We're talking about a team in Kent that was 1-23 the last 2 seasons and had an interim HC up until a few weeks ago vs. JoeMo in his 4th year at the helm at Akron. So whatever positives you want to focus on, make sure they are accurately viewed through the appropriate lens.
The scouting report on Akron shows that we struggle in the red zone. Kent's defense reflected this as they were giving Akron anything they wanted in between the 20s to prevent any big plays then locking down in the red zone. The total yards were largely meaningless. First drive, Akron got inside the red zone and were held to 3 points. Late in the 4th quarter, JoeMo had 3 plays from the 3 yd line - 2 were basic runs up the middle and 1 was a horrible pass play. He opted to take the 3 pts instead of going for it on 4th, a decision that will be hotly debated for a while. The offensive was wildly predictable most of the night, hence Kent's success for 2.5 quarters with bringing pressure and jumping passing routes. It wasn't until Akron started taking more chances and mixing things up in the 4th quarter that the points started to occur. A fluke onside kick recovery (incredible execution) and a fluke fumble were the only reasons Akron stayed in that game. Otherwise, Carney kicked JoeMo's butt.
I don't really care about a team quitting vs. not quitting. These guys know there is always an opportunity to put out film for their next NIL deal, so in this era of college athletics, it's hard to take that discussion seriously. The fact is, the talking point of quitting vs. not quitting is being discussed because Akron was down by so many points to a previously 1-23 Kent team. As far as I know, Kent is in a similar financial situation for football. They made a move at HC to a true football guy and look how it's working out for them. Heck, I poo-poo'd Carney as a hire with his only success being victories over lowly UMass but I'm thinking that was largely denial from fear of them making a good hire.
It is possible to get this right.