ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net

Interesting reply, keyboard commando. Last time I checked, the points get totaled to decide who wins the games. Kids who are reclamation projects from larger conferences don't impress me until they win lots of games. Those power 5 kids have won how many games this year so far? It's the MAC playing OOC you say? The MAC has performed well so far in OOC games this year, and yet once again, the Zips are where they have been for far too long. Cultural bias? TB clearly plays up the "daggum" aspect in his delivery and I suspect that doesn't always play so well in the industrial midwest. It's part of the whole Bowden family schtick, which is great if they're winning. Why are you so defensive about this staff? Are you a Bowden? Do you want UA to win or not? What exactly has the staff done to justify support? I don't know who you are but I'd bet a paycheck that I've been following Zips football far longer than you have. Don't sugar coat this start to the season. This is an Ianello-esque offense. Since you know so much more about football than I do, how about you tell us how they're going to win more than a couple of games with this offense, smart guy.

I've been a distant follower of the Zips in the last couple of years, and an even less frequent poster, but after yesterday's debacle in the pouring rain, and today's crushing of the Browns, there can be absolutely zero doubt that NE Ohio football fans, especially those of us who follow the Zips AND Browns, are the worst-off of any fans, anywhere. Talk about gluttons for punishment. Talk about being cursed. Regarding Bowden, I fail to see the appeal at this point. He's a southern "aw shucks" huckster whose recruiting and style work well in the deep south, obviously, but does any of that "daggum" schtick work in the industrial north? Not that I see. I watched the entire game yesterday and this team looks just like Zips teams have since Ianello was here, which is to say too small, too short, too slow, poorly coached on offense. Tell me again about Terry and offense? Tell me again about his recruiting? I suspect that posters here are still on his jock for no reason beyond him not being Ianello. He may not be Ianello, but he's clearly not good enough. Based on the first two weeks, scheister Scarborough should have completed the switch to OH-PEE-U before this stinker of a game.

It has become painfully obvious that the stadium was built on an Indian burial ground, as was the field house.

Hey Zach, unless you are a moderator, I wasn't talking to you. I would happily discuss and argue with you, if only some pathetic moderator didn't feel the need to move threads like this into the shadows. Whichever mod made the move didn't have the courtesy to link to it from the football section, nor to explain why it was being moved. That's bullshit and you know it. @Keener, same to you. You two have been participating, arguing, disagreeing, in the thread, and I appreciated your comments even when I disagreed with them. The point isn't whether we agree, the point is that this was the most active thread in the football section and there was absolutely no reason to move it. It sure looks like discussion that argues anything other than "stay the course" isn't welcome on ZN. That's shitty.

I cannot believe that one of the lame-ass moderators moved what was one of the largest post-count football threads in months to this lightly-visited dark corner of ZN.org. To whichever of you idiots moved the thread, and didn't even keep it listed where it belongs, in the football area, SCREW YOU. If a poster cannot maintain a solid discussion on this site without having to blow smoke up asses about this program, it's not worth posting on. Shame on you, you lame, sorry, coward. You didn't like the thread, maybe didn't like my posts, so you just stuck it in a place where nobody will even see it. Whichever moderator it was, kiss my ass!

Of all the posters on this thread, you are the one who is the most antagonistic, wallabee. Why is that? Are you capable of carrying on a discussion, even arguing, without being condescending and A-hole-ish? And, to the point, if you read my posts, you will see that I argue that we have failed for 25+ years. The last three have simply crystallized that failure, but make no mistake that there is no denying that this program has never consistently achieved at the FBS level, as an Independent, nor in the MAC.

Sure they'll go up, Dr. It's a big IF though, don't you think, all these years in? Are you aware of recruits coming in that are likely to change the bigger picture for us?

We'll agree that those are SOLID FCS attendance numbers. Spin, why is it that apparently we're the only two who can actually read and digest numbers and facts as they apply to this program?

I'm in SoCal snapping, snapping, snapping away! Can you see the changes happening there?

It's all about the money. Whatever happens with the Super 64, they will continue to entice the s@#t-suckers, like MAC teams, with a little extra cashish. Schools like UA will take a few extra shillings to be crushed in the home coliseums of the giganticon Super 64. Maybe they'll even add a few extra dollars so the fans in said coliseums can enjoy some genuine bloodsport. As insane as the above sounds, even if it were reality, I have no doubt that many of the tiny, toe-sucking programs would continue to sacrifice the health and safety of their players, not to mention pride in their programs, and take the paydays at the modern-day coliseums. It truly is all about how much money the ADs can suck in on such games.

Of course, as they make their plans, Akron has NO PLACE in the world that those power brokers envision. Akron needs to create their own world. High-end FCS in football, mid-major basketball and Super Premier Euro Whatever in soccer. That's how it should work.

