[ZachTheZip]

Does anybody know what games we have lined up after this season?

It appears that in 2010 we will have Syracuse at home, and Indiana on the road. There's still a possibility we're playing Kentucky on the road. 1 open slot, presumably a home game.

In 2011 looks like we're playing at OSU to open the season, a return trip to Cinci, and FIU at home. 1 open home game spot.

[xu9697]

Take if for what it's worth (these type of sites are not always accurate):

http://ncaapalace.com/fbs/akron/ncaaf/futuresched

Personally, I think we are better off playing 6 home games than the gauntlet of next year of 3 BCS road games (MSU, UK, IU).

[Class of 82]

Take if for what it's worth (these type of sites are not always accurate):

http://ncaapalace.com/fbs/akron/ncaaf/futuresched

Personally, I think we are better off playing 6 home games than the gauntlet of next year of 3 BCS road games (MSU, UK, IU).

I'm all for more home games, especially since we will now have a home truly worthy of them.

But I'm more than glad to have the BCS games as well... for several reasons:

1) Kids who commit to playing in an Akron uniform deserve the chance to play quality opponents.

2) Playing quality opponents makes your team and your coaches better over time, and sends the right kind of message both to fans and to potential recruits.

3) I'm much more interested in seeing how the team I cheer for stacks up against a Penn State or Michigan State than I am in watching us play Morgan State, a game that excites me about as much as a tuna salad sandwich.

4) And finally, as the most expensive athletic program--by far-- football bears the responsibility for generating revenue to at least help offset its tremendous cost. The new stadium will sure help attract better draws at home, but it also means you've got to be willing to go get paid on the road, too. If you want to continue as a D-1 program, this is just the reality. And, frankly, I'm okay with it.

Anyways. My two cents.

[GP1]

Take if for what it's worth (these type of sites are not always accurate):

http://ncaapalace.com/fbs/akron/ncaaf/futuresched

Personally, I think we are better off playing 6 home games than the gauntlet of next year of 3 BCS road games (MSU, UK, IU).

I'm all for more home games, especially since we will now have a home truly worthy of them.

But I'm more than glad to have the BCS games as well... for several reasons:

1) Kids who commit to playing in an Akron uniform deserve the chance to play quality opponents.

2) Playing quality opponents makes your team and your coaches better over time, and sends the right kind of message both to fans and to potential recruits.

3) I'm much more interested in seeing how the team I cheer for stacks up against a Penn State or Michigan State than I am in watching us play Morgan State, a game that excites me about as much as a tuna salad sandwich.

4) And finally, as the most expensive athletic program--by far-- football bears the responsibility for generating revenue to at least help offset its tremendous cost. The new stadium will sure help attract better draws at home, but it also means you've got to be willing to go get paid on the road, too. If you want to continue as a D-1 program, this is just the reality. And, frankly, I'm okay with it.

Anyways. My two cents.

Interesting points. Here is my response to your points and respectful disagreement.

1. They deserve to play ONE BCS team per year. Starting out the year 0-4 does nothing for the program.
2. Recruits want to win, not just compete against teams better than they are while losing. Winning records are good recruiting tools. Losing records result in coaches getting fired every three years which continues the cycle of losing.
3. Is it better to lose 45-0 against PSU or win 45-0 against Morgan State? Both are uninteresting, but one gets you one step closer to a bowl which is REALLY interesting.
4. Break the bank one game a year against a BCS team. Starting 0-4 does not bring people to the new stadium.

[ZachTheZip]

Take if for what it's worth (these type of sites are not always accurate):

http://ncaapalace.com/fbs/akron/ncaaf/futuresched

Personally, I think we are better off playing 6 home games than the gauntlet of next year of 3 BCS road games (MSU, UK, IU).

I'm all for more home games, especially since we will now have a home truly worthy of them.

But I'm more than glad to have the BCS games as well... for several reasons:

1) Kids who commit to playing in an Akron uniform deserve the chance to play quality opponents.

2) Playing quality opponents makes your team and your coaches better over time, and sends the right kind of message both to fans and to potential recruits.

3) I'm much more interested in seeing how the team I cheer for stacks up against a Penn State or Michigan State than I am in watching us play Morgan State, a game that excites me about as much as a tuna salad sandwich.

4) And finally, as the most expensive athletic program--by far-- football bears the responsibility for generating revenue to at least help offset its tremendous cost. The new stadium will sure help attract better draws at home, but it also means you've got to be willing to go get paid on the road, too. If you want to continue as a D-1 program, this is just the reality. And, frankly, I'm okay with it.

Anyways. My two cents.

