LosAngelesZipFan

Elton's MAC discussion has a bit about Akron's atrocious scheduling. Seems like we tried the v low SOS last year to produce a gawdy record tack last year and got nothing for it (except some press, but I don't think being the only school to win 26 games and not get any post-season action is a recruting plus since it makes us look like a bunch of small-time mokes with no juice anywhere).However, I really do trust KD with this-- the man has a plan. I'm assuming that this is a 3-5 year process to upgrade the schedule as the team upgrades, and over time he will work in perennial top-10 teams that we have a shot of knocking off. I certainly hope it is-- I hate watching Can't play UNC or Duke. I have got to believe that to a recruit, having games like that is far more impressive than NCA&T. We need those "top note" games to point the program in the right direction, IMHO. I'd love to see us get into cycle of playing one top name program a year (UCLA, Duke, etc.). I can accept the schedule now but I hope it really upgrades over the next few years. I like Capn's idea of a tournament, perhaps even with Can't. Could we do a "King James Classic" and have it be a fundraiser for LeBron's foundation? Maybe Akron and Can't each host a game then the championship is at the Q? Couldn't we get top teams in if we paid them?

That's AWESOME to hear!! After a disappointing fall of football and the rumors swirling around the Fingerhut thing, it is great to see preparations underway to get DIRT MOVING!!Can someone on campus please take some photos and post them!

BTW, what happened between UA and Goodyear? They should be ponying up to support the stadium with some major support given the level of investment they are getting from the community. I love that they are staying but am really distressed to hear that UA and Goodyear-- which should be its largest corporate benefactor in terms of geography and specialty-- aren't on the same page. Seems like that would be Job1 for the UA administration if in fact it's the case. Anyone know anything?

I just read some of the forums listed above-- I am actually kind of heartened that there were so many pro-UA comments, people willing to call out the negative posters as being the ill-informed, backwards-looking, self-defeatists they are.Is there a rendering of the new Coleman project available? It'd be great if they could demo Carroll and Memorial as part of that-- the U would be well-served to remove all those buff brick, 50's era buildings over the next decade and completely re-create the inner campus.

CJ11 played with fire last week-- the way he scrambled down field and blocked on every running play was inspirational if not particularly smart. This game, he was deer in headlights all night and every play. Did anyone else see that look, like he had been drilled repeatedly and we were down by 30 but instead he had taken a few licks and we were down by 7? The lack of leadership and fire was incredibly apparent.So here is why it's JD's fault-- why would you wait until the beginning of the 4th to bring in CJ17? When it was clear CJ11 was not going to have game, he should have brought CJ17 in for a series or two in the 2nd and see what happens. Bringing him in for 1 series, late in the game, deep in our own territory is not going to set anyone up for success. That was just stupid.

Yes, much better team effort all the way around. I LOVED seeing the BW/AA hammering-- that was the big difference in the game I think and hopefully a preview of what the next few years could be like. It would be like Mack and Byner. I was really impressed with the way BW picked the holes and then hit them-- and of course I am also wondering why he wasn't the feature back from game 1. And it was incredible to see AA break it on the left side for a big gainer and just miss the end zone. Where was THAT the rest of the season??Another big difference in the game was Kas and some others actually catching the passes thrown their way, such as for the TD.As far as JD, he clearly was fired up to be home and felt pressure to show something. I loved that he was (rightly) fired up about the hit on Jones and think the rest of the team fed off of that. Again, where was THAT the rest of the season??We did a great job of containing their great RB and were fortunate that their QB suuucked-- he just missed alot of opportunities towards the end of the game when we seemed to be losing focus.The jury is still out for me on JD-- but I think getting a solid win eliminates any chance that they would term him this season (assuming Miami is not a total debacle). Last season was a massive disappointment (partially due to overly inflated expectations, granted) and this season is, well, what this season was. However, I don't think he survives another aimless, meandering season with major breakdowns in discipline and long periods of implosion. I really want to be a big supporter-- really and truly. But next year needs to show real improvement in all aspects and not just more 'whack a mole' by JD (that is, being able to only focus on the burning issues while everything else moves sideways).

