GP1

I loved the Sherman interview because it brought the fans closer to the game, which is the purpose of the media. For the first time, Sherman revealed to a lot of football fans what it sounds like on the field during the game when players are talking. The actually say things like that all the time in the exact way he said it. He should be thanked for the interview.

Playing better than the other team and scoring more points in the Super Bowl wins championships. Everything else is a cliche.

You already have given the metrics that prove my theory. The truth is all around you. Stop staring at the weeds.

Thanks for your response LZip. It is an interesting statement and an interesting company. When the owner says the things he does, he is talking about everyone at the company, including himself. A great leader. A great leader challenges himself and not just those around him.

Headline I think the Plain Dealer keeps the headline of this story ready to go at all times. All they have to do is change four words and they are ready to go.

Good starting five. Not having a true PG on the floor to start makes me uncomfortable, but considering out PG situation, why not? There have to be 2-3 guys who play until their legs almost fall off or foul trouble. For me, those three are Diggs, Forsythe and Tree. In order to play a lot of minutes, one must get used to playing a lot of minutes with game conditioning. It isn't really finding a rotation as much as it is finding the 2-3 guys you are going to live and die with. There isn't a team out there who has five "go to" guys so the number is smaller than five and probably four as well. Most everyone has 2-3. Unless there are a lot of unknowns, those players should be identified before the season and conditioned to play loads of minutes. The others come in and out of the game as the game dictates based upon their abilities. It isn't about throwing a bunch of guys in and out of the game. It's about playing to win and deploying the troops as necessary to win.

Thanks for the reply BirdZips. I would say we have some work to do in terms of fundamentals, but I'm not sure we are terrible at them. For example, I believe our passing would improve if the offense flowed better and the spacing was better. I do think you hit the nail on the head. The Zips have a very talented group of players. I don't think it would be out of the question to call them one of most talented, if not the most talented team ever. There is a big difference between talent and playing good basketball. There have been Zips teams in the recent past who were less talented than the current group and would extend a beating to this current group because they played the game better.

I'm not talking about their top five players. Teams don't have five key players.

I'm sure the injury to his DB probably had a lot to do with it. A key player out of the secondary and blitzing the #1 offensive line in the NFL could have produced a worse loss for them. NE was never going to win yesterday. Between the type of exhausting game Denver plays at high altitude and Brady being a little "off" yesterday, it just wasn't going to happen.

It looks they play their key players more in big games. That's my point. There can't be nine key players. Worrying about the minutes of the rest doesn't focus on maximizing output. I like to look at what teams do with their stars in big games. Many on this board obsess about what KD does with 9-10 guys in big games. What he doesn't do is settle on a smaller group of key players and ride them, do or die. That's why we fall short. Toledo came to win on Saturday and we came to tinker with the rotation.

Denver's strength is their offense and it starts with the line. Denver has the #1 ranked offensive line in the NFL. They are good enough to produce the #1 pass offense in the league and a rush offense in the top half. Seattle's offensive line ranks 23rd while producing the #4 rushing offense while only the #26 passing offense. Not very good balance and what is impressive does not win games in 2013-14. It would be more impressive if those two numbers were turned around. Both teams are tied for rushing defense for 2013. Seattle is #8 in sacks and that is impressive, but not enough to get to Manning enough with the #1 offensive line in front of him and the schemes they use to get rid of the ball quickly. Seattle is #1 in interceptions. Whether or not this matters will depend on how physical the refs allow them to play. The less physical, the more it favors Denver. Bad weather favors Seattle's running game. Denver took apart NE yesterday with machine like precision and they are on a roll. I think their offensive line is going to make the difference in the game and they win in a relatively low scoring game. 27-20. They are too good at too many things. A better team than Seattle all around.

Please see my signature line.

It's a building process....

Statistical size seems too small if you look at just one team. Looks to me like Akron needs to have their top guys playing more minutes.

I guess the question of whether or not to bring him back depends on one other question. How is the current point guard recruitment going? I would imagine if there is a PG out there with the talent to unseat the current group, we should make a huge effort at getting him and AA does not come back. AA is better than what we have and he isn't exactly a world beater. My concern would be his ability to play after a year off. Q has extremely good athletic ability and AA does not. Q can take a year off and still have the ability. Not sure AA will be able to do the same thing. In reality, Akron needs something different than AA if they really want to take the program to another level. One of the guys who owns the company where my wife works always say, "What got us here won't get us there." AA helped to get us to where we are (sadly, not always in a positive manner). Another year of him won't get us to where we need to be. Akron is only a couple of players away from being as good as Toledo, so it isn't like we can't do it or it is an impossible hurdle to get over. Sorry if my belief that this team/program should be better in every way than they are now offends some.

