Lee Adams

Actually under the circumstances not too badly. We beat Can't with him at QB.

Its a shame that this coach at least publicly doesn't take responsibility. I get the feeling that if every once in awhile he came out and said I screwed up people could tolerate this situation a little more.

Not true.There were 20 people around me at game's end. Every one of them was aghast at the 2-point decision.We had a HORRIBLE team on the ropes, at home. A team proven to choke. A team we'd outscored 22-3 to finish the 2nd half, and we handed them the game. What a gift for CMU.If we were down 1 to Ohio State, on the road, and our team was gassed from giving some Herculean effort, THEN you go for 2. Like Air Force did against Tennessee. No way you go for 2 under yesterday's scenario. Ianello blew yesterday's game by his extra point playcalling. I've never seen that before. I'd never seen a team kick off twice in a game either. Or kick a mid-4th quarter field goal to take his team from a 20, to a 17 point deficit.What's the common denominator?

Thank you! Why did it take him so long?

Based on the 2nd half yesterday,we could say the PLAYERS are making progress. Ianello finally put Moore in the shotgun most of the time. By necessity,they had to throw the ball more because they were behind. That opened up the field. Moore was able to get into a rythm. That helped Chisholm because the defense couldn't just sit on him. He still needs to run behind his pads. But maybe he'll learn. Ianello was calling the plays in the 2nd half,not the O-coord. That was interesting.Players win games. Coaches do not. What is sad is that a coaches decision(s) cost the players a chance to likely win that game.

Coaches singlehandedly lose very few games. Ianello lost this one. I wouldn't be able to look my players in the eye.meh. He gave them the chance to win it, and they didn't. I don't think there was a wrong choice between going for it or kicking it. Everyone would be praising the call if he caught it.It seemed to the folks in our section that Ianello didn't give them the BEST chance to win. Players win games not coaches. Let them get the ball in OT and keep pushing CMU around like they did most of the second half. Even if they had made the 2 the decision can still be questioned.

Coaches do not win games. Players win games. Coaches CAN lose games by making decisions that do not allow the players to be in the best position to try to win. That is what Ianello did today. For whatever his personal reasons,he thought he could win the game from the sideline. In doing so he not only did not allow his players to be in the BEST position to win the game,he sent the message that he did not trust them to win the game in overtime. No matter when he made the decision to go for 2 it was a bad decision.Nobody in our section could believe it. That team played the best half of football they have played in two years and the head coach 'takes the pipe'.

When we get done with this, we can put signs above the lockerroom doors reading, "Whites Only...and Only If Your Parents Have Money".I'm not interested in turning on the TV and watching LSU vs Alabama with DIII talent. Sorry....I enjoy modernity.Sorry, throwing the bullshit flag on you here. Millions of college students somehow manage to make it through with combinations of loans, work, etc. And believe it or not, a lot of those students are black and they somehow do it too. The percentage who are helped by athletic scholarships is miniscule compared to that number. Throwing the race card in doesn't help your argument, especially if you just want that for your own entertainment.If you want the quality of D-1A football to remain where it is today, scholarships have to stay where they are. If you want to go to college football games where almost everyone looks like you, go to Mt. Union games. Everyone sits around those games patting themselves on the back on top of their high horse about the DIII players being "true student athletes". I don't need my world view boosted with a football game...I'd rather have good entertainment watching top level athletes compete.The other side of that might be that watching competetive games on a consistent basis at whatever level the team is playing may be more enjoyable than what we have now. I have lived in places where there are only D-II or D-III programs. Fans still go to the games. Sure they watch the big boys on TV like we all do. the MAC and conferences at that lvel can't compete at the highest level now. So do we want to watch those sacrifice games at the beginning of every season as we do now with little if any hope of ever competting at that level consistently? Or do we want to stop spending millions of dollars with the the impossible belief that 'some day' teams like those in the MAC or Sunbelt etc. will be able to stand toe to toe with the Russkys(thanks Slim) and win?

This another way for the big athletic programs like OSU et al to separate themselves from everyone else. Those schools can go play in their own back yardand not have deal with the MAC's of the world. Create another super division and let those guys beat up on each other while they throw more money at the kids they want in their programs.Wasn't there a time back in the dark ages when schools started playing football that athletic scholarships weren't given? Of course kids were still being paid to play. It was the $100.00 handshake.The idea that professional football and hoops should have their own minor league systems has been kicked around for years. It will continue to get kicked as long as those sports can get away with not having to spend the money to develop players. You can't make it lucrative for some kid to go school for a couple of years then leave to become a professional. Hockey and baseball develop their players who don't attend college.

