GJGood

To a large extent I agree...regular ticket prices should not be lowered. I just think the pricing should be different for youth than for adults, which will in turn get more money and fill more seats.

I have finally got my schedule cleared and I'll be making the trip up to see the team and new digs for the first time myself this weekend.Anyone have any suggestions on where to park? And does anyone know if there is a different ticket price for youth than for adults in general admission? I haven't seen anything anywhere about it and we're coming either way but you would think it would be a good idea to have the youngsters tickets not be as much as everyone else. It would only help bring more people in. Plus the more youth who get to campus events, the more likely they are to choose Akron when the time comes.

No FCS teams. Its just not fair. Only teams with the same number of scholarships should play each other.A mix of lower tier BCS, a bigger name BCS, and two non-BCS but still FBS teams would suffice me. Two at home and two away. Get as many home-and home contracts as possible.

Can we play Penn State in basketball now? LOL..That would be competitive.

Agreed, and a whole buch of those passing yards were a result of those lateral to slightly backward passes at the line of scrimmage they kept using. The fact that often times the receiver then broke a couple of tackles to rack up yardage after the catch really boosted the passing yards for the QB. In that way his big numbers were a little misleading.

I thought some halftime adjustments were made that worked quite well. Penn State was never really able to gets its running game going. While Akron never had any success running either, in the second half the QB had more time to throw and it showed with some good completions and a TD. Obviously something was adjusted, be it blocking schemes or whatever. To me it seemed like the second half was an even match. I just wish field position could have been better and the adjustments could have been made sooner in the first half.

I like getting games in each year against solid BCS conference teams but does it really have to be a top 10 or even top 25 team every year? I would like to see us play middle-of-the-pack (not necessarily the bottom just not the very top) BCS conference teams every year, and why does it always have to be in week one? I'd like to see us play somebody we should get a win with in week one (just not an FCS school, I hate when FBS schools play FCS schools).How would we have fared if we had played somebody like Minnesota, Northwestern, Virginia, or even Texas A&M today? I think it would have been a lot more interesting. If we are going to play teams that refuse to give us a return game, lets at least play someone we have more than a punchers chance of competing with.I like the idea of playing Indiana and Syracuse but even if we win those it will just leave people saying how bad those teams are. We need middle ground BCS opponents, like Cincy and NC State in years past.

While I'm hoping to see better, or at least tougher, non-conference schedules in the future as the program continues to improve, I certainly don't think that this years schedule is a downgrade from last years. Playing in the Glenn Wilkes tournament was a good move and they are playing Drake and NC State, plus this team scheduled Texas A&M and Wyoming. Last year it was Pitt, Niagara, and Winthrop. It amy not be a significant upgrade this year but I don't think its a significant downgrade either.Plus, I have a hunch that Valpo is going to be greatly improved this year as well as Rhode Island not being too shabby either. Also, with a good season the BracketBusters opponent could be an RPI boost as well if we can pull off a tough road win.

What is on the side of Fir Hill across from the Chapel that cannot be replaced and put somehwre else on or around campus? I know the alumni office and Early childhood development buildings are there but could they be relocated? Just a thought.Personally, I am fine with the current location of the JAR. I just would like to see it upgraded and possibly expanded. Marketing needs to improve also to get bodies in the seats/bleachers.

All true but let's keep in mind that it takes an agreement between two parties to schedule. If bigger name programs see us as extremely dangerous but we at the same time lack national noteriety then scheduling the Zips is really a "no win" situation for them.That is why I personally think the Zips need to concentrate on getting into the best neutral site tournaments they can get into every year and then hopefully play their way into a very good BracketBusters matchup also. I'm not saying to give up on more competitive scheduling in addition to that but I think that is the area where the biggest strides can be made without just throwing the team into a gauntlet like Miami runs every year.

Just wanted to post a link to an article I found locally here in Columbus for those of you who may be interested in some of the activities of Zip gridiron alums currently playing in the NFL. I think its cool these guys will all be there together.http://www.snponline.com/articles/2009/07/...06_1054am_1.txt

I could handle the MAC moving something to Columbus, which is still fairly well centrally located. Of course, that is just me being selfish since if, for example, the men's tourney were held at Nationwide Arena it would be a 5 minute walk from my work.

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.

