GP1

I agree completely. Next year could really be an unknown year for the MAC in an unpredictable way. That's when a team like Akron has to make a jump. The bottom line is this. If we don't win at least four games next year, we are still in the "horrible" range of teams for the league. It would be our fourth year in a row in the horrible range with two different coaches. Something has to break for this program next season. Winning has to start taking place in a serious manner. By serious, I mean some wins against programs with a pulse. Another year of sub 4 wins, and the recruiting gets that much more difficult so the long term prospects for winning become even more difficult. One of the lies of the "building process" is it is OK to suck for a while as a program is slowly built. Good things tend to happen around good things happening. Good things don't normally happen around bad things. Winning is good. Losing is bad. Winning results in more winning because it is something that can truly be built around. Winning is real. It's easier to continue to win when you are winning because a lot of pieces fall into place. Losing is something nobody can build around because it is a foundation of mud. Nothing falls into place and nothing can be supported for very long. That's why winning next year is so important. I hope everyone understands how important next year is. It isn't just year two of Bowden. Right now, it is four years of sucking with a potential for a fifth that really needs to be avoided.

Hmmmm. Let me help the Cavs. Do the math on living/working in the following places while having more money than you could ever spend. Miami vs. Cleveland Los Angeles vs. Cleveland I guess the economy of Cleveland will have to recover in another manner.

Why not buy four thousand and make up the difference with extra tickets sold? This is a promotion. Promotions are designed to bring people to games. If they feel it is a worthwhile promotion, the cost shouldn't matter. In fact, buy five thousand and if there are any remaining, put a price tag on them and sell them.

Why only 1,500?

The Massillon coach is an idiot on a couple of levels. First, when the coaching change was made, he should have informed his player of the potential risks to his scholarship when a coaching change is made. Secondly, never say never. If Cincy is a fit for a kid, the kid should have every opportunity to explore that possibility without his high school coach getting in the way. Here is what I would do if I was a coach for Cincy and wanted to talk to a kid a Massillon. Contact him another way beyond his high school coach. Call the parents directly or whatever you need to do to reach the kid, but find a way to talk to one. Don't let an idiot high school football coach decide for the kid. Lastly, high school coaches really need to sit down with their players and encourage them not to commit to a school until all possibilities are explored. Too many kids are "verbally" committing to schools at entirely too young of ages. The final commitment should not be made until official visits are completed. It's all short sighted and stupid to commit to a school in 10th grade like some are doing now. Just stupid.

Could it be the MAC is the same in a very predictable way?: two teams are the clear leaders. It seems to me from your post that the major difference in the MAC is the teams in the west have decided to stop sucking so bad and actually compete against the east better. These changes could actually make the league much more entertaining to watch.

Getsy to WMU

Or, the recognition they could walk all over a lame duck AD without much blow back.

It does in some very interesting ways. What history never reports on during a dynasty period is the number of really good teams that never make it to the top because of the dynasty. Had any of those team existed during a non dynasty period, they would have a championship. This discussion always leads me to think of the Dallas Cowboys of the 1970s. This was a team, except for a few plays here and there, could have had just as many Super Bowls as the Steelers, but things didn't work out. It's the nature of sports. If LSU makes just a couple more plays against Alabama this year, they beat ND and not Alabama...It will become a back story in history, but I find those stories interesting.

Would anyone like to discuss the horrible game that was on TV last nigh? I thought Alabama would win, but not by as much as they did. Lots of talk about Nick Saban. Great coach, but a play here or there against LSU and yesterday has a different outcome. I'd like to congratulate ND for getting the ball past the 50 yard line. Anyone ever been to the dog track in Wheeling? There is a place where you can go down and watch the dogs pee on a wood post so they can test them for drugs. It is a good place to see the dogs up close to see their physical conditioning as the dogs are only about ten feet away. Not many people go down there, but I've made a lot of money seeing the dogs up close and betting on the better conditioned dogs. Had I seen the Alabama dogs next to the ND dogs before the game yesterday, I would have never thought the game would be close. Bigger, faster, stronger just wasn't a cliche last night. Better everything all around. Wasn't even close. There is an old saying, "When one door closes, another opens." That statement probably couldn't have been more true around Ohio yesterday. The sound of the door closing was all of the ND fans putting their sweatshirts they haven't worn in 20 years back in the drawer for another 20 years. The sound of the door opening was those same fans opening up the door to where they keep their OSU sweatshirt to throw it back on. Would it be out of line to predict Alabama winning the national championship next year?

This is too bad. I HATE stories about players getting hurt. I hate seeing it even more...won't even watch the replays of RGIII getting hurt yesterday.

Agreed. You missed the point about it being about OSU or Michigan or both at the same time.

You have basically described the Big Ten since the late 1960s. It is now and traditionally has been a league of the same two teams with a sprinkle of good teams other than those two every once in a while. That's why it is such a bad league. It has been for a long time.