: Our offense can't control the ball to save it's life. I can't recall one long drive this season that wasn't aided by some inane penalty or mistake by the opponent.The Zips are the Get Well Card for the MAC's downtrodden. Look for a bad CMU team to be the latest in a looooong list of D1 opponents to thoroughly drub Rob Ianallo's team on it's home field.The MAC has figured it out - stop Chisholm and the Zips are done.

I used to get notes like this all the time from people on this board. Never responded. I got sick of the notices so I turned off my PM function.it doesn't bother me in the least....but something keeps urging me to teach morons like this a little life lessonJust enjoy the game. There are too many morons in the world to correct all of them. It's a losing battle. Go Zips!

Maybe someone has talked this up before. Forgive me. I see Getsy is the QB coach at Indiana PA. Curt Cignetti hired him. All my relatives live over there. That program had been sliding a little since they got rid of Frank. Too bad Akron didn't take a look at Frank. Successful head coach at a lower level. Oh well.

It's hard to say this when any college team has 100% turnover every 4 to 5 years. If his "plan" had any merit whatsoever, halfway through his 2nd year wouldn't we have to be at least competitive? I hate to echo people here, but I skipped the game Saturday to go to an overcrowded, overpriced Cedar Point. I'm not sure what would've been worse, dropping $150 and riding 5 rides in 10 hours or watching the Zips give up nearly 600 yards of total offense and get squashed despite being +2 in turnovers.What's sad to me is that I'm embarrassed of the program. Maybe that's selfish, but when my co-workers are aware that I'm a big Zips fan and all I get come Monday is, "How much did 'you guys' get crushed by Saturday?" It's embarrassing. The only saving grace is that the majority of them are suckeye honks and their season, scale wise, is in the dumps as much as ours.Yes,we may not be winning but games would be much more competetive and we would see improvement in certain areas of the team. They have promise at WR and RB. There was some talent on the team last year. The AD and coach said it themselves. Problem is,a lnumber of guys playing now are going to graduate. If Ianello's guys are any good,next year should be there year where there is significant improvement in the won-loss.

I got a PM from this guy also. I didn't read it. Not worth my time. Given what I have seen,wouldn't surprise me.

Three observations you made are very interesting. 1)Chisholm wants to run 'East--West' more than 'North-South'. The coaches must be talking to him. There were times when he at least tried to cut it up. But he doesn't get his paids squared often enough to avoid losses. Reminds me a little of the way Dennis Knnedy ran when he first got here. But boy did he figure it out. 2) The defense just gave up tons of yards when OU ran right at them. There was nobody on the line or at linebacker plugging holes at the line. The OU O-line was getting on the linebackers and smothering them. 3) There was little pressure on the QB. Part of that is because Tettleton knows when to get rid of the ball and how to move behind the line. Akron was and has been trying to blitz. But, its hard for bitzters to get pressure when the DB's are playing 5-7 yards off the receivers. The QB has plenty of room to dump the ball. Heard an ex-coach talking about that. He said you have to play press coverage and make the QB hold the ball a little longer. Problem is when your secondary is getting toasted its tough to do.Find it interesting as Gaffney points out that in the middle of the second season the coach hase decided to start changing up his offensive scheme.

After a brief respite from such things,unfortunately there are one or two folks out there who for whatever personal reasons have decided to resume the personal attack mode when responding to posts with which they do not agree. Most people don't have a problem if you disagree with them if you can do it in a civil manner. If reading the posts on this site is that upsetting,please take a deep breath before responding. Or,have another beer!

How'd he feel about the FG attempt, down by 20 in the 4th qtr? Love cutting the margin from 20 to 17 with 8 minutes left. Nice job Rob. Way to quit. FU and your process.You could see the players' body language after that decision. They gave up because they saw that their coach gave up.Why kick a FG down 20 and follow it with an onside kick??? It's like the coordinators are all on different pages with each other and Ianello.Great point. It DOES tell the players that you've given up. And inexperienced coaches would tend to make such mistakes. A TD was the only way to still give us a chance to win the game. I still can't imagine what he may have been thinking, other than possibly wanting to say we put a few more points on the board. But, players want to win games.Even Steve French commented on that.

