The tone of the game was set by the officials in the first quarter.

First, there was the touchdown that wasn't, which occurred right in front of me. I had a much better view of that play than the official who could not see the plane of the end zone from his position. I could. While the receiver's foot was in the end zone the ball never crossed the plane. The replay, which they showed on the screen at the stadium clearly showed that, but the replay officials apparently had their SEC glasses on and only saw what they wanted to see. While not as bad as the four-yard safety this was pretty outrageous.

Second, there was the fumble that wasn't. While I did not have as good a view of this one, it was a strange overturn of a call on the field. They did play the replay on the big screen once, and it really seemed there was not enough evidence to overturn. It certainly looked like the ball was coming out before it hit the ground, and certainly not enough evidence to say it didn't. Again, I suspect if this had been an Ohio fumble under identical circumstances the replay results might have been different.

If these two calls had gone the other way, the whole tone of the first quarter would have been different, and Ohio would have gained some early confidence that I think would have made for a tighter game. I know others disagree, but I've always felt that these psychological factors can play a huge role in games of this type. I didn't really see our offense as being that much outmatched by UK's defense, but that the offense was too tentative and was less "well oiled." That is, I don't think the various parts of the offense have worked together long enough to have really jelled. The dropped passes was but one indication of that. In only one case did I think the drop pass was directly due to an intimidation by the UK defense. I think that will come as the season progresses. If I was NIU I'd be worried about a certain date in Athens in November.

Overall, I thought OHIO played tough and disciplined football. Though Vick, I think, is more athletic and quicker than Sprague, the team chemistry seemed better with Sprague at the helm. I expect him to start against Marshall, with Vick still getting a lot of playing time. The D looked very good and actually seemed to get stronger late in the game, probably after they lost the SEC jitters. You can tell that the defense is still getting used to the more aggressive scheme that is being used this year, and it looked to me that occasionally assignments were getting blown. On the way back to our hotel from the stadium, about a mile and half walk, a nice UK fan start a conversation with me and the first thing he said was a shout out to our defense. He said, "that's a very good defense you have. I was very impressed." Says it all in my mind.

Kentucky looked to me overall as a much better team than the one I saw last year that lost its opener to WKU. I was particularly impressed with Towles. He is a big, mobile QB who is a threat to run and does well seeing open receivers. My impression was that his receiving corps was less talented than he. I suspect UK may make it up to the middle of the pack in the SEC this year rather than the usual fighting it out for last place with Vanderbilt.

Seriously? You start the entire thread out by laying "the tone" on the officials? Wow! We were overmatched, simple! We battled, the defense dug in and played well. The Offense was what many on here thought it would be early on. But to start out "throwing" officials under the bus. That's non-sense.

I agree with DCF, here, not OCF. I also agree with Billy that the officiating had no effect whatsoever on the "tone" of the game. After the initial drive, the defense really only had one one bad play, the long TD run, where they just got caught out of position. Other than that, any gains by Kentucky were due to good things done by Kentucky, and not to bad things done by Ohio.

Even if the one TD had been called down at the 1 foot line, I think Kentucky probably would have scored anyway, so that call, right or wrong, had no impact on the game.  As for whether it affected the "tone" of the game, I would say, definitely, no. This team has too much unity and focus to be affected that way. Last year's team did get affected by things like phantom safeties, but I don't expect to see that this year, at all, ever. If they do get a truly terrible call this year, I'd expect them to just come back out playing harder.

What killed us early was not stopping UK on 3rd and long. Both of their scoring drives they had had big 3rd and long conversions. On the first drive they may have had 2