By "great things at Purdue", do you mean 8 wins two years in a row or something? Purdue hasn't won the Big Ten since 2000 and they went 8-4 that year. It was also a three way tie for the championship and they went to the Rose Bowl because they had not been to it since the last time they won the league in 1967. If you mean "great things at Purdue" as he will make enough money in his short tenure to be comfortable for the rest of his life, I would agree 1,000%. Purdue is now and will always be the NC State of the Big Ten. 4-5 years from now, he will be on to other opportunities with a wallet full of cash. No doubt Hazell is a solid college football coach. At the end of the day, his success in the business of college football allowed him to take a much higher paying job. Guys who find success at a MAClike level should cash in at the end of a great season if they can. There is too much money not to. I'll say this one time and one time only to the Can't football team because I'm feeling magnanimous this morning....Congratulations on a good season. Even though you don't have a championship ring to go with all of the wins you have and your coach abandoned you the first chance he got, it was a good season. To all Can't graduates I would like to say, congratulations on a fun season. Now that the fun is over, please get back to mowing grass, shoveling driveways and flipping burgers.

If it is all about money, there is more money in not playing non bcs teams. If it is about wins, playing the non bcs teams makes sense.

It is not. Current BCS conferences less the Big East plus four schools that meet a strick entrance criteria. Then the doors shut forever and universities can return to the business of educating people. This country needs more innovation coming out of universities and fewer new stadiums, arenas and indoor football practice arenas.

Anyone watching FCS Championship? Neither of these teams could win a division in the MAC. I don't want the Zips playing at this level of football. While we haven't had much success in D1, we can do better than what is on tv right now.

Georgetown, yes. The others, no. After a couple of years, nobody will care. Change will be hard on some and a Georgetown could lose out.

Never underestimate how easy it is to dupe the America people when it comes to sports. In time, the money will swamp schools that aren't in the top tier. The tv networks will pretend there are no other teams and they will soon be forgotten. A dull regular season? Any more than the current dull regular season, or the now dull conference tournaments, or the now dull first round of the NCAA tournament? Does it really matter if Duke beats a 20-10 NC A&T or a 10-20 (insert bottom dweller Big Ten, ACC, SEC, etc school name here) in the first round? I follow sports pretty closely and I cannot name a single first round match up from last year and it has only been nine months. The big schools want money and they want it now so athletic directors can get it on their resumes. Things like competition and excitement are secondary as the illusion of those two can always be created.

You have touched upon the central question nobody has asked for years at Universities. Are universities in existence to make discoveries in the various fields of science in their colleges and then educate the future leaders of our country about those discoveries. Or, are they in existence to provide young adults a place to go play for a few years while they get degrees in fields that aren't much use in the real world? Or, are they places where administrators can mask their incompetence and lack of ability to see the future by building one open air building after another (looks great from the outside, but there is nothing inside)? I guess it is a lot of things. The problem is, the focus on the building process and not the discovery/education process.

These questions are easy to answer. No and no. The money made by the NCAA Basketball Tournament is the vast majority of the revenue the NCAA uses to operate the NCAA. The schools can take that money and put it in their own pockets while at the same time funding a much less bloated bureaucracy to manage their own division.

There is another way to look at it. Is it the number of home games or the amount of money they can make? More games could equal more money. Fewer games could also equal more money depending on price points for items sold. What if they did have a 14 game season with 7 home games in lieu of 8 home games AND they only played each other? They could easily make up the difference in revenue in increased prices for tickets, concessions, parking, alumni donation for ticket reservations, etc. In my opinion, the amount of home games teams like OSU and others play has to do with more than money. Does it make more money? Yes. It is also a method whereby they are able to stack up easy wins and create the illusion of greatness and most importantly, stay in the conversation for the BCS Championship. Unless you are an SEC team, you more or less have to go undefeated to make the BCS Championship. Current scheduling is done with that in mind. When the BCS teams separate, a playoff will take effect. With a playoff, there is less of a need to go undefeated and more of a need to just make the playoffs, so early season losses are not as important.

There is a difference between what you call yourself and what you are willing to spend. The non bcs schools have a lot bigger problems than whether or not they are on the ESPNU Tuesday night game (which I believe is a disaster for those teams, but we can argue that on another thread). Non BCS schools tend to get non bcs talent regardless of their exposure on espn. Again, the espn argument falls into the "exposure" category. Other than "in theory", is there any evidence that playing on Tuesday night espn games is good for recruiting at the non bcs level or does it increase the quality of player? My evidence saying it doesn't would be that the Zips played in their share of those games in recent years and we just finished 1-11 two years in a row. How did that "exposure" work out for us?

Back to the topic. I'm going with Can't losing 28-17.

Replays are making games last forever. In addition, they take all excitement out of the game when obvious TDs have to be replayed. BTW, why do the refs say, "The previous play is under further review."...... It's, "The previous play is under review."