I think he succeeded. He answered the question honestly when he said: "I don't know if we can beat UK".
The reporters seemed to treat the remark as some sort of gaffe, continuing to bring it up. How will the team respond when they hear you don't know if they can beat UK???? Gasp.
But that's stupid. What did you want him to say? That despite the fact we just lost against a Sun Belt conference team at home that we're definitely going to go on the road and beat our SEC rival by three touchdowns?
From my perspective, he answered the question the way he's answered every question since he's taken the Louisville helm. With honesty. We've lost four straight to UK, they've had continuity with coaching and recruiting over the last 6 seasons while UofL has experienced turmoil and decline.
The goal is to catch up to them. Then leapfrog them. So am I mad that Charlie Strong won't guarantee a blowout victory over our rival in his second year of a rebuilding project? No.
Greg Scruggs clearly pissed on whatever fire the reporters were trying to stoke when he took the podium next. When asked about it Scruggs said...
The proof is in the pudding. We haven't beaten them in four years. Coach is calling it how he sees it. He's been honest since he got here.
Q: Is he wrong?
Wah wahnn. So you're telling me there's no guarantee of victory to write about, nor is there a story about discord between roster and coach? I guess we gotta find a new story.I'll never say my coach was wrong.
Charlie Strong isn't a Rex Ryan. He shouldn't be a Rex Ryan. We don't need or want a Rex Ryan.
We need a coach with both feet squarely in the real world. Or more specifically, on the real field, teaching his players the game of football.
I don't know if we can beat UK either. But Charlie Strong's realism has me feeling more optimism for some reason.