V funny w the linkI would love to read the rant on the issues with the university...

Under "normal" circumstances, I would tend to agree that you give JD another year to pull it together-- but these are not "normal" circumstances. UA is about to make a huge investment in this program--HUGE. The stadium project is the culmination of 20+ years of discussion and planning. I remember talking to Bill Muse about it, and the hope was that Faust could put together a few winning seasons to give the admin air cover to make the investment.Well, here we are. Dr. P, who has been an incredible and truly transformational leader for UA, is now taking this on-- but the dynamic of the quality of the team justifying this huge investment is still incredibly important.It still comes down to this-- based on what we are seeing now, do we have reason to believe that JD can have this program going in the right direction when the ribbon is cut on the stadium? If you don't feel like you have the stud coach you need, the one that can make that investment pay off, you are far better ripping the band-aid off now, rather than waiting another season. I have been a JD supporter in the past-- but the mission control board is blinking red right now. The team is clearly not fighting for him anymore-- and worse, there appears to be a growing discipline issue. This is more than a "oh man, they just threw another stupid screen pass" discussion. This is a "do I entrust the huge investment being made in the stadium to this coaching staff based on what has been demonstrated through 4 seasons, because if I believe there to be a significant possibility that I will need to make change, it is better to make it now so the new coach as a couple of seasons to right the ship before the stadium opens" discussion.Assuming he goes ofer the rest of the way, firing him needs to be seriously considered. If the stadium is getting delayed until 2010, you can maybe afford to give him another season that is truly make or break.My gut tells me you pull the plug now, unless the team shows something in the next 2 games-- not necessarily wins, but real competitive fire and a solid plan of attack. If these last 2 games play out on a linear projection from where we are now, I think you have to make the change, IMHO.

Just got online to get the score...wow. Ugly. Horrible. The starting QB suspended? WTF? I did not see the game, but it sure feels like this team has just quit on JD and the situation is out of control. What the hell happened? I thought the days of us getting blown out by MAC teams would have been behind us. This continues the downward progression of the past few weeks-- someone please make an argument for keeping the current coaching staff in place assuming the next 2 games play out in this pattern. If you were Proenza, what would you do?

The stadium is not a done deal until it is getting built. The site is not completely controlled and the funds are not fully raised. The state can still interfere which is why the merger discussion, and its timing, is disturbing on any number of levels.You know, if we can collectively get behind Zippy to kick every other mascot's ass, why don't we do an online petition for Fingerhut or something that demonstrates the demand that UA control its own destiny.

I have re-read the paragraph below 15 times but still don't quite get what he's implying-- simply a sarcastic remark about the stupidity of a merger with CSU or hinting that the merger would in fact kill the stadium project all together? Could that happen? My understanding is that expenditures like this get reviewed by a state board-- could they in effect put the stadium on hold until the merger discussions play out? This would be disastrous for fundraising in the near term, needless to say.Inside the Mid-American Conference with Elton AlexanderPosted by Elton Alexander November 01, 2007 12:01PMInside the Mid-American Conference with Elton AlexanderAfter being in and out of the Mid-American Conference race the last three weeks, count the Akron Zips back out following their loss at Buffalo.AP fileAkron coach J.D. Brookhart wants to see more big plays from his teamIncluding the 2005 season, coach J.D. Brookhart's Zips are 10-10 in league games, 16-18 overall and struggling with an offense averaging less than 20 ppg. This from a program that won the 2005 MAC Championship. "We have not had a lot of 'big hit' plays," Brookhart said. "We have not made those plays that hurt you."That's because, like most rebuilding teams, the emphasis is on "big plays" instead of "basic plays" -- those plays where a team lines up and says, "I'm better than you."Instead, many offenses are designed to find a way to trick the defense. The result is every big win is matched by a "How did that happen?" loss. It's a pattern that has held true at Akron from Gerry Faust to Lee Owens and now Brookhart.Highly touted recruiting classes at Akron have never fully developed on the field, and despite a high quality marketing program, a consistent fan base has not materialized in the stands. But don't worry about that. With talks of a Cleveland State-Akron merger looming, Akron president Luis Proenza's new football stadium due in 2009 won't be of much use for the Cleveland State Zips.

