UAZipster0305

Without insider facts, it is impossible to say what the right course of action is, but I appreciate your thoughtfulness and perspective.

It's been a while since I have checked in with this thread, but never have I been more disappointed in my fellow UA alums and supporters, and not just this particular post. I say this as an alum and someone who is STEM faculty at a major research university (not Duke). Academic departments do not exist to serve industry nor vice versa. Rather, both coexist and grow in a complementary manner to serve an economy and create a community of support. UA's expertise grew out of the rubber industry, and because it was on the cutting edge of innovation (which all top STEM departments are), a whole new economy of polymers emerged. UA supplied intellectual property and graduates with advanced research training that allowed new companies to form and grow. This is why ACS and companies support the program, and it is the reason NEO is known as polymer valley. Now, did polymer science and engineering need an entire college unto itself with the associated overhead of administration?...almost certainly not. Being a department within the college of engineering enables the same productivity, thus it is almost certainly a better value having been consolidated. However, a drastic reduction in faculty and the commensurate decrease in intellectual property, research funding, and graduates is as bad for surrounding industries as it is for the university itself. These losses are substantial too because polymer science and engineering was one of only two nationally ranked programs at UA, along with I/O Psychology. Do you enjoy seeing UA diminished on an international or national level? I certainly do not. Do you want to see UA become exclusively a regional state university? I do not. The truth is, UA WAS the Berkeley of polymer science and polymer engineering, and Proenza was 100% correct for celebrating this fact. To Hilltopper's comment, the professor to student ratio is likely out of proportion for the polymer science and polymer engineering programs because they are primarily graduate programs in which faculty salaries are paid more through research grants, contracts, and endowment than teaching. It takes a lot more resources to mentor a graduate student to being a top scientist because it requires so much individual attention, whereas thirty undergrads can be taught in parallel via lectures and with the help of graduate students. Nearly all other departments have both undergrad and grad programs, so apples and oranges. To adzip,yes, many of the students in polymer science and polymer engineering are not Americans, but that is the result of having an internationally-recognized program. It has international reach, and the program requires students with international-level credentials, experiences, and distinctions to maintain. How many STEM faculty at any university are international? How many of our best soccer players over the years have been international? Why is this a problem? The only justification for such a reduction in faculty should be that resources previously available to support salaries were no longer available and this financial limitation was impossible to overcome through other means that were extensively explored. In any case, the loss of that many faculty in one of UA's few nationally and internationally recognized programs should cost executives their jobs. Finally, the logical disconnect between so many posters here at ZN desperate for national recognition for sports but to not care about even maintaining international distinction in academics and research is astounding. Without a doubt, the latter is easier, especially in the current landscape, given the less even playing field in athletics, which is now further exaggerated by NIL

Our leadership for the past fifteen years has to be some of the most incompetent at any Ohio university all-time. Sadly, this example demonstrates it's just continuing.

I thought that was about a decade ago.

Agreed. There was actually some respectable football played BY THE ZIPS at the end of November. Who knew it was possible?! O and D looked very good, fundamentally, most of the time the past two games.

And like you always say, @GP1, it's the MAC, you can count on teams to beat themselves. Toledo beat themselves tonight every bit as much as we beat them, but I will take it.

There you go, @tomzip! D wins us the game!!!

The D could yet win us the game!

No, Zips D is dead tired. They played well tonight. The coach has to help them out and give the offense more and better opportunities so the D stays off the field.

Great play!!!

Did our kicker from the IU game last year transfer to Toledo?

When you play conservatively (not to win), you lose.

Our D looks gassed...I knew this would happen.

Exactly. We have nothing to lose, and we need to keep the D off the field. No player, recruit, or transfer is inspired by conservative end of the season coaching. Losers play not to lose. Winners play to win. A winning mentality dictates you go for it there.

4th & 5...Go for it!

How is that not a flag for interference?!

We need a long drive to give the D a break. If this continues in the second half, we lose simply because our D becomes gassed.

Always good to see Kent doing Kent things too, down 26-0 to the University of Canada and still in the first half.

Nice to see the team is amped up for playing tough.

Offsides, please!!!

Jaaskelainen is exactly the sniper who is capable of doing so. One shot, one kill.

Georgetown out. NC State advances 2-0.

NC State up 2-0 on Georgetown at 75". Looks like the Hoyas could be done.

NC State up 1-0 on Georgetown midway through the second half.

Thanks for the update(s). I can only follow via the game tracker, so your comments are the most color I can get.