Palmetto Proving Grounds

People, seriously. Saul Smith started over Rajon Rondo.

No way Burnham comes close to that.

Mark Love was better and should have played. I'm sorry, it's almost physically impossible to have a worse LB than what we had playing. He was far from the best we had.

I still remember when we played UCF when they had Daunte Culpepper. Daunte dropped back into the endzone on one play, and Shane had a clear path to him. Shane hit him as hard as he could, and should have sacked him. Daunte, though, didn't seem bothered by him. He just stood there, surveying the field, while Shane was desperately holding onto him trying to tackle him. Daunte finally went through his progressions and threw the ball and completed it.

OK. People have opinions and most are different.

I agree, but he took a walkon spot from someone else. Speaking as someone who's been through the walk on process in the past, there is nothing more frustrating than being better than someone that the staff ends up taking. Also, if I remember he got to play in some games and got passes thrown to him when other guys were better.

He's still better than Shane Burnham, and would have been a better MLB than Burnham.

Scotty also did well on the scout team. Ask any player. He was a star in high school anyways, there is nothing to support we had better walk-on candidates. He's not a good example.

I think he caught one pass. Who was better? Did they work harder? Perform better in practice? We're talking about a walk-on, there is not enough info to support, or disprove the argument. Hawkins, Burnham, Tommy Bowden, hell, even Saul Smith, who I didn't think was all that bad, are better examples.

yeah let's eliminate all opinions on football unless they are delivered by former players.

Yes, but if I recall there was no 1 else to play that is not daddy ball

Scotty did not take PT away from anyone, he did not embarrass the university on the field. I cannot believe his name is even being brought up. It's not what the thread was about. We're talking about people who actually started, affected whether games were won or lost.

So far, there are 2 that stand out: Shane Burnham, whom I believe Groovy when he said we had a transfer who was better. I too, remember him trying to tackle Culpepper. I don't think Culpepper even noticed him. Anyways, there is no way we did not have a backup safety who would have made a better MLB.

The other is Saul Smith. I did not know he started over Rondo. That brings it to an entirely new level. That is disgracing the university right there. Inexcusable, imo, for Saul to start over an NBA HOF'er.

Cody Hawkins was pretty bad also. I just don't think he was as bad as Burnham. And, I don't know that they had a star behind him or anything. I just am too unaware of their depth chart to make a judgement on that.

Im still laughing. I don't remember him, must have been horrible

That's a good analogy.

Saul Smith is/was a punk but you have to give him a few props. He wasn't completely indebted to his dad. The guy was all state in Georgia and had other major offers. He was a two or three year starter on some UK teams that were damn good- one title and 2-3 SEC championships. I believe he still ranks in the top 10 all time at UK for assists and possibly steals and that ain't too shabby.

I am not positive, but I believe he bounced around for a year in the NBA before getting into coaching. Regardless, he was a servicable point guard at a very high profile school an he did better in that situation than most would have. But damn I used to "intensely dislike his @ss." Played with him at George Felton basketball camp in the late 80's and he was a little $hit them too.

mark love was a few years after me in high school but he was a hoss. it pained me to see him play behind burnam.