My initial reaction was to be really pissed about how competitive it was, feeling like Mullen is just not getting the job done. Like a lot of others, I saw it as a second game in a row that was too close versus a team we had out-manned.

But as I look at UK's other results, it seems clear our stats are very similar to what you see from their games versus Louisville, UF & SCar. Really, the only time they appear to have been beaten worse was by Bama, a team that has done nearly the same or worse to 6 other teams this year.

So, here I sit, still frustrated and questioning whether Mullen is the right guy right now, but also intellectually recognizing that I may need to take a deep breath and try harder to look at it objectively. I'm just not thinking the UK game is the "barometer of success" (or lack thereof) that I at first thought it was.

Yes, Mullen had 2 weeks to prepare, but then, so did UK. That's a wash, as far as I'm concerned. And the more I consider things like the big momentum shift that occurred when the refs missed the facemask on the Prescott sack, the more I'm inclined to give Mullen a pass on this game. 21-10 and still driving late in the 3rd Q is a whole different ballgame than 21-12 and having to watch Bell let us down yet again with that horrible free-kick, giving them great field position.

Part of me in very concerned we're gonna miss out on the right guy as HC if we keep waiting for Mullen to show us something more. But perhaps a bigger part is feeling like he gets to stay if he at least beats Arky & Ole Miss, adn is competitive versus SCar, aTm, & Bama. I might could even stomach one more not-so-pretty loss to Bama. But a loss to either Arky or Ole Miss, or 2 ugly losses in 3 of the others will probably seal-the-deal for me.

I'm guessing that's probably how a whole bunch of us feel right now. Where am I wrong?