Can't State loses in fantastic fashion. Hazell departs and Can't State becomes a glorified HS program again. SUCK ON THAT Can't State.

Dave In Green DRUNK ON A SATURDAY NIGHT. The well-reasoned, logical Mr. Spock of ZN would never make such a post. I love it. Raw emotion. However, please remember that the friends I speak of ARE Joe Akron. Ultimately, if UA can't find a way to make them reconsider their scorn for this program, UA will be a failure. It's not about the losers (all of us) who post here and actually care about the fate of UA, it's about attracting Joe Akron to pay to attend games on Saturdays. You know it. I know it. When will Luis realize that without Joe Akron there is no fandom at the Info? By the way, I am drinking delicious Chimay Triple tonight, painting the interior of the house. That's a HOT Saturday night. BAM!

There are far too many Zips fans, who are well-meaning and good fans, but who are wedded to the fantasy that Akron will somehow, someway, become a MAC power at the least and the next Boise at best. It doesn't matter how many facts you present, the salaries of the staffs, the attendance, the win/loss record over 25 YEARS, etc etc etc, they see and "know" what they want. It's a fantasy that Akron can, or will, compete at the FBS level, but there are fewer rational fans here than I thought. So, let them wallow in continued failure. For DIG, Vision Statements are patently delusional fantasies. My organization is BIG into Vision Statements now, and the Visions Statements that leadership typically comes up with are pure fantasy. I respect you, but I care not what the UA Vision Statements are. This is the same group of leaders who have allowed the football program to become a national embarrassment. The football program is an albatross around the neck of UA. Locals, people I know, my friends, make fun of me for being an Akron fan. Why? Because of the ridiculous sad-sack program on the football field. Soccer does their part. BB does their part. Hell, track does their part, but the GD football team is a freaking joke. I just want them to compete at a level at which they have a realistic chance to win games. Is that REALLY so much to ask?

The problem with looking at it that way is that I have no doubt that much of the way that universities size each other up is based on resources and money committed to their athletic programs. I'm with you on the MAC and the Sunbelt, but like it or not, C-USA and the Big East spend much more on their athletic programs than do any of the schools in the MAC or the Sunbelt. I suspect that much of the reason that the Big East won't give MAC teams a sniff for membership, beyond potential TV markets that we've talked about before, is based very much on commitment of resources. I keep on harping on it, but look at Cincinnati as an example. Very similar university to Akron over all, but they pay their head football coach 2,000,000 bucks a year! If I'm a Big East president, I look at MAC schools and the paltry investments they make in football and I'm just not interested in them. Also, the Sunbelt has two tiers when it comes to resources committed, so I would aim for some, but not all of those programs. You are looking at results, while I'm looking at the $$$ involved, because I have become convinced that long term, it's the money that dictates everything else, and that results on the field are a lagging indicator.

OK JZ84, you're examining the much larger picture, and wondering about structural issues starting from the top of the overall heap. At the level where Akron exists, if you assume that we're starting by talking about the best fit for the football program at its current overall level of resource commitment, historical record, recruiting, attendance, etc, I would argue that the program exists in a slice of the world that includes the WAC, the lesser Sunbelt teams, a couple of MAC teams, and you can throw in upper-level FCS teams into that mix. Now, if Akron and those programs were to somehow form a union, which, if any, of those universities would make good overall fits with Akron? When asking this question, I'm thinking along the lines of which of those universities maintain quality basketball programs, whether any of them play good soccer, geographic concerns, etc. My first thoughts are that you could build a structure/league that would nicely run from the midwest right down into Florida. There are also plenty of interior/plains state programs and even some western programs if you want them to be in the mix. Include schools that commit resources in similar manners and are stuck at the bottom of FBS in football, call it an FCS league for football, and off you go. I don't understand why the biggest boys can mix and match to suit their needs but schools like Akron sit and wait to see how the shite is going to roll down onto them. There is a stratum that can be created by schools with similar levels of existence that would work well for all of them. I think that you could probably find a good mix in basketball from this same group, although I don't know about soccer. If Proenza gave you the mission of creating such a beast, what would it look like?