We need to look for someone who knows what they are talking about and talk with them.Excuse me.You really did not want to discuss football did you?? You wanted to discuss the failures of ICoach and Moore.Just reviewing sarcasm #1:..................YPR...........R/PCincy...........3.8..........34/36VMI.............6.4..........49/29 EMU............4.6...........32/29FIU.............3.9...........30/23 note: Moore "ran" the ball 11 times. Started as pass playSo...it does not appear an over commitment to the run. Based on the adjectives used and the tone of your writing, you are once again complaining about the type of offense we run. I totally agree that you have a right to bitch, whine and complain but it is others right be get tired of it and speak up. No?? I am really tired of the lame criticism of Moore and ICoach, the negativity and sarcasm on ZNO lately in regards to football. I agree we need to start winning. I get it...you want to use the "spread" and throw the ball all the time. I don't. I want to run the ball about 50% of the time and expand our options.Please. If it is going to get personal I will from this point on refrain from responding to your posts.. No I was not doing any of those things you ASSUMED I was doing. I get it too. So please don't start talking down to people who may not agree with your personal views of how the football program or the world should be. If you were offended I apologize. I can assure you that this is the last discourse I will have regarding any of your posts. I hope you do me the courtesy of the same.

We need to look for someone who knows what they are talking about and talk with them.Excuse me.

How about the MAC and the S.belt. Better fit. They already play each other anyway.This is the chance I have been talking about for a while. It is happening without any NCAA telling these conferences what to do. Now is the chance for the non-BCS D-1A schools to combine into one league, break up into divisions and play each other at their level, on their own terms. It could be something exciting if they would just let it happen and not worry about the BCS schools and all the nonsense that goes along with being their doormats.West coast vs. east coast, different divisions, a playoff...this could be a fun change.Would have to leave the NCAA....something you would be happy with....have the rules changed Only currently allowed 13 games per year not including a bowl. the new MWC and CUSA merger can't have an extra "championship" game at this time.Lots of conferences don't have every team play every other team,like the MAC. Not a problem. BGSU doesn't play Akron and they are in the same division. Of course if you ditch the MCAA there are no rules.

Ianello mentioned in his press conference that one of the things they wanted to work on was the drop back passing game. Umm. Does that mean he hasn't been satisfied with the result he has been getting from his chosen offensive scheme so far?Anyway,see if the following continue on Saturday:1) Overcomittment to the run. Is the offense trying to run when the run isn't working? Is the offense moving the ball on the ground? Is the offensive game plan as simplistic has it has been? Is the offense leaving the defense hanging out to dry with too many short possesions? 2) Is Moore 'trying' to throw the ball over the middle? Because of the number of batted balls,there didn't seem to be an much of an effort to throw short/medium over the middle in the FIU game.3)Does the game plan call for more option or moving pocket? They ran the option a few times against FIU.4) Is OU crowding the line of scrimmage? Are they saying go ahead and throw we'll take our chances. FIU did.5) Is the defense giving up big yards on the ground? Solich likes that game. He has no problem winning 14-10.That said, this 'looks' like a game that didn't appear to be competetive before the season started,but SHOULD be now.

Do you think RI has that tattooed somewhere?...or does he shorten it?JUST PROCESS BABY!

I may have to suspend my betting theory this week. I expected a lower line also.First of all, put it all on the Zips. Then you won't have to worry about having any cash the rest of the season. These games have a tendency to be close if not really competetive. Akron looks like they are playing well ...but...not really. This is a week Solich has to love. Hunker down and tell his team its a must win. Go out and bust them in the chops.There's no "supposedly" to the injury problem in Athens. First of all, the entire defensive line graduated last year. Every starter from this year's line is now out with injuries - three with season-ending knee injuries. One linebacker (leading tackler) has leg issues and is only 50%. Starting corner has a broken shoulder.To increase our odds of winning I recommend attacking their corner with the broken shoulder.And throw all of the passes high, since he probably can't lift that arm past his waist. Doesn't that happen naturally?

OU-Akron usually USUALLY play close games here even if we are bad. OU wins by a TD+ but the game won't be that close. OU can still hang it on its D to win a game against an offense that has no clue.