This is an excellent point-- and I think argues for making a change sooner rather than later. You want that stadium to open with a program that is in a position to WIN, and you would want to give the next coach at least 2 season to get it going (particularly if it appears that the program is in total meltdown). And, to your point, right now is the absolute most attractive moment ever for Akron football given the stadium, the field house, and the campus improvements--it's actually a very good situation for a hot young coach.I am NOT totally throwing in the towel here on JD, just saying that that he needs to show he can turn this thing around NOW, give real reasons to believe that the ship can be righted, or the looming reality of a new stadium may force the admin to make a decision now that would usually take another season of losing to make. And if we go ofer the rest of the way, it would be the right decision to make now rather than wait another year and hope things get better. There's just too much at stake given the investment being made...

Yes, Akron loses in a merger with CSU. Political muscle will win out. And then Can't will lose out.So, the only logical thing is an Akron-Can't merger. That would be a boon for the Akron area-- and create a potentially world-class institution, in a way that CSU-Akron just wouldn't--very little synergy in that, it's purely a power play by Cleveland to get more resources funneled into downtown. But Akron and Can't could really achieve something if they worked together.

I think there is going to be some serious discussion about JD's future-- his contract is not that expensive to buy out and he could always be re-assigned (which is what they did to Faust) and wait for him to leave.The issue, as I argued in another post, is trajectory. The U is about to make a huge investment in this team, solely for this team. If we make that investment and end up with the same performance as we currently have, then that investment will look to have been a waste of money. Further to the point, there is still a good bit of fund-raising left to go to fully cover the cost of the stadium-- the U needs momentum in this program to get the dollars to flow. This is one of the key reasons Lee Owens got bounced-- because the administration didn't want to "waste" the momentum the field house would give to the program-- they had lost confidence that he could leverage that investment and make a solid return on it. The stadium investment is so much more significant--particularly given the merger and consolidation talk-- that they can't hope that things will work out if there is clear evidence that it won't. There are alot of things to like about JD, but his negatives are now the bigger pile. If he goes ofer the rest of the way, I think they will have to give serious thought to a change because making that change now will at least give us a shot of having a new coach re-ignite the program. I personally hate the thought of starting over and am bitterly disappointed that we are in this position--mostly because he seemed to be generating real progress in the program. But in hindsight, the progress was illusory, based more on luck (winning the MAC east through a fortunate tie-breaker, getting an amazing series of breaks against Northern) and good PR (top rated recruiting classes that produce no qualitative impact versus other schools). I really want to be supportive of JD-- but something is off. The enterprise clearly isn't gelling. The whole is not equal to the sum of the parts. Everyone on this board feels it and knows it-- and it's not just the disappointment of this loss or even dropping 2 in a row or the fact this year is clearly a re-building year (which in and of itself is a warning sign given that this is the exact moment-- 4 seasons in-- when the team and program is entirely a coach's creation). The vision, if there is one, should be coming together now. We should see something on the field that is clear evidence of real progress. I think most people on this board would be willing for that evidence to not solely be wins in any given season-- if we were seeing things that said "this team will be INCREDIBLE in 2 years" because the talent is evident, the system is working, the program is starting to fire on all cylinders. What we are facing right now is another "rebuilding year" in 2008 after a few coaching changes and JD wading in to fix this or that aspect of the game. What SHOULD season 5 look like--with a still new and fantastic field house, an actual campus, and shovels turning on a incredible new stadium. Please, someone tell me if we have a large group of incredibly game-changing red-shirt talent or recruits that come in and transform this program. And even if we did, does anyone think that the current play calling, game management, and preparation will let that talent produce 7 or 8 wins next season? Again, sorry to be a butt monkey. But things don't look promising at all and I don't think any of us wants a program that just occasionally has a shot.

sorry to be a but monkey , but jd's job is now in jeopardy. If the team goes 0 for the rest of the season (and is there any reason to think anything else will happen), look for a change. The issue is trajectory-- what direction is the program going? And is the current coaching staff worth of a $50MM investment in a new stadium? You want to hit that moment with a head of steam, clearly moving in the right direction. The question then is whether the current coaching staff, in all aspects, gives you confidence that they can leverage that HUGE investment and turn it into something. If you make a change now, a new coach can make a difference in 2 seasons.

