johnnyzip84

OK, I telegraphed that like a Mike Junko pass over the middle I guess my point is I don't think we needed a more difficult (even ever so slightly) schedule at this point in TB's tenure. I'll bet he's not too happy, deep down, that he's facing what is very likely to be the three best teams in the MAC West next year. He knows that at some point, the wins need to come no matter how good a coach he is or how good a staff he has assembled. I know the following statement, while true, is perhaps somewhat misleading. The 2013 Zips will be facing NINE bowl teams from the 2012 season. I would have like to see this number be seven or eight instead, just to increase the chances of getting some momentum going in this football progrum. One last thought I have is I can understand, in a way, why the MAC is doing this. After all, it worked wonders for the perception of the league in 2012, and many of the key players are returning in 2013. I just hope that, if and when the Zips do turn this thing around, the MAC will give UA the same scheduling benefits.

I'm not a shoot-from-the-hip person in general, so I thought a little about this and I have a question for you. Do you think there is any correlation between the quality of a recruiting class and the team's win-loss record in the season prior?

I'm convinced you should predict 5 point losses more often.

If it's whining to expect a relatively fair shake from your conference, I'm guilty as charged. I suppose it doesn't really make much difference, since substantial improvement is needed to get the program winning regardless of the schedule. Go Zips!

Definitely! I might even risk being put on double secret probation.

I think Pohl and the offense will do fine regardless of the schedule. It's the defense (and the sense of fair play) I'm mostly concerned about.

I understand what you're saying. But there's nothing like making TB's task to turn the Zips around, already very difficult, even harder. I don't even want to make any predictions on the 2013 record at this point, but so much for being too hopeful about ANY of the matchups.

So we don’t get to play fellow strugglers Eastern or Buffalo, or Western (breaking in a new HC), or Central (loses Radcliff) Get on the horn, Dr P, and give someone hell about this. Is the MAC trying to give us an excuse to leave?

The PD's EA picks UA

Maybe the third paragraph in THIS ARTICLE explains it all

Providing some motivation to the Bearing Specialists Association in May at Hilton Head.

Thanks for the update lumberjack and my thoughts and prayers are with him. It will be great to have him back at full strength for the meat of the schedule and especially into the post-season. Go Zips!

That was pretty funny. I believe KD also added something like "I guess that zone wasn't working too well tonight".

Granted Marshall is mediocre this year at 7-8, but OU really smoked them 94-57 today at the convo with Cooper dishing out a team record 17 assists. So perhaps they're coming together in time for MAC play?

That would be surprising, but not impossible of course. I really think college hoops is the "fly in the ointment" to the creation of the Big 64. Can it still be accomplished? Sure, but it's not a given in my book.

Then 64 must not be a hard and fast number for you. I challenge you to pick 64 teams, based on the total strength of their football program (resources, funding, success), and still include the likes of Duke, Kentucky, and Syracuse.

What's interesting about comparing IU and UA football, to me, is that the Zips under FREAKING IANELLO competed very well with the Hoosiers in Bloomington when several of us were there in 2010. I know it's just one game, but IU football has been so bad for so long that I wouldn't exclude them from a proposed "second tier" (based only on football).

@GP1 So quite possibly schools like Duke, Kentucky, Georgetown, Syracuse, etc would be relagated to second tier in college hoops? Sorry, but I can't agree that people will buy this. I also don't think the Super 64, going completely on their own, is a foregone conclusion. I think another possible scenario is the NCAA gives the new top division de facto independence in football matters, but still keeps all schools under the NCAA umbrella and continues to run the other sports much like they do now. @STZ If I was tasked to identify like-minded schools for Akron to join in a new second tier, I would start by including the entire MAC. This takes into account the fact that several of the current MAC football powers are pretty weak in hoops. I would probably include all of the Sunbelt, most of CUSA, much of the Big East, a few FCS teams (the cream of the CAA, MVC and Southern conferences), and perhaps a few "big boy" castoffs (Vandy, Wake, Duke, N'Western, Indiana all come to mind). As much as I like soccer, I don't think it would be a PRIMARY concern in such a study.

If it happens as you say, then college basketball will become somewhat chaotic. I would argue that the remaining NCAA hoops squads would be at least as competive as the top 64 (based on football only) teams. The public won't be duped into thinking the Super 64 is THE clear top end of collegiate hoops. You could argue that the competiton will be good for the sport. Now would THESE teams (hoops) play each other exclusively? Makes for one dull regular season, if the 64 teams end up having their own season ending tourney outside of the NCAA.

This is a very good point. One might say that the "big boys" can make up for fewer home games with more TV money, if they ever end up playing themselves exclusively. I still maintain that it will be problematic to determine who is in and who is out of the Super 64. Will a traditonally mediocre team like Stanford, who has been hot the last 5 or 6 years, make the club? Does TCU get in Ibecause the Big 12 nabbed them and Boise get left out because they're stuck in the MWC? What about Vandy and Northwestern? It's a given that football is the driver, but will basketball have any impact on decisions whatsoever? There are many, many additional questions. If these schools leave the NCAA, will it be for football only? Will their other sports stay in the NCAA? As they say, the devil is in the details. I'm not saying that change isn't on the horizon. It just make take more time than some of us think, and it may not be as drastic in the end.

Didn't DiG warn you about those .ru sites?

I think the A-State team speed will be the story of the game. A-State 37 K.E.N.T. 24

Woodson shines in Chesapeake Bowl The following quote is from the Patriot-News:

Almost 100 of KD's 300 wins were at the D2 level (Ashland and Tiffin). Often when a coach's total number of wins is quoted, it includes those at all collegiate levels. Hunter easily had 300+ in 1999, if you include his Wittenberg tenure (he reached 600 at WCU recently).

Uhhhhh, Larry Hunter for $1000 Alex?