have been just a immature hissy fit of sorts. Regardless, it seems to have worked itself out. Its hard to judge without knowing all the details….. but hey, thats not stopped us before right?
by BigBlue87 on Dec 3, 2008 2:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think the players' reactions and comments give a better sense of the situation
When I first read about Liggins refusing to go back into the game, it reminded me at once of the Carruth shooting embargo game from the 01-02 season. I really want to give Liggins the benefit of doubt, but something like this is hard to get past as a fan.
As you point out, there might be reason to believe that Gillispie’s comments to the press are being made with a purpose beyond answering whatever question was asked and if his quotes were the only thing we had to go on I would be uneasy about how this whole thing would ultimately play out.
Fortunately that is not all we have to go on – we also have the response of the team and however you choose to interpret what Gillispie says, I think it’s safe to say the players are going to be completely and unquestionably genuine with their comments. The fact that the team has made it clear that they want Liggins involved makes me feel better about this. I know that teammates are going to stick up for each other, but guys like Patterson are no-nonsense dudes and if he says things are okay then I believe him.
Ultimately, nobody except the players and staff really understands the dynamic. I, for one, am going to take Gillispie at face value and trust that whatever problem there was has been dealt with and it’s time to move on.
Also, I’m not so sure Liggins is not getting punished. I believe Gillispie indicated that it would be addressed during practice and not during games. Besides, seeing as how the offense was Liggins not wanting to play, I don’t think benching him for a game is the best route to take. ;-)
"That's not a Sherman tank, it's Frank Thomas!" - Monkeyball
by JLeverenz on Dec 3, 2008 2:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing.
Coaching a team sport really requires two different hats that are often incompatible with each other.
The first is coaching the individual as an individual. That part of the job requires a lot of empathy and a rather touchy-feely skill set to go along with the tough approach. Gillispie has the tough-guy act down, but that isn’t always the appropriate response to a bad decision by a team member. I have had several coaches in my life from everything from sports to sales, and the “Spare the rod” approach doesn’t work nearly as well one-on-one as it does one-on-many.
The other role is that of the team coach, which is essentially defined by the philosophy that each coach wants to instill in his team. Tough teams require tough coaching — there is just no way around it. Tough coaching is not always successful at the individual level, but it is often much more successful at the team level because one of the objectives of that style is to promote an “us against the world” mentality. Unfortunately, if there is no “us,” i.e. a group of individuals who value each other and their contributions to the team, the approach breaks down.
Typically, if a team member misbehaves in a way that hurts the team, the first-blush reaction would be to discipline them. We do not know if Liggins was disciplined or not, but I think it is safe to say that he likely was. What we do know is that the discipline imposed was not the bench. There are probably repercussions for Liggins from rejecting the order from the coach to go into the game, but college coaches have many tools at their disposal for discipline, only the most visible of which is the end of the bench.
Since I don’t know what passed between Liggins and Gillsipie, I can’t pass a cogent judgment on Gillispie’s actions. It isn’t as though DeAndre were acting in a Carruth-like deception, agreeing to play but then unilaterally and apparently without any thought of team consequences failing to do what he did best, i.e. shoot the ball.
Liggins was obviously upset by something, and part of it could have been being unceremoniously yanked from the game in front of all his friends, family and peers from Findlay Prep (remember, Liggins was playing in front of a lot of guys he had just been to high school with). Gillispie evidently concluded after speaking with him that benching Liggins would have damaged the young man’s self esteem to no productive effect. Instead, he most likely decided to play him with the admonition that if he makes a fool out of himself, he has no one to blame but himself. It seemed to work.
Tough love can be had in a lot of ways. I remember whenever Cliff Hawkins or Antwain Barbour would screw up, Tubby Smith would yell at Chuck Hayes — if Hayes hadn’t done anything wrong, Smith would just make up some slight to justify a tirade. That’s because he knew that Chuck did not suffer from fragile self-esteem, and could take anything. So instead of turning the bright light of his frustration and potentially hurting the team more by yelling at guys who just couldn’t take it very well, he used Chuck as a reflector for his passion, a way to get his point across without doing more harm than good.
Now, many will suggest that toughness requires tough love and the more introverted team members just have to learn how to take it. That one-size-fits-all approach does not even work for armed forces, where it is most often used, except as a method to cull those who are incapable of teamwork at any level. The fact that these athletes are here is clear testament to the fact that they can function in the team concept, but smart coaches understand how far to push. I may be giving Gillsipie more credit than he deserves here, but I chose to believe until otherwise demonstrated that he simply did what lots of good coaches have done who are not insecure in either their methods or their job.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 2:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Liggins
I thought he should have been banished from the bench that night and suspended 1 game.
