UAZipster0305

Let's both agree then on our endorsement of Sudden Death for NCAA tournaments then! Cheers!!!

I watch a TON of European football. The argument for ties in such leagues are much different because it is a table format with other simultaneous competitions such as Champions and Europa leagues, domestic cups, and international team games and tournaments. Players and even entire rosters need the rest. Also, very few inferior European teams "park the bus" to play for a tie for fear of being shamed. Instead, nearly all try to score on fast counterattacks with only 2-4 players committed offensively. The comparison is not relevant to NCAA soccer. NCAA teams literally play only ~20 games per year, and I have watched many Zips' opponents put all 11 players within 35 yards of goal. It's the epitome of boring and pathetic. From a fan's perspective, and specific to this season, I much would have preferred to risk losing and play OT against Notre Dame, Western Michigan, and Cleveland State. Notre Dame and Western Michigan were top 5 teams at the time, and wins for us would have meant much more than ties...and who wouldn't want to watch more competition between some of the best teams in the country?! Again, nobody plays to tie unless they are an inferior opponent...it's a loser's mentality.

That's the nature of soccer. It's low scoring in general, so with only 22% (20/90) additional time, a goal to break the tie is not expected, unless one team is really dominant. I still say play the ET. I don't show up to watch the Zips tie, I watch to see them win, especially against high caliber opponents. Even as a player, I play to win and would choose the ET. Nobody plays to tie unless they are an inferior opponent.

I also respectfully disagree. The extra minutes reward a team with a deeper bench or more fitness, both of which mitigate injuries. It's up to the coach to manage these risks appropriately.

I wish the regular season were like this too. No OT rewards teams for parking the bus and allows underdog teams to play not to lose. If OT were implemented for the regular season, I think we would have a few more W's on our resume.

Good thought, but I respectfully disagree with this strategy. The players should start and be coached to not be so aggressive that they get carded. I think it's important to keep continuity in the lineup and maintain our winning momentum, especially against a big brand and traditionally strong program like UConn.

Always looking for a chance on goal with every touch...that's what makes a striker an assasin!

No game thread for yet another notable Big East opponent, so I'll start one. I am excited for potential win #9 in a row, and we are undefeated on the road so far. Is this a trap game before heading to UConn next week? Marquette is 6-5-4 (2-2-2) on the season with no wins against top-tiered teams. The Zips are 8-1-5 all-time against Marquette with the lone loss coming in the NCAAT on the road about ten years ago. I don't recall specifics, but I have the perception that we somehow got shafted in that game. If anyone has details, please remind me. Anyhow, I'd love to see another solid team win with Emil getting in on multiple goal contributions and a shutout for our defense. Prediction: another 3-0 domination. Go Zips! Keep it rolling!

...if only we could have those games against CSU, IU-I, and Temple back. Ouch! Those hurt, but man, we are on a roll now!

Solid win! 3-0 by score, 17-4 on shots, 5-2 on corners...dominant by all superficial metrics.

I believe we may have a Herman Trophy finalist on our pitch!

I'm sorry that's upsetting to you, and I say that sincerely. The lack of success is painful for anyone who is a passionate supporter of UA, which obviously includes you and anyone else on this forum. However, discussion of the past is certainly relevant to the future because we keep doing the same thing over, expecting different results. We are not learning or evolving in a positive way. It's insane. I want to see Coach Moorhead succeed but so far he has not. Due to experiences from the past and the fact that UA cannot afford to buy out more contracts, he should not be replaced until either he leaves on his own choosing or his contract expires. Had we done that with two prior coaches, the program and UA as a whole may be in more favorable conditions.

At least 2+ of those seasons were in trying to turn around the program, and Bowden's success is still way better than any other coach has done since and arguably before. How many other Akron coach's at the D-1A level have had multiple 6+ win seasons? Our MACC coach JD Brookhart was also run off because there are people here believe we can become Boise State who we as a university, athletics department, geographic region, etc., have nothing in common with. It's delusional because it does not accept that we will still have some down seasons, even with a solid coach. Bowden and Brookhart both got us to the top of the MAC, and that is what is realistic. They both should have been retained. The revolving door of coaches, essentially playing roulette, is not going to get us to the top of the MAC. UA can no longer afford to be buying out a multi-million dollar contract every five years either.

I don't see a statue for Bowden for our an 8-5 season and our only bowl win ever.

15-20 years old or not, our facilities are still tops in the MAC, and a competent staff should be able to leverage them. Is it just bad luck in not being able to hire a coach who is capable of such a strong reversal of momentum? BUGS hired Urban Meyer. The WMU coach from about five years ago was excellent. Someone out there like them is available, it's just a matter of finding them and getting them committed before their skillset is too expensive. Why can't our administrators take a risk on someone young and charismatic who we can afford? Hiring coaches in their '60's, despite their experience, is not going to get the program turned around because they do not have a hunger, vision, or connection to high school and college men. Also, if we can afford them in their '60's, they do not have the skillset to get things turned around. If they did, we would not be able to afford them. Bottom line, we need a Moneyball approach to think outside the box. Trying to do things as we have been and like everyone else is futile.

Maybe so, but also consider all the support given over the last twenty years related our best-in-conference new facilities such the stadium, field house, and rec center. Can you imagine what Toledo or NIU could have done with those facilities?!

What is most astonishing to me is that the program is so bad, and has been for most of three decades, that regression to the mean bias (towards .500) suggests that just by pure luck, a coach should be able to exhibit some upward trend in terms of W's and L's, yet consistently, we hire coaches who manage to keep the program at the bottom. Unreal.

Would love to meet up with you for a future Zips game @Georgetown or @Maryland. I live in Baltimore City.

3-0-1 in the Zips favor. Yes, that's right, in four all-time games against the Hoyas, we are undefeated.

Solid win! On the road no less! Let's hope the line up and team play are figured out and that the rest of the season is more of what we expected!

Same here, but I think most of the imbalance in shots came after our goal as a result of Georgetown pressing to get it back to level.

Dollars rule supreme though. It's a business decision, not a cultural one.

Thanks for this observation. It is an interesting data point. UC's upward trajectory corresponds to their investment in the physical campus (UA based much of the Landscape for Learning plan on what UC did), an emphasis on increasing their research portfolio, and advancing their athletics program from C-USA to the Big East to the AAC to the Big 12. UC is also in a much larger media market without other major public research universities (OSU being the closest). Which of these was a main driver of UC's image enhancement is unknown. As compared to UC and despite having transformed its campus, UA does not have a medical school (a major source of research dollars), is stuck in the MAC, is not sited in the epicenter of a major media market, and has another equally large public research university only ~10 miles away, and a second in Cleveland (CSU). The proximity of Case Western and YSU are also a likely detriment. It's fun to think what UA could be without the presence of KSU, CSU, and/or YSU and with NEOMED under its umbrella, but that's just fantasy. Side note: I just noticed that UC cut its men's soccer program.

The difference between Kent, OU, and BGSU versus CSU, UA, and UT is that the latter are urban campuses. Conservative media's constant bashing of urban areas as unsafe and undesirable havens of criminals and minorities has likely taken its toll, especially in relatively conservative rustbelt states like Ohio that have many other suburban and rural options (Kent, OU, and BGSU). I'd be interested to know if analogous schools in similar states (e.g. University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee) are seeing the same enrollment trends. (I realize OSU and UC are both urban schools, but I believe their brand strength and cultures overcome the urban divide.)

Another bad foul by Ali.