It's extraordinary to play your best players most of the game in a big, nationally televised game? Sounds like smart coaching to me. Averages are interesting as the don't always tell the real story. I would be more interested in knowing the minutes distribution against meaningful teams.

Off of shots, properly boxing out renders your opponent less mobile. Since he is less mobile, he is less likely to get a loose ball. The player in proper athletic position wins.

Being in position to get loose balls is like being in position to get a rebound. Toledo was constantly in front of the Zips rebounders on the offensive end and the defensive end. If you execute good fundamental position rebounding (rebounding is an art, not a bunch of guys bumping into each other), the ball falls your way even when they are loose balls. It's the same as getting a fumble in football, get enough guys around the ball and fumbles get recovered. Get enough guys around the rim/ball and the rebounds go your way. How is Toledo this good? They brought in three really good players with two of them being top notch MAC players, they put them out on the floor for the vast majority of the game with some other decent player, they execute on the offensive/defensive end with good passing/a well run offense/good team defense and play a fundamentally sound game for 40 minutes. What Toledo is doing is not complicated. Toledo plays good basketball. Akron tinkers with the rotation hoping something works.

Yes, the Zips will find a way to win 20 before the end of the regular season. That's only a 9-6 record. The MAC is a terrible league and they should have no trouble doing that.

He may be only off by a game or two. It was a complete beating today. It was machinelike in the way they beat the Zips. Toledo was better than Akron in a way that doing a thing or two different isn't going to change the fact that they have better players and a better overall team. For example, they didn't out rebound the Zips because Akron wasn't hustling. Players can look like they aren't hustling when they are getting out performed by another player. They out rebounded Akron because they are better at rebounding. They converted a lot of points in the paint off of rebounds not because they were out hustling Akron, they did it because they are good at getting offensive rebounds and scoring in the paint. I don't know if anyone remembers my post from earlier this year, but I'd like to bring it up again. Akron has a bunch of one trick ponies. All of their guys tend to be good at one thing and not very good at most other things. Toledo has guys who can rebound AND score after getting a rebound. They have a guard who can shoot from the outside AND create off of the dribble. We just don't have enough of those kinds of players. We have one star in Tree and he was outplayed by both of Toledo's stars today. So, my question is this. After two years, how is Toledo's coach able to field such a complete team full of versatile players and we continually rotate one guy after another in an attempt to throw enough poop at the wall that something will stick? Toledo had three guys play over 30 minutes and one at 29. Akron had only one guy play 30 minutes and then another at 29. KD needs to find five guys who are going to get the majority of the minutes, start them and stick with them do or die. This whole "11 man rotation" nonsense is just that, nonsense. It looks great against cupcakes, but stinks up the gym against teams with real talent. I guess another question. Of all the MAC teams that went deep (for us, that would mean winning a game) into the ncaa tournament, how many of them really were using 10 different guys on a regular basis? If my memory is correct, most of them threw their stars on the floor and lived and died with them for as many minutes as possible. Toledo might just do the same thing this year.

That was a thorough beating and it was no fluke. Just one question. Who is the old guy behind the bench who keeps yelling, "Run the dog gone pick and roll Keith!"?

Is there still a place on the east side of Akron called Duffy's? The used to serve breakfast and have a full bar.

First, I don't see any way JT goes to work for Detroit unless his two main options fail. He likes being the head guy and for many, many years was the head guy at tosu and ysu. I think this rumor does two things. First, it forces UofA to poop or get off of the pot with JT. He either gets the nod to become President or not. A guy who is accustomed to making millions a year is not going to sit around Akron forever if he gets passed over so he is going to have to move himself into the upper income bracket quickly. Speed if very important to Tressel right now as he is 61 and needs to make a quick move if he is going to make one. Second, it places pressure on the Browns to make a decision if JT is interested in the job. Those who want the Browns job must be feeling jittery right about now. JT may be one of those people. The conversation between Tressel and the Lions might be, "Ideally, I want either the Presidents position at Akron or head coach of the Browns. If both fall through, I'll start looking for a place in Auburn Hills. Let's keep this offer open for now and revisit it in a couple of weeks."

No Can't? The MACC alone makes us better than Eastern and Can't. We are probably a bottom 16 team over that period as the Ianello years would destroy any average, but we aren't a bottom two.

Disagree. While I agree think the coaching staff from last year was the best ever because of experience, there were a couple not far behind. The 1987 staff was young, but had some really good coaches on in. Included in that staff were current secondary coach Mike Woodford and Indianapolis Colts offensive line coach Hal Hunter. Coach Carr later went on to coach for several NFL teams as well. The DC and OC from that season had high level D1 coaching also. JDs first staff was very good also.