UAZipster0305

@trimmy10, the above statement makes it clear that you believe that Ianello would rather win than lose. This was not clear from your exchange with GP1: I think he wants to win. The problem is his ideas on how a team wins are wrong.We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter because the outcome is still the same.Right. I don't think he cares about winning now. That is not to say that he would prefer losing to winning.I'm not going to continue arguing semantics though; you made your point, DiG. I'll try to be less ambiguous in the future.It's a sad state of our program when that's what our post-game discussions involve.

I'm a bit disappointed in you, DiG. You're one of the most solid, logical, and level-headed posters here, and I've never known you to put words into anyone's mouth but that seems to be what's happening here. What ZtZ and I have essentially said is that there is no emphasis on winning because we're still in the building process. The current attitude is that if we happen to win while playing a scrimmage style game, great. If not, no big deal because it's all about developing the players, schemes, etc. A NE Ohio sports fan should easily recognize this mantra from Cleveland professional sports...always rebuilding...and all the fans continuously drink that Kool-Aid, which just perpetuates the cycle.However, this is a far cry from saying iCoach would rather lose than win. Where did you come up with that notion anyhow? It was never stated implicitly or explicitly.

if Ianello (or maybe the OC, I don't know who calls the plays) preferred winning, we wouldn't kick a FG when down 20. Whether you make it or miss, you're still down by three scores. It does absolutely nothing to help you win. It's just basic math. So you should go for the TD because if you get that you can cut it to two scores and then the onside kick is actually meaningful. Our players aren't dumb, they can do the math. They saw that by choosing to kick a FG in that scenario our coach chose losing over winning. To a person with the mindset of our coaches, purposefully blowing the chance to win with plenty of time left gives the staff the opportunity to run the plays that they feel need to be evaluated in a game situation. Halfway through the season they're more concerned with putting together schemes than winning. They're doing the stuff that should be done in the spring and pre-season while other teams have successfully completed most of that stuff by the second week and are putting it into practice to try and win games.This says it all for me, DiG! iCoach is complacent about winning because he seems to think he has at least another three seasons to do so.

I think he wants to win. The problem is his ideas on how a team wins are wrong.We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter because the outcome is still the same.

A problem this big isn't caused by only one person. The current condition of the Zips football program is due to a broken system. Coach I is going to do exactly what he said he was going to do in his job interview. He didn't hire himself. The AD and a hiring board of God knows who...I can only assume complete incompetents hired the guy. Firing Coach I isn't going to solve the entire problem.It's not a system, it's a process. Call it what you want, it's not working. And iCoach has no intention of winning...his play calling and game decisions are all the proof you need of that. Where are all the commitments from these 3/3+ recruits that our "recruiter" of a coach should be landing? A gorgeous fall day of football and the best part is the partying that takes place a few hours BEFORE the game!And to anyone supporting the program after this year, you're just contributing to the problem. I hate to say it, but the only thing that will get iCoach out after two seasons is a concerted effort from the fans/alumni. From the end of the season forward until iCoach is gone, that is likely the best thing we can do to show our support and to improve the program.I am amazed that the players remain motivated to still play hard. And whoever said that on an individual basis, we match up evenly on talent with most other MAC teams is spot on! It's the coaching that is lacking and preventing these players from performing well as a team.

A decent win, but we need to snap out of this complacency...when playing a good team or in poor weather (such as the other night), we won't have the luxury of easily turning the game around for a comeback.

The flood gates are open. I was really worried about this one when it was 2-1.

Thanks for sharing the video feed.The ball seems to play very quickly on the turf. With precision passing, this should be to our advantage.UB has a terrible venue for soccer.Are we in the white or blue? I really hope the blue because possession is too one sided otherwise.

I appreciate you doing this too, mes102.

Damn...what do they say at OSU, Muck Fichigan?This is a tough loss to take.

Am I able to follow the game anywhere other than the Big Ten network?

I hate to say it, but a tie against a struggling program is the equivalent of a loss.

We really need to pull this one out. A tie against a weak Michigan program isn't going to look good on the resume.

Are we down 1-0?

28-17 OU wins. Chisel goes for 125 and 2 TDs, and LR8 has nearly as many rushing as passing yards.

+1.

Coastal Carolina coached by Akron alum Shaun Docking coming in at #20.http://www.goccusports.com/sports/m-soccer...ng_shaun01.htmlI'm also getting excited thinking of what the bracket might look like. Could we end up getting Louisville or UVA at home? Wisconsin is about the only Big Ten team we haven't played and/or beaten during Coach Porter's tenure though they'd potentially be very well-prepared for cold weather.

I'd love to see NIU get an at-large bid. Would stop some of the complaining over the MAC as a conference. I wish them well in al of their remaining contests unless they play the Zips.+1.

Completely unnecessary to include random, unrelated political commentary in your post. This has nothing to do with the federal government. Money would likely come from the City and State.

I think that is true. But I will argue that is better for us to be under rated than over at this time. I would rather them have something to prove....and work to prove it.No, we need a top 4 seed for the Tournament to be guaranteed home games through to the Final Four. The prospects of playing UConn or Maryland on the road are ominous.

I'm not sure this even matters. We just want Akron people to support Akron, instead of going elsewhere. Right?And Akron should have a convention center. Were a large enough city.We do. It's called the John S. Knight Center.

When there are 500 or so actual butts in the seats for a UA football game, it's no longer called a crowd. It's more like a get together.

They drive to blossomBrowns fans drive to Columbus to see a winner.

The large MAC schedule is why I believe in the worst of rebuilding years we should be 6-6. If the scheduling is done properly, we get two OOC wins (vs. D1-AA and Sun Belt-esque team) and 4 in the MAC (Can't and UB need to be guaranteed every year and two other wins should not be hard to come up with especially if EMU is on the slate).

I'll just add that a new arena regardless of its location is likely better for the growth of the program and university than remaining in the JAR indefinitely.The basketball facility and current state of the football program are likely the only major factors limiting our attractiveness to more prestigious athletic conferences.