I'm with bigzipguy on this one. Baseball as a sport is very hard to figure out sometimes. There is no other major team sport I can think of where teams at the bottom of the standings get wins over teams at the top and its not seen as a big deal. I know in college baseball specifically it is a bigger deal if a northern team beats a good southern team than it is if the 9th place MAC team beats the second place MAC team. In baseball, it is more common that the "better" team doesn't win than it is in sports like football or basketball.As far as a lacking of fan support because of how good they are, I understand that to some extent. I was an undergrad at UA though in 1996 when Akron won the MAC title and I have to tell you there weren't many more fans attending games that season than there are today. So, while performance and record may be part of it, they could probably still do some better marketing on the team's behalf.

when is the school going to stop being referred to as Akron University, at least by the media?

So basically since EMU and CMU are playing each other and two of the three get spots, Akron taking two of three or all three at BG would likely get them in the tournament? Either EMU or CMU automatically has to lose at least two games in their three game series.I wonder why there isn't more support for the baseball team. I mean from this point on now every game is about as important as it can get and yet virtually no chatter.

Any chance the Zips still make it to Chillicothe this year? I keep looking at the conference standings and it would seem possible to me assuming the conference takes the top 8 records. I'm not exactly sure how it works though. Plus, no article or post I've read anywhere has even mentioned what the Zips must or must not do to make the field.Can anybody fill me in here?

Quite a day indeed. I am simply amazed at the softball team. Three wins in one day in the conference tournament and all three against teams that were seeded better. That is amazing in any sport! I don't know what will happen today but if the Zips can win another 3 against higher seeds they go dancin'! I realize that may be too much to ask since these ladies have got to be running on fumes today.I hope a buzz has been generated about what they have accomplished already this weekend though and the future of this program certainly looks bright.

I really like this commitment, I have always thought there is a lot of talent that seems to slip through the cracks to FCS or lower division schools because the prospect is coming out of a very small, and often rural, and much unseen, high school. A dual threat guy at QB that has led winning teams might be just what the offense needs for the incoming class of 2010 as it may provide options for the coaches and an interesting competition for the QBs that will already be on the roster at that point.

I wouldn't even be that against the BCS if it just included the champion of every conference with equal payout an had a set criteria where the BCS rank of each conference champion, and not the name of the school or conference affiliation determined the actual BCS game matchups.That at least would be a step in the right direction.

Orr with his BCS coaching background, leading of BG to the #1 seed in the MAC and Cincy ties actually could get in the mix I believe. I'm just not sure how much interest he would have in leaving BG right now. Although, if he were likely to go anywhere, wouldn't it be to "go home"?

I just want to see the MAC get better and us be a perennial power within it. Everybody keeps talking about jumping for another conference. I'd rather the conference we're in become more nationally prominent. That way we're not only good but we're loyal too.There needs to be a major shakeup and reoganization within the MAC offices and get some pepole in there that are going to take this conference to the next level and beyond.

That does look good. You make a great case.I still think it should be 24 teams with 8 getting a bye. But the 16 scenario that you showed actually looks better than I imagined it would.My 14 one would look similar and would not allow the very topped ranked teams to rest their starters at the end of the regular season because they'd want one of those top two seeds and a bye (in fact I would propose that those two universities host the national semifinals even if their teams get defeated prior to that round). It also wouldn't allow so many teams that didn't even win their conference in. 16 teams likely means you can finish second in 5 of the 6 BCS conferences. My way is only 3 of 6, or two if an independent qualifies.My first round would have looked like this (using the pre-bowl BCS rankings)1 Oklahoma (first round bye)9 East Carolina at 8 Virginia Tech13 Alabama at 4 Utah12 Texas at 5 Penn State11 Buffalo at 6 Boise State14 Ohio State at 3 USC10 Troy at 7 Cincinnati2 Forida (first round bye)I think those aren't too shabby and it allows a school like Utah or Boise State to get a home game, allows a northern school like Penn State to host a southern school, and creates marquee matchup potential like Ohio State-USC and Texas-Penn State in every round.

I say a 14 team playoff with the top two seeds getting byes (for those who like the chase for the top 2 the BCS now creates)...the 11 conference winners and three wild cards. Seeds 1-11 (or 12 if an independent reaches a certain level) go to the conference champs and the wild cards are seeded at the end. At least the first round would be played at campus sites. This allows for marquee matchups every week as the wild cards are liable to be national powerhouses AND would result in some non-BCS conference champs getting the opportunity to host a game since seeds 3 thru 8 (all conf champs) would start at home.That is just what I'd like to see. I think it creates a more level playing field that way and emphasizes winning the conference no matter what the name on the jerseys may read.

I want to be somebody like a Utah. Always near the top of their conference in the major sports and still able to be somewhat of a player on the national scene. I think there's is an overall athletic program we can model ourselves after, at least for now. the difference is Akron is situated in much more fertile recruiting ground than they have in Salt Lake City, so if we ever reached the Utah level we then may be able to look even bigger at that point.