Interesting points. Here is my response to your points and respectful disagreement.

1. They deserve to play ONE BCS team per year. Starting out the year 0-4 does nothing for the program.
2. Recruits want to win, not just compete against teams better than they are while losing. Winning records are good recruiting tools. Losing records result in coaches getting fired every three years which continues the cycle of losing.
3. Is it better to lose 45-0 against PSU or win 45-0 against Morgan State? Both are uninteresting, but one gets you one step closer to a bowl which is REALLY interesting.
4. Break the bank one game a year against a BCS team. Starting 0-4 does not bring people to the new stadium.

1. Akron won't start out 0-4 because 3 of those four BCS teams are terrible. If we lose to Syracuse at home, JD needs to be fired.
2. I won't argue with you that winning is the most important thing to recruits, but a true competitor also wants to be tested against the best.
3. I agree. Blowing out Morgan State gets us closer to a bowl, while also allowing the team to build some depth by getting the 2nd and 3rd teams some playing time.
4. I would rather play bottom-feeder BCS teams than non-BCS teams. The level of competition is the same, but a win over a BCS team looks better, no matter how bad they are (see Syracuse and NC State). If we have the same chance of winning, why not? An interesting point, though, is you saying that starting 0-4 doesn't bring people to the stadium. That's why we need to have more early home games. I'm tired of having a majority of our home games in late October and November in the middle of the week.

[you am i]

Akron can realistically aspire to be a top-level MAC football program, and a top-level MAC program should be able to be competitive with any mid-level BCS team.

I have always admired Fresno State's "anybody, anywhere" mentality. I'd like to see Akron get there someday.

[GJGood]

Take if for what it's worth (these type of sites are not always accurate):

http://ncaapalace.com/fbs/akron/ncaaf/futuresched

Personally, I think we are better off playing 6 home games than the gauntlet of next year of 3 BCS road games (MSU, UK, IU).

I'm all for more home games, especially since we will now have a home truly worthy of them.

But I'm more than glad to have the BCS games as well... for several reasons:

1) Kids who commit to playing in an Akron uniform deserve the chance to play quality opponents.

2) Playing quality opponents makes your team and your coaches better over time, and sends the right kind of message both to fans and to potential recruits.

3) I'm much more interested in seeing how the team I cheer for stacks up against a Penn State or Michigan State than I am in watching us play Morgan State, a game that excites me about as much as a tuna salad sandwich.

4) And finally, as the most expensive athletic program--by far-- football bears the responsibility for generating revenue to at least help offset its tremendous cost. The new stadium will sure help attract better draws at home, but it also means you've got to be willing to go get paid on the road, too. If you want to continue as a D-1 program, this is just the reality. And, frankly, I'm okay with it.

Anyways. My two cents.

I pretty much agree, but I wouldn't just limit the quality opponent tag to BCS schools. There are some well thought of non-BCS schools out there that just may be willing to give us a home and home series, whereas most BCS schools won't travel to InfoCision. I'd love to see a home and home series with teams that regularly finish in the top half of conferences like the WAC, Mountain West, or even C-USA. Schools like Fresno State, Utah, Tulsa, East Carolina and Air Force come to my mind.

Ideally, maybe a mix of a non-BCS you should certainly beat, a big money BCS road game, and two games that could go either way (BCS school or not) one each at home and away, would be the best scenario for my taste.

[johnnyzip84]

1. Akron won't start out 0-4 because 3 of those four BCS teams are terrible. If we lose to Syracuse at home, JD needs to be fired.
2. I won't argue with you that winning is the most important thing to recruits, but a true competitor also wants to be tested against the best.
3. I agree. Blowing out Morgan State gets us closer to a bowl, while also allowing the team to build some depth by getting the 2nd and 3rd teams some playing time.
4. I would rather play bottom-feeder BCS teams than non-BCS teams. The level of competition is the same, but a win over a BCS team looks better, no matter how bad they are (see Syracuse and NC State). If we have the same chance of winning, why not? An interesting point, though, is you saying that starting 0-4 doesn't bring people to the stadium. That's why we need to have more early home games. I'm tired of having a majority of our home games in late October and November in the middle of the week.

Right now we have NO idea how the Syracuse program will be in Marrone's 2nd season, so I'd hold off a little on that characterization. Do I think we can beat them again in the Dome this year? Sure, but mainly because it's hard to turn a football program around overnight. But Marrone will likely have much of his system and a lot more of HIS players come year two. Coaching is such a difference maker I just don't think we can necessarily count that 2010 home game as an "easy" one just yet..

