All Activity

Yeah, let's focus on finding a good starting QB first

They only play in 20% of the games though. If you look at the starting rotation collectively I would agree. It might not be a single position, but 1 player in basketball probably makes the biggest impact. A QB is much more dependent on his receivers catching their passes, his offensive line giving him enough time, and his defense actually playing defense. Guys like LeBron, Jordan, Kobe, who were elite both offensively and defensively, could put a team on their back. If you take LeBron off that 2007 Cavs team they probably only win 25 games.

I'm always here to help. The MAC does not serve us. The conference is a member organization. As such, the members make the decisions. The problems at Akron are almost entirely of our own making. The MAC commissioner and other schools have not hired a series of mid level, at best, ADs since Mack. Nor did they force us to hire Ianello, Arth and keep on to Bowden too long. Further, the MAC is not forcing Akron to fund the program like it's Grandma's checkbook. Ya, the weeknight games are a laughable joke at this point, but other schools seem to be able to win regardless. If the weeknight games go away, what evidence is there that Akron will be able to maximize that opportunity?

And back to my original point, I don't understand the logic of maintaining a persistently bad football program for the sake of the basketball program. Okay, back to football. ZipsNation is re-entering the Groundhog Day zone.

Exactly, if the MAC demands FBS football, but we determine it's no longer economically viable why would we stay? Not to say that's presently the case, but that time might come. The MAC offers us nothing of value for basketball and doesn't even support soccer any longer. It would be more about finding a conference that more aligns with our strategic direction.

My issue is not entirely about the one bid conference issue. It's more about the demands of a conference that does not serve us well.

What would make Akron attractive to a better basketball conference? Meh game attendance (6th in MAC?); zero NCAA tournament wins; smallish media market, particularly since there's largely zero coverage of the Zips by the Cleveland media; and a basketball budget that would be middling if not in the lower half of many other leagues. Bud Wentz's money can only do so much - and what if his financial business faces a serious downturn? I get the frustration with the one-bid issue, but the Zips have had that bid more often then not in recent years and done nothing with it.

Baseball starting pitchers.

In no other sport is a single position as important as QB is to football. How can the staff be in its fourth year and not have a viable backup when they know one will be needed? That's a failure of leadership plain and simple.

Why would it have to be a consistent multi-bid conference that Akron would have to go to? I would think everyone would agree that the MVC is better than the MAC for hoops. The MVC teams are typically seeded better in the tournament, win more games in the tournament, and on occasion get a 2nd bid. That would probably be more Akron's level for hoops. MAC hoops have drastically declined since covid and there are no signs of it improving anytime soon. The other schools are too busy checking the couch cushions searching for every last nickel and dime to throw at FBS football.

I'm not suggesting that there's a perfect conference for UA sports. I'm proposing that a conference that makes demands that are inconsistent with UA's needs may not be a good home, or needs to change to become a better home for its schools. That's even more true with the current direction of college athletics.

So,.you all know I find the number of support personnel and people running around with GoPro's on the field more than a little bizarre. In fact, I find it obnoxious. Yesterday I was at the WF vs GA Tech game. For the coin toss, there were four captains per team. There were 10 people with cameras filming it. What the Hell is going on in the world of college football that this happens? Is this what the money is being spent on?

Eh, I didn't want to repeat my thoughts from another thread. My beef is that he hasn't gotten his dual-threat to run his offense & here we are in Year 4.

Pick one of the multiple bid leagues. If fans want a multiple bid league, I have presented them. Pick the one you think is the best fit to be one of the multiple bid teams. My opinion is this. I go to 1-3 Wake Forest basketball games a year during the ACC schedule. Wake is a bottom third ACC school and I'm going to put this as kindly as possible. They would run Akron out of the gym. Akron is exactly where it belongs.

Yes. Thanks for asking. At least the MAC as currently constructed, especially if it demands what it currently does.

You must be tired of winning as well. I'll list the conferences that had multiple bids last year and you tell me which one we can finish with a winning record. This list is from Wikipedia. BidsConferenceSchools 14 SEC: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Tennessee, Texas, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt 8 Big Ten: Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Oregon, Purdue, UCLA, Wisconsin 7 Big 12: Arizona, Baylor, BYU, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Texas Tech 5 Big East: Creighton, Marquette, St. John's, UConn, Xavier 4 ACC: Clemson, Duke, Louisville, North Carolina 4 Mountain West: Colorado State, New Mexico, San Diego State, Utah State 2 West Coast: Gonzaga, Saint Mary's The MWC and West Coast are not serious options because of travel. That leaves us with even less serious options in the Big Ten, SEC, Big East, Big 12 and ACC. All but the Big East require football membership. That leaves the Big East. Let's see, St. Johns plays in the most famous arena in the world. Marquette plays in an NBA arena. Xavier has their own palace. UCONN is a national power. I guess once every 10 years we could beat Creighton. Does leaving the MAC still sound like a good idea?

This conversation invariably brings the discussion about how UA can't be in the MAC without an FBS football team and the impact that could have on the basketball program. I say it's about time we started considering other alternatives to a one bid conference where half of the schools make no effort to put out a reasonable basketball program. I've seen enough Michigan directionals for the rest of my life.

I wish my great beef was the backup QB. He hasn't had a decent starting QB. The bar for fan expectation of Zips QBs is extremely low.

So probably not. But they're a lot closer to popping an FCS playoff berth every now and again than they are to an FBS bowl game.

This is where my greatest aggravation with JoeMo lies.

And with our best players leaving via the TP every year what else should we expect? With the current state of college football I think the best we can hope for is the possibility of catching lightning in a bottle once in a while.

You're right, it's not about the money. The central question is whether or not they want to be in the MAC. If that answer is no, it puts a lot of pressure on other programs that are performing well. The other question is, who would want Akron and why? If the answer is yes, they need to figure out how to get more competitive in 2026 and beyond.

Seems like a smart decision as the University tries to right size its footprint.

Wherever they can be competitive. Think they could compete against the S.Dakota, N.Dakota and Montana teams among others, in FCS? Personally I would question that also.

Not about 'saving money' after lierally decades of this. They have to play at a level where they can be consistently competitive. Now they are not.