I mean really...that 3rd and short was a disgusting play call. Again-- don't you need to play with the team you have, not the team you'd like to have?

3 and 1 on their 15 and we run alex allen up the middle for a loss..wtf??? And then throw an INT.zips are going to lose this game

oh dear god byran williams just dropped a sure td

I actually do think there is a strong case to be made that the university system in Ohio needs to be rationalized-- too many schools competing for an ever shrinking pie. Competition is a good thing, but the problem is that Akron and Can't end up competing with each other for a static pool of resources and are not able to get to the point of competing on a different level that would bring in resources from outside NEO. Akron and Can't are the epitome of this-- 2 huge universities within 15 miles of each other. Really just doesn't make sense in the grand scheme of things.The reality is that mergers and combinations won't result in much savings-- a few million dollars of admin and athletic overlap I suppose. But it could result in the creation of an entity with the scale and resources to compete on a national and global level.Now, if Fingerhut and Strickland and others in government really have no interest in creating a competitor to Ohio State, than the whole exercise is meaningless. The point of the whole exercise should be to create real competition for Ohio State. The state is best served to have top tier state universities aligned with the major population centers-- Cowlumbus, Cincinnati, and NEO.

I wish I could agree with you but the perception is that Akron is only marginally better than CSU. We know the real story, but most people don't know the HUGE difference including, apparently, the guy pulling the levers. I wrote the PD reporter of the above article, and here is what she responded:"Your points are good ones. I haven't heard this directly from Eric Fingerhut, but rumor has it that he was unaware of the $500 million campaign. It certainly gives UA a lot of clout. CSU President Michael Schwartz is giving his state of the university speech on Thursday and I'm told it's going to be memorable. Stay tuned."-- Janet Okoben, higher education reporter.Frickin Fingerhut didn't even KNOW UA had a top 100 endowment, one of the top 3 or 4 in the state system, and that we had a huge capital campaign going. I'm telling you, we are in a really sketchy place. Proenza is a STUD, I completely trust his vision and judgment and abilities. But there is no way he is as wired in the bowels of the State of Ohio as all the political hacks and business interests of Cleveland. Remember, Mike Schwartz was president of Can't State for a decade-- he has been in Ohio for most if not all his career. He has a very strong hand to play in terms of relationships and business interests. All of Akron's progress won't balance that out.Again, IMHO, the only way to balance the scales is to have Akron and Can't work together. The good news is there is HUGE upside to doing that, but at minimum it mitigates the downside risk of being subsumed into a Cleveland land grab.BTW, the lead story in the BJ should be a total call to arms about this-- the should have an in depth analysis of the potential impact to the community. They should be investigating how the Cleveland establishment is working its way to steal both NEOUCOM and the patina of UA. They should have an op-ed piece from mayor don saying he gets it now and is going to do whatever UA needs for it to fulfill its potential. It won't happen of course, but it should...

