Hilltopper

Nice work. I guess that answers my question. I hope Bowden is able to move the program to the next level.

If there is no announcement tonight does it impact us tomorrow on early signing day?

Maybe Williams can use some leverage to get Bowden to make some changes to the coaching staff.

Unless I am mistaken next year is the final year on Bowdens contract. Did he do enough this season to merit an extension? If he doesn't what impact will it have on recruiting? Based on what I am seeing tonight, we still have a long way to go to be a consistent winner.

Yeah?

Balsy, you totally lose all credibility in your posts due to your constant use of ad hominem attacks in your responses to the other members of the forum. Try sticking to some actual points of discussion.

A good read. It appears to me that the Zips are just the type of program he is begging for. Unfortunately when it comes to the post season the other style of play prevails most often. Size and speed with an emphasis on defensive prowess will beat finesse if the referee swallows his whistle. For what ever reason we seem to have culture in the USA that in the post season we accept the concept of "just let them play".

It seems that their fans reflect the personality of their coach. https://247sports.com/college/tennessee/Board/102675/Contents/Lane-Kiffin-still-a-total-jerk-54603424

It disincentives the exact things you want it to do. There are already remedies available to prevent ISP's from blocking or throttling content. Lawsuits can be filed using existing FCC regulations that were in place before NN was enacted. If the ISP's try to throttle the public outcry will be tremendous. More government regulation is not always the answer to every possible issue in life.

Where in the NN regulations did it say that multiple ISP's had to expand into underserved markets? If anything the NN rules discouraged expansion. Here is a pretty good explantion of both sides of the issue. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/28/one-law-professors-overview-of-the-confusing-net-neutrality-debate/ "The most notable aspect is that net neutrality has become a social justice cause. Progressive activist groups of all stripes have come to believe that net neutrality is essential to and allied with their causes. I do not know how this happened – but it is frustrating, because net neutrality is likely adverse to many of their interests. One hears lots of stories about how activists are using the Internet, and how small, typically minority-owned, businesses rely on the Internet and therefore on net neutrality. The reality is that there is exceptionally little reason to believe that any ISP would ever do anything to hurt these users. The general animating fear of net neutrality is that ISPs want to move to a “pay-to-play” model, charging those putting content online to deliver that content to users. But there simply isn’t enough revenue to be generated from charging most of these users to make it worth the ISPs time (not the mention the political costs that ISPs would face if they did). Moreover most of these users do not deliver their own content, but instead rely on third party providers. There are many stories of people producing video content who are worried that net neutrality will make it impossible for them to reach users – despite the fact that most of them use YouTube to deliver the content. And, as I said above, if net neutrality rules decrease investment they hamper efforts to close the digital divide, harming already marginalized and disadvantaged communities. The most frustrating of these stories, which relates back to the innovation theories above, is that there is a pervasive belief that net neutrality is needed in order for entrepreneurs to enter the market. The concern is that ISPs would charge start-ups a prohibitive amount in order to get access to ISPs’ customers on terms sufficient for start-ups to compete with firms such as Google and Netflix. This is tragic because almost all of today’s big content providers – the Googles and Netflixes – have invested massively in “content delivery networks.” These are networks that allow their content to bypass almost the entire Internet, dramatically improving performance. In other words, they have already paid for prioritization – they just haven’t paid ISPs for that competitive benefit. Start-ups don’t have access to (or need to pay a pretty penny for access to) services such as these. Allowing ISPs to charge for prioritized performance would give start-ups a lower-cost alternative to CDNs that could give them a competitive advantage (or help remedy a competitive disadvantage). The reality is that most start-ups don’t need that sort of performance assistance (so would not be harmed) – but those offering complex-enough services would have access to a valuable new offering. It also must be noted that for many (most?) people net neutrality is about regulating ISPs. ISPs are reviled. They are known for bad customer service, they always seem to be too slow, they cost too much (especially bad since they’re mere middlemen, not providing anything of value – just access to content providers’ things of value), and when anything on the Internet isn’t working it’s their fault (e.g., if Netflix is down, users blame their ISP, not Netflix). In this context, “net neutrality” is about “having the FCC regulate Comcast so it will have better customer service and I’ll have someone to complain to when Comcast raises its rates.” Never mind that net neutrality has nothing to do with this. This is why many people are in favor of Title II, utility-style, regulation for ISPs. We don’t like ISPs so we should regulate them; end of story. The last comment that I will make is how I think about this entire issue: it’s just the latest example of a fight between bilateral media oligopolists. “Big content” and “big distribution” have always fought over how to split the rents they extract from consumers, users have always distrusted distributors, and content providers have always used this to their advantage. From this perspective, the net neutrality rules are pure rent seeking by a content/edge industry that had largely captured the previous FCC."

The very issues that NN will supposedly regulate are already being manipulated by the likes of Goggle and others. All NN does is let the government decide who the winners and losers will be instead of a free market. More lobbiests and bribes to politicians. https://www.forbes.com/sites/fredcampbell/2017/05/03/the-truth-about-net-neutrality-the-left-and-google/#185730fe3745

https://www.ohio.com/akron/sports/university-of-akron/on-the-record-canton-charge-builds-big-lead-cruises-to-113-102-win-over-grand-rapids-drive "Former University of Akron standout Zeke Marshall performed well for Grand Rapids (7-10). The 7-footer logged 14 minutes off the bench, scoring 12 points on 5-of-6 shooting from the floor. He collected three rebounds and threw an assist while blocking one shot"

I wouldn't be surprised to see Lolla leave Louisville. The money train that was feeding the soccer program there went off the tracks when the Addidas story hit.

E-Man all the way. If you walked up to him and called him poke, I doubt he would respond. E-Man or just E.

This week is exam week. The players need extra time to concentrate on their class work. As far as whether it's a good idea for teams like Miss. Valley St to play this kind of schedule, I think it is a great way for the school to raise money to be able to fund their athletic programs. With the internet it is entirely possible to travel and complete their studies.

They used rubberbands around the t-shirts tonight. It's a good thing NW Akron was heads up this time.

You start a petition and I will sign it.

Great crowd at the party tonight.

Lucas had been playing against the guys over at the rec center during open gyms before the season. The coaching staff took a look and decided he could help the team during practice. He has turned out to be a pleasant surprise.

Glad you guys donate to the Z-fund too. I pay by the monthly payment plan on my credit card. It makes it easy to contribute. I'm sure many on here could easily afford $50-100 a month. You can even designate which sport you would like to support. The majority of my donation goes to basketball. I would highly suggest that for anyone who wishes to support Zips athletics. It's also a nice tax deduction.

This came in todays mail. I always pay my gambling debts. No matter who on this board won the bet, tbe real winner was Zips Athletics.

I talked to Isaiah at the JAR just after Thanksgiving. He is in Akron and has decided to not go back to play for the team in Sweden. It was not a good fit for him. His agent is working on a few other options including the NBA E-league.

If you ordered tickets through the Zips ticket office they are available to pick up between now and 10 am Friday at Infocision box office. If you wait until Saturday they will be available at Ford Field gate C starting a 9:30 am.

A split second after that snap shot Sayles got smacked right in the face by that UTC defender. Should have been a foul and maybe even a flagrant 1.