skip-zip

Buckzip, if this data is correct, then I was wrong on the facts about their recruiting rankings. It just seems to me like all of the OSWho fans I know tell me that they have one of the top recruiting classes every year. And that wouldn't surprise me that they're wrong since most of those people are your typical "the Buckeyes can do no wrong" type of fans.

Wow...some harsh stuff, right on down to criticizing who KD puts on the floor as a top-10 news story? GoZips. Relax for awhile on the PG issue. If I recall, you were pretty vocal about Humpty being the great savior of Akron Basketball a few years ago too. For the time being, we have two very experiences senior guards who will have a big impact on our success this year.

I find it interesting that EVERY YEAR I hear of OSWho having one of the top couple of recruiting classes. Yet, they aren't winning national titles. Honestly, doesn't that leave you to question your coach? If they are indeed getting the best players, but aren't winning the titles, isn't that a no-brainer to classify that as an "underachieving" situation?

Here's a possible solution to the problem with the athletes having spending money that could possibly keep all schools equal. Let them work for minimum wage serving food at the cafeteria, spreading salt in the parking lots, or ushering at volleyball games.

I think I've read enough comments about this not being a big deal, and that nobody got hurt, that it's not a crime, and that it does not create an unfair advantage. Come on. The fame that a player obtains from becoming a star at OSWho instead of Akron is already something we have to deal with that creates an unfair advantage. Does someone really want to add the fact that players might also obtain pants that they are free to sell for thousands of dollars? How about the street value of a MAC title ring to the Big 10 title ring? Plus, with no restrictions on employment, we can run the risk of a major donor giving a future star a job that pays a lot of money for doing maybe nothing? And a school like Akron wouldn't be hurt by this during the recruiting process? Do we really want to naively think that kids wouldn't know of these opportunities? The closer we stay to a college football culture that enforces the idea that these kids are exclusively college students who get a free education to play sports for that school, and can gain nothing more, is the best situation to keep Akron on a level playing field.

0-2. Left nut remains intact. Zips played a nice tourney. 2-1 is what was to be expected. However, this team needs McNees to wake up. He's going to get his 30 minutes per game the remainder of the season, and take his 6-12 shots per game. If he has a 20% 3-point percentage at year's end, we're looking at another CBI bid. The Zips have a lot of work to do between now and the K.e.n.t. game. We've played terrible at home. And K.e.n.t. is the type of team that gives us the most trouble...yes...the dreaded "athletic" team. At work I bet a lunch with two guys...K.e.n.t. Fan and NIU Fan...on every Zips vs. <K.e.n.t. or NIU> basketball and football game. I took a lunch time beating in 2010. It has to change in 2011. I hope Brett McKnight gets his team ready for the K.e.n.t. game. K.e.n.t's waxed us the past 2 years. It has to stop on January 8th. Amen!! Seems like a long time since we won 4 in a row from them. And there was really no difference with the make-up of the two teams back then. Can't was the more athletic team back then too. But we were Very Good. Over the last couple of years, we've probably only been "good". And that hasn't been good enough against the kinds of athletes Can't can put on the floor against us.

You're right. Know why? Because we are their first opponent during the terms of the suspension. Bingo. What's hilarious is that you guys probably really believe that. LOL. Hey, I'm sure we all still realize that we'll need a miracle to win. But, one can still hope

The amazing after-game thought for me is that we played a team who shot 1-11 from 3-point range. You should be able to beat ANY team that shoots 1-11 from 3-point range in a game. Why didn't we win then? Because we're a poor shooting team ourselves. I'm puzzled at how Bardo played 22 minutes without committing a since foul. That's a minor miracle to me.