zippy: 28252 | Monte: 28271 VOTE VOTE VOTE

From the PD this past week...time to circle the wagons...University of Akron president talks up school's dedication to cityCSU merger talks downplayedTuesday, October 16, 2007Janet OkobenPlain Dealer ReporterIn his first public remarks since talk of a merger between Cleveland State University and the University of Akron surfaced last month, UA President Luis Proenza said his school is staying put in Akron.UA is "a growing and vital enterprise that will not be moving or sold," Proenza told about 500 supporters at his annual State of the University address Monday.Proenza used the occasion to officially launch a $500 million fund-raising campaign and say that $275 million has quietly been raised. His comments seemed designed to assure donors that the endowed faculty positions, student scholarships and new building that would come from the infusion of money would be for the University of Akron alone. The school's endowment was $168 million as of June 2006, the most recent number reported to the Chronicle of Higher Education."We need not lose our institutional identity or ask any other institution to do so, and we will not do anything to disadvantage our community or dishonor our heritage," Proenza said.Proenza was alluding to the concept of the University of Northeast Ohio, which would combine UA, CSU, and bring the Northeast Ohio Universities College of Medicine in Rootstown to downtown Cleveland. A task force is now studying ways for the region's universities to collaborate better. And Eric Fingerhut, the state's chancellor for higher education, is working on a 10-year plan for a University System of Ohio.In a speech last month, Fingerhut said, "We have good public universities in this region, but we don't have a great public university. We have some world-class research, and some world-class talent, but we don't have a world-class university."Look no further than Akron, is Proenza's message to Fingerhut."Because of our demonstrated leadership and documented capacity, the University of Akron should be formally designated as the public research university for the region - a strategic partner and a transformational force to create sustainable economic vitality and a model for a fresh paradigm for public higher education," he told the crowd Monday, which included Fingerhut.Fingerhut spoke briefly at Monday's events, but said he wouldn't get into details about the future of Ohio's higher-education system.William Demas, chair of UA's board of trustees, said after the speech that it was important for Proenza to make sure the school's strengths are known."We have a story to tell," Demas said, explaining that a merger would have to come about because it's the right thing to do, "not just bringing things together because the numbers look good on paper."With Akron's position clear, CSU President Michael Schwartz is expected to weigh in on the issue soon, too. He will speak at the CSU convocation Oct. 25.

I am not a huge fan of the dorms in the rendering-- obscures the view of the stadium. I wish they would clear out another slum area with new dorms.

btw, anyone know how to do polls on here now or is that feature gone?

Here's how this will unfortunately go down: Movement will build to drive to a more efficient and rationalized set of state supported institutions in NEO. The UA-CSU merger talk will grow, but instead of creating a 'tent pole' for Akron, it will be used to create a focal point for development on the near east side of downtown Cleveland. UA will eventually become a branch campus of a new university that is based in downtown Cleveland, with a major effort to create a football program that can fill Browns Stadium. Let's face it-- most of NEO thinks of UA as this little commuter school with a "high school on the hill" campus. We are at a HUGE disadvantage perceptually-- in 5 years that will have changed I think, but we are still a long way from the average person in say Garfield Heights thinking of UA as a truly major institution. Bank on it-- Akron cannot win a straight up fight with Cleveland over this, even with UA being a much stronger institution. We have to go after a confederation with Can't-- a merger of equals but with complimentary programs-- that really bolsters the Akron region. I know everyone on this board hates to consider this-- but the writing is on the wall. Ohio can't afford to maintain the status quo-- it's ultimately not working. Akron needs to make the argument proactively-- what makes for a better more impactful university: Akron with Can't or Akron with CSU? For the Akron area, the choice is crystal clear. Combine UA with Can't, add in NEOUCOM. You end up with a university concentrated in the Akron metro area with nearly 60,000 students (bigger than OSU), a major endowment, significant research base, synergistic programs, and dominant position in NEO (branch campuses in every county). Only then could a CSU merger be pursued in a way that the base of institution remains in Akron.Every Summit, Portage, Stark, Medina, and adjacent county reps and state senators, mayors, etc., should be supporting this type of solution. It's also in the best interest of Can't State, because otherwise it will essentially revert back to a total backwater, its more successful programs sucked into the CSU-Akron combo because there is no way it could compete politically with that.A global institution like this would have a huge impact on an area the size of Akron-- it could really lead to a renaissance. Net net, it makes a huge difference in Akron, probably saving the region. In Cleveland, it would be not be that additive-- it would always play second fiddle to Case-- but it would certainly help the near east side of Cleveland and anchor the west side of the Euclid corridor that they are building with the Clinic, Case, and the rest of University Circle on the other end.