OK, so let's talk about Indiana and its resourcing, compared to Akron. The Indiana head coach is paid $1,260,000 per year, plus is eligible for bonus payments of $830,000 every year. Terry is paid $375,000. Indiana, the doormat of the B10, pays their beleaguered head coach 3.3 times as much as Akron pays theirs. It's SO eye-opening to see the numbers behind all of this. No coaching continuity, worse recruiting, lesser attendance and fewer and smaller revenue streams; there is simply no way for the MAC to compete. It's actually a disgrace that they even call it FBS football at all. I also wondered why it seemed so difficult to recruit a few difference makers. Well hell, the recruiting process surely makes all of this crystal clear to recruits and their families. It surely looks to me like Akron does not recruit true FBS players at all, because FBS players with any other options choose to play in programs that more closely resemble the FBS averages. Akron recruits tweeners, exactly commensurate with their level in all of the other areas we've talked about. Akron players are a little too good to play in FCS, or would likely be starters/dominant players in FCS. They aren't good enough to be recruited by genuine, average FBS programs, and so they end up at Akron or another MAC school. Match Akron up with the WAC programs, the lesser Sunbelt teams, a couple of the lesser MAC teams, a handful of the better FCS programs in the country, and NOW WE'RE TALKING! Similar resource commitments by the member universities, recruiting parity, high level of play, much more of a competitive balance in all aspects. I would LOVE to see a paradigm like this, and there is absolutely ZERO reason it wouldn't work, and zero reason Akron and other schools in the same position don't pursue it. Call it FCS and let this "conference" dominate the FCS universe. The big boys are already carving us out of the bigger picture. We can be the bigger fish in the slightly smaller pond. I would be a blast.

I don't know what's going on, but for the last day I've been getting "403 error/forbidden" messages whenever I try to post. Hopefully this will actually get posted: -The arguments about exposure of the program are nuts. Akron gets zero positive exposure in the media. From here in California, it's much easier to see Mount Union on the FiOS lineup in the Fall than it is to find Akron. In fact, the MAC is on minimally at all here, while there is tons of D-II and D-III coverage. -Akron is in no way resourced as an FBS program, but neither is it FCS. FBS coaches earn, on average, 1 million dollars a year. Terry is paid 375K. The highest paid FCS coaches are in the 200-230K range plus bonuses. While we are MUCH closer to the FCS level than FBS, we are still resourced at what I call the FCS-Plus level, along with WAC and the worst Sunbelt programs. Why not find a way to truly compete at that level then? Why not play commensurate to how we pay to run the program? As the college football universe explodes, why not be innovative and seek out FCS-Plus programs, plus some of the better FCS ones, to form a new paradigm. At that level, Akron would be appropriately resourced, and competitive.

test test test

I'm having trouble getting posts onto the board over the last 24 hours. This is a test.

A little research goes a long way, and my recent digging around confirmed for me the extremely large, truly insurmountable funding differences in FBS programs. When the premier programs pay their head coaches 5+ million dollars, and FCS-inspired programs like Akron pay 375K, it's crazy to think that the smaller programs can ever compete with any consistency. Oh, and the schools that pay those mega salaries are typically doing it through their athletic department budgets, from money generated from donors, ticket sales, licensing, etc. If a program can generate enough money from those streams to pay the head coach that kind of salary, stop and think for a second about how much money is floating around that program, and how many donors are throwing into the kitty. It's absolutely impossible to compete with that unless you're already in that same sphere of money and influence.

41-3 Arky St. Hazell sucks it on his way out. BAM.

Agreed! Here's a question though: how much of the prominence of programs like Boise is related to structural stuff that would disappear if those schools joined other conferences? Would Boise still be Boise if they were part of the Big 12? If they had to recruit against the Big 12? Would they win like crazy against Big 12 programs year in and year out? It surely would be cool as hell to see regional mega conferences based on strict geographical definitions, using the Euro Soccer relegation program wouldn't it? Can you imagine the Big Ten being defined geographically and rigidly, and the year coming when, say, Indiana and Purdue would be dropped for NIU and Can't State? How cool would that be. Hey Indiana, welcome to the MAC! So impossibly and utterly never going to happen, but so cool to think about. To get back to my original point though, part of what makes programs like Boise what they are is the fact that they gain absolute domination of their conferences, sail through their schedules and take on the larger programs in a bowl game, primed after a year of domination. What if Boise had to play a conference schedule of Big 12 or SEC teams, get beaten up all year, and only then play in a bowl game? Would they be the same? As strong?

@DIG, you are saying, and advocating for, nothing. Of course, the easiest thing to do is to sit on your hands and wait. The power brokers in college football are striking out and creating the world they want to dominate. Akron is nothing more than the dirt under their shoes, as long as Akron, and other programs in similar situations, allow themselves to be so. The winners are aggressive, as is normally the case in life, and the losers, the "contemplators (yes I made that word up)," hoping that Akron will somehow not end up in the big pile of shit that remains when the larger programs are done doing their business, are going to get the shaft. This is not a time to be cerebral. It's time to go get ours.

Hey DIG, news flash. You are not Einstein. How about you answer the points made, without the pointless and spiteful little jabs? I put much thought into my posts. They can run long. Read them and answer, or be a lazy jackass and answer in a passive-aggressive manner. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my arguments, but you are neither a moderator nor are you the ZN arbiter of reasonableness, even though you clearly think you are.