I've stayed pretty silent to kind of let this thing play out a bit, but I pretty much agree with this. I know plenty of OSWho fans, and I will cut them a little slack since most of them hold the almightly OSWho above God, and think they can do no wrong, and it's useless to try to talk rationally with them. BUT, I find it laughable if anyone truly believes that this serious of events was some kind of humanitarian effort to help others. Spare Me !! Beyond that, I'm a Zips fan, and think about what will benefit the Zips. If we allow the big schools with all this money floating around to break rules, it's not a benefit to the Zips. If we allow the bigger schools with a lot of money to pay players, that's a disadvantage to the Zips. So, at this point, I'm completely in favor of enforcing all of these rules, and putting the hammer down on any schools that are getting any kind of unfair advantage becuase players are able to gain benefits that they wouldn't be able to obtain if they played at a MAC school.

You're right. Know why? Because we are their first opponent during the terms of the suspension. Bingo.

That's right. The score was 3-2 at halftime. But we had to have a play reviewed to get a safety called correctly. The refs must have been embarrassed for them. That was absolutely PRICELESS joining all of the other Zips fans in chants of Z-I-P-S, while watching 90 thousand people dressed in red and silver look stunned with their jaws hanging to the ground. By the way, did anyone see the article in Cowlumbuses OWN paper on the follow up to their president's recent idiotic comments? It ends up that Boise State's schedule was actually BETTER than Ohio State's schedule, and TCUs was comparable. How embarrassing!!!! I loved it. Their writer appears to actualy be ripping on his own team. It's hilarious. You have to see it.

That is, if we can assume that all 2nd year coaches show dramatic signs that they learned something from all of the mistakes they made their first year. One can only hope....and pray.

All I have to say is Thank God for John Kasich.

Once again, to beat them you have to SCHEDULE them. Oakland has already played 4 ranked teams, and still has OSWho coming up.

Times change. Plus, really? The Zips haven't gained any notoriety because of the soccer team? Take any notoriety the basketball or football team has, multiply it by 18 and you still aren't getting anywhere near the notoriety of the soccer team. Every soccer fan in the country knows who Akron is, whether it be because of the national championship or because of multiple MLS players. I would bet your average NFL or NBA fan couldn't name a single player from Akron (aside from Jason Taylor and I'd be surprised if they knew he went there). Trust me, out here in Boston, MA no one is impressed with the basketball or football team. It's all soccer, all the time. Please, tell me where I stated that we didn't earn any notoriety from our soccer championship? But, you did mention the key word yourself, "soccer fans" noticed our championship. But back to the response to this post topic. Making a heavy investment in women's soccer in order to possibly build a major college athletic program around men's and women's soccer combined is a bad idea. Let me ask you a question. The Akron men's soccer team (the best in the country) drew roughly a few thousand per game. The best football programs in the country can draw over 100,000 per game. If you wanted to grow the athletic prowess of your University, where would you invest your resources? Football and basketball are by far the kingpins of collegiate sports, and always will be. Easy there skippy!!!! Take two of these and go back to the fb/bb boards in the morning I must be outwardly expressing a little holiday stress. But, I am not cutting on soccer. I wish right now that soccer got tons of publicity. But it is what it is.

Here's my question: When you look at the resources dedicated by schools with the best football programs in the country, does UA have the resources to compete at that top level? There's no question about soccer. It's already been done. UA is #1. To be at the top in basketball would require significantly greater resources. To be at the top in football would require astronomically greater resources. The bigger the sport, the greater the resources required to compete at the top level. What is the biggest sport that UA realistically has the resources to compete at the top level? That's the sport where the resources should be focused. So, you're in favor of dumping more money into women's soccer in the hopes that their success, along with the men's success, will elevate the entire athletic program as a whole? It has a very small benefit, at best. Even with the men's program, you're looking at building your athletic programs around a sport where the #1 school in the nation draws 3,000 fans per game. What would you gain by investing your resources there? Still no TV of any significance, limited publicity, and maybe a few hundred more dollars in revenue per game from having a few more fans. The gain in football is infinitely greater. And although it takes more investment, you can also increase attendance by 10s of thousands, and TV revenue by hundreds of thousands, if not millions. I was using the best soccer team and the best football teams only as a comparison of where the two sports stand in fan interest. Akron isn't ever going to draw what the top programs draw for football. But, to be successful enough to take our attendance from 10,000 to 20,000 or 30,000, with higher revenue TV games, millions of viewers, etc., is a dramatic return on investment that would never be realized with an increased investment in women's and men's soccer.