[Class of 82]

Lots of good stuff in this thread!

And I understand your point of view, GP1. I don't want us to open 0-4 either. But I don't think we will. Indiana is a Big-10 team with as many or more good recruits as we get, and they present a challenge. But I think realistically we can beat those guys. I think we can beat a Syracuse, too, even if they improve under their new coach. (We should be getting better as well, dammit!) Ohio State and Michigan State? Well, like I said... the program needs to get paid, so you do what you have to do.

I guess I just refuse to accept that the Akron program is in the same place it was when Lee Owens took us to Nebraska and LSU. And if we are still there, then some heads should be rolling down Brown Street.

I do agree with GJGood about other quality opponents from non-BCS schools. You just have to be careful about making the travel reasonable, since you're looking at home-and-home arrangements. Conference-USA schools seem like a natural target.

Anyway, now that we should have some gate to offer, getting decent home games should be a lot easier for the AD staff.

And I'm with uakronkid. What the heck is up with our home schedule? It seems like we're lucky to get ONE freaking home game before the weather goes south. Every year! That is a real downer for attendance.

[LosAngelesZipFan]

First off, how about that shot by 'bron! Wow. It was like an exorcism. I just told my wife that I am breakin the bank for ticket to a Cavs-Lakers finals game.

Back on topic, I'd love for us to always have one of Syracuse, Pitt, and Cincy every year-- ideally 2 of them, with one at home. Maybe toss Louisville in there too. These are the urban center schools we should aligning ourselves with, imho.

A big ten school would be great yearly or every other year, though I'd much rather get the lower tier ones so that we can have them as home games every other year.

We should also heavily schedule Army and Navy, also home and homes.

And of course, we should be playing UCLA each year. ;-)

Still holding out hopes to some day watch my Zips play in Pasadena.

[GP1]

Interesting thoughts continue.......

I know lots of us want to believe the MAC should be able to win against mid level BCS teams. That just isn't the case anymore. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The MAC is closer to I-AA than mid level BCS. We can't even beat CUSA teams in bowl games anymore.

[Captain Kangaroo]

The MAC is closer to I-AA than mid level BCS. We can't even beat CUSA teams in bowl games anymore.

That is the present situation, but I don't believe it has to be our future.

What was it...5 years ago that the MAC had two Top 25 teams?

The Zips have the best facilities in the MAC. And better than most in C-USA.

The Zips program should now be at the level of the early 2000's Marshall...Miami...BG...Toledo. There absolutely no excuse to be otherwise.

If we reach our potential, we'll be winning the MCB, GMAC or whatever bowl we end up garnering.

[Class of 82]

The MAC is closer to I-AA than mid level BCS. We can't even beat CUSA teams in bowl games anymore.

That is the present situation, but I don't believe it has to be our future.

What was it...5 years ago that the MAC had two Top 25 teams?

The Zips have the best facilities in the MAC. And better than most in C-USA.

The Zips program should now be at the level of the early 2000's Marshall...Miami...BG...Toledo. There absolutely no excuse to be otherwise.

If we reach our potential, we'll be winning the MCB, GMAC or whatever bowl we end up garnering.

Spot-on analysis, Captain. It is little wonder that you have reached your elevated rank.

While I'm not calling for a national championship run, I have long since tired of the notion that Akron football should have aspirations that for the most part amount to a bowl of spit. Don't get me wrong. I've been guilty of the whole Akron/Cleveland/northeast Ohio inferiority complex schtick myself in the past, but I am simply not going to do it anymore. It's just a losing excuse for more losing, as far as I'm concerned.

We have a fine school with excellent academics, a beautiful campus that is growing more beautiful all the time and are building athletic facilities that are first-rate. No more excuses. I've heard enough of them for a lifetime.

GO ZIPS!

[ZachTheZip]

Welcome to the good side, Class of 82!

No more excuses. No mroe moping around feeling sorry for ourselves and blaming it on some stupid "curse". It's time to take control. We have everything we need to create a great athletics program. All that's left is to actually do it. As fans we should be doing what ever we can to progress the situation.

[dreal1scout]

Welcome to the good side, Class of 82!

No more excuses. No mroe moping around feeling sorry for ourselves and blaming it on some stupid "curse". It's time to take control. We have everything we need to create a great athletics program. All that's left is to actually do it. As fans we should be doing what ever we can to progress the situation.

I agree 100%. and PSucks! This WILL BE the year the ZIPS make us all proud!! I will be watching the Penn State game from So. California in a "Penn alumni friendly/owned pub" and I WILL BE PROUDLY & LOUDLY supporting our team.