The team thought differently. Gillispie took their advice, not mine.
It paid off (W over WVU).
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 3, 2008 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow>>>>
Did you hurt your back twisting around to find a way to rationalize that ‘non-move’ to punish Liggins?
Look I think there is a happy medium. It lies somewhere from banishment and doing nothing at all (yea I know….we just don’t know what’s going on in practice). Sitting him down one game is a good ‘medium’ choice of punishment. Is Billy that desperate for one solitary win????
Billy chose to make this issue public in the conference after the game…therefore, it placed him in a position that he needed to follow through in a public way. He didn’t chose to do it which hurts him….and the team eventually.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How do you know that...?
Seriously… HOW..???
We, (and that includes you), do not know exactly what happened or what was said. How do you know that Liggins “may” have felt very embarrassed, or even cried after the game and Billy felt it would do more damage to this young man if he suspended him..???
Seriously, it blows my mind how people can get on this blog and “think” KNOW EVERYTHING…
I think you’re just looking for something negative to say after your beloved cardinals got waxed by WKU
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 3, 2008 4:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Billy Coaches a TEAM
If Billy is concerned about an individual and only the individual then maybe he should coach a sport like golf or tennis (as long as it is not doubles).
Really???? UofL lost to WVA?
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You have to coach both.
The team and the person. The two are inseparable. If you don’t believe me, ask a coach and find out for yourself.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
EXACTLY
…but he chose to ‘coach’ only the player and didn’t consider the team with this move. You are making my point.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
once again, you are incorrect...
Billy said in his press conference, that one of the reason his let him play was because he ask his “team” what that wanted… The “team” as a whole, wanted the young man to play…
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 3, 2008 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose the fact ...
… that he consulted the team prior to making his decision must have escaped your attention.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Silly me...
…I thought Gillispie was the coach. I now understand it is done by a committee of 20 yr old students. Interesting.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
by HozeKing on Dec 3, 2008 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This UK team
Is a family. If you have read or heard any of the players comments, you would know.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 11:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And this was before the incident in Vegas
It has been mentioned very numerous times from recruits coming in and the present players.
by kykat51 on Dec 3, 2008 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What a foolish comment.
Please do better.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 4, 2008 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not you. :-) I was attempting to reply to HozeKing.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 4, 2008 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gillispie IS the Coach
and by asking the TEAM what their thoughts were on how to handle the PERSON he was taking care of both. I am sure there is no winning with you here. Had Billy sent Liggins to the locker rooms, suspended him, etc. you would more than likely be hating on him for acting selfishly and not taking the rest of the team into consideration. Cardinals….
by kentuckygirl0724 on Dec 4, 2008 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I never mentioned WVU....
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 3, 2008 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
haha, Nice
Really???? UofL lost to WVA?
Try WKU
by BigBlue87 on Dec 3, 2008 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
when I read this
“Really???? UofL lost to WVA?”
I got really excited…I thought maybe Lousiville really DID lose to West Virginia and I just hadn’t heard they were playing. Wishful thinking!
Well—at least Louisville did lose to Western! I never get tired of repeating that.
by blue kentucky girl on Dec 3, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And...
Western lost to Murray State by 30.
I never get tired of repeating that! ;-)
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
by chirop1 on Dec 3, 2008 6:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and by the way
Louisville was ranked number # 3….hahahahahahahaha…that part is also repeat-worthy : )
I will stop now.
by blue kentucky girl on Dec 3, 2008 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well ...
… We’ll just agree to disagree about this.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
by Truzenzuzex on Dec 3, 2008 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
tonights game..?
does anyone know the line on tonights UK game..?
I can’t find it anywhere….
Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.
by vinceuk1 on Dec 3, 2008 4:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ask Jimmy Johnson...
who coached the Cowboys to Super Bowl wins. He was very public that he had different standards for star players and role players.
by SevenRings on Dec 3, 2008 4:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
BG made the mistake
of mentioning this to the media.Sometimes,you are better off to keep things like this “in house”.Unless there is another angle I am missing.And like the old saying,“Don’t worry about WHAT happend,just see what happens NEXT”.We shall see.
by -Zoso- on Dec 3, 2008 6:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 