Times change. Plus, really? The Zips haven't gained any notoriety because of the soccer team? Take any notoriety the basketball or football team has, multiply it by 18 and you still aren't getting anywhere near the notoriety of the soccer team. Every soccer fan in the country knows who Akron is, whether it be because of the national championship or because of multiple MLS players. I would bet your average NFL or NBA fan couldn't name a single player from Akron (aside from Jason Taylor and I'd be surprised if they knew he went there). Trust me, out here in Boston, MA no one is impressed with the basketball or football team. It's all soccer, all the time. Please, tell me where I stated that we didn't earn any notoriety from our soccer championship? But, you did mention the key word yourself, "soccer fans" noticed our championship. But back to the response to this post topic. Making a heavy investment in women's soccer in order to possibly build a major college athletic program around men's and women's soccer combined is a bad idea. Let me ask you a question. The Akron men's soccer team (the best in the country) drew roughly a few thousand per game. The best football programs in the country can draw over 100,000 per game. If you wanted to grow the athletic prowess of your University, where would you invest your resources? Football and basketball are by far the kingpins of collegiate sports, and always will be.

With all respect if you like this sport, are you implying that we should build an athletic program around soccer? And that a stronger women's program would help? Of course, we all enjoyed what happened here a little more than a week ago. But, most sports fans in this country didn't even notice. Some might not even know that soccer is a college sport, or that Akron has a team. You gain notoriety through football and basketball. That's where the emphasis should remain.

I agree. You just described almost every MAC school. Unfortunately, we are in somewhat of the same position Can't is in. The trouble with Akron is gaining that one winning season as well, and not a 6-6 record. Akron is in a good postion to turn things around if they could just turn a bunch of guys who don't believe they can win into a group of guys who believe they can win. There's a lot more to that, but in general, there is more up-side at Akron than any other floundering MAC school. I wonder if JD wishes he had left after his 2nd year.

I'm sure it is indeed just a big misunderstanding. That program is a joke to the whole institution of college athletics.

1-12 If that's "good," what's "great?" 4-16? No use arguing with some of these guys Cap'n. The way they see it Steve is the "Shooting" Guard and therefore he should lead the team in shots. You simply can't let facts about how many of his shots come from behind the arch or how he is an extremely streaky shooter get in the way of blindly breaking down shot attempts based on what position a player plays. Can we now say 1-11 was a "good" football season? After that celebration on the field last month, you could be left with the impression that some people felt that way.

Because to this point it is nearly impossible to be LESS successful than Ianello.

Would anyone really had been any more happy if we had won by a couple of baskets? That was rough. We needed everything we had just to get that game into overtime, and we should have beaten those guys by 30 points. But, Steve concerns me a bit too. One of the possibly unoticed problems with moving him over to the wing is who he's forced to guard on the defensive end too. I think he and Darryl were the guards at the end of regulation, and through overtime. We've seen that pattern for the 3rd season now. And I've always believed that Steve at the point with Darryl by his side puts the team in the best position to win at the present time. But, Steve's shooting problems are puzzling. The guy has almost ideal long-range mechanics. It's a mystery to me too.

Sorry, but all of this makes me recall a couple of the most absurd thoughts I've heard on here so far this basketball season. 1) Brett doesn't have a good shooting percentage. We can do without him. We have Euton now. 2) Since this team is already pretty established, maybe Brett can come back and contribute as a "role player". If the recent article isn't enough to convince everyone how much his teammates are glad to have him back, the way they reacted on the floor on Saturday should be more than enough. He immediately changed the complexion of of the game, and his teammates leaned on him immediately to make some things happen. As he gets back into the flow, I won't be surprised if we find that he'll not only be a major contributor, but very possibly still the best player on our roster.

I wouldn't be surprised at all.