GP1

So would I. I watched Wake beat FSU yesterday using a spread offense with a good mix of run and pass. It's how teams with lesser talent win.

He should stick it out at Akron, get a degree and support his school in his professional career. He will have nothing to be ashamed of. I don't understand guys who transfer (unless they are forced to do so) for one year.

Who said that?? Oh yea...YOU. So I am to assume that is your OPINION as I looked it up in the the dictionary and even Googled it and nothing like that came back. Please send me the link if I am mistaken. Wow. I thought we plays to win. I thought we practiced to win. I thought coaches are brought in to win. Apparently my opinion is bunk. It is bunk. We don't do anything to win. Didn't you know that? Everything we do is part of a building process.

What turned it around for JD his first two years was Brett Biggs. He was willing to make a change and had a player who could immediately impact change in the program. Who is Coach I's player who could immediately make change in the program?

Schedule and Results Mack's got himself a nice season going on with his football program. Very favorable schedule, which is a sign of a good AD. Undefeated with a win over UCLA (not that beating UCLA is that hard). Two wins were very close, but they pulled them out. Next three games look favorable as they are at home....I saw ECU play and they have loses to USCarolina, UNC and VA Tech....in the game in all three. If Houston can win this game, the schedule gets easier and they may crack the Top 25. If they go on a nice run, we may see Mack at another school in the future depending on what opens up. This is just speculation, but Mack is a clean cut guy and there is a HUGE school in Ohio that needs to clean up its athletic department by getting rid of the AD....Hmmmmm. Actually, if Mike Thomas would have just waited one more year, he could have fallen into that job easily.

The BCS conferences could leave the Big East behind tomorrow and start their own division. The quality of competition would be increased by not allowing those schools to have 2 rent a win games a year. Better competition would create more viewers. More viewers creates more ad money, which is why these schools are doing what they are doing. Waiting for the next TCU to come along is a waste of time for them. TCU lived through a period where they had lightning in a bottle. Now that that gingerhead QB is gone, they won't be as good. They have already lost to Baylor and SMU....SMU. They may have had their day. It's one thing to play New Mexico, BYU, CO State and UNLV every week. It's another thing to play Oklahoma, Texas, they already lost to Baylor and the rest of the Big 12 every week. They will be a middle of he road Big 12 team.

And for Homecoming, Captain Kangaroo will be visiting the room where he took his first MUM class.

I watched a team with an terrible passing game that had a great running game and a good defense get one game away from the super bowl last year. While it's not popular, it can be done. Someone can always point to the exception. In business, a bad manager will look at an isolated success case and believe it can happen everywhere in lieu of asking why it happened. A one quarter jump in market share can be a result of one unusually large project going your way. If the bad manager believes that level of market share is sustainable because a miracle will happen and another project that size will happen again, he is kidding himself and that is why he is the bad manager. Everything averages. I want to be the team that doesn't have to take the hard road each time it leaves the house. I don't believe the road has to be perfect, but driving over the MOon hasn't been much fun. The University needs to start using its brain in lieu of wishing something unusual would happen. Make a wish or crap in your hat, see which one fills up first. We have a hat full of crap we have been filling for the better part of 20 years. It's really starting to stink around here.

TCU tells Big East, "Just kidding". Looks like they will go to the Big 12. Developing..... A while back, I used to tell everyone the MAC would be better off if it reduced the number of teams in the league to around 10. Is the Big 12 going to be better or worse losing Colorado and TX A&M and replacing only one school with TCU? I say yes...a smaller, more competitive league is always better than a big non-competitive league. Let's be honest, these moves are being made for football, so let me ask the following. How is the competition in the SEC better with TX A&M? How is the Pac Whatever better with Colorado? How is the ACC better with Pitt and Syracuse? I'm not saying they are worse, they just aren't more competitive. The Big 12 is the only conference that got smaller AND better/more competitive by adding TCU. They may have just positioned themselves to be the winner in this game of musical chairs. I still don't understand why the MAC isn't trying to get smaller. My only concern is if football is driving college athletics, we might be one of the schools on the outside looking in. We all understand these moves are not about creating better competition; if they were, the leagues would be looking to get smaller. They are about creating more games which creates more television money.

25 years ago it did. Today is doesn't. The game is about passing (not that running isn't important). I've been saying it for year now.

That's a pretty fancy shirt. I guess if a career in life is to become a drug dealer, one of the goals has to be ending up in jail because so many do. I guess congratulations are in order for reaching a goal. Career Stats

Until the guy named "Other" shows up.

I must confess this did not take place. It's a sad story of a guy in Charleston, on a carriage tour, with his wife and 10 tourists. I'm sure nobody wants to hear about it.

Just light a match. That's all it takes....

I see this quote a lot and I respectfully disagree. I'm sure that in many ways, Coach I is a very good professional at what he does. For instance, I'm pretty sure he knows how to coach the offense he wants to run. I'm philosophically against what he is trying to do with the offense but that doesn't make him in over his head. When people say, "in over his head", it is the type of general statement that can cover a lot of area. It's sort of like when fans say, "the QB doesn't see the field"...how the Hell do they know what the QB sees unless they are sharing his eyes...

Nice!!!!

As much as I make fun of "the building plan", I really shouldn't do it. In fact, I shouldn't make fun of something that doesn't actually exist.

Schedule FIU is having some trouble of late. They beat NTSU by 25 early and Louisville early. Lost to a team they shouldn't have lost to. Zips are at home.......Weather not great. I can't go against Vegas and FIU does cover. FIU 35 Zips 14

Because play calling is a rhythm. To change the rhythm changes the flow of the offense in a way that probably isn't good for the offense. It's the same reason the Wildcat really isn't working...it isn't fooling anyone and has become a series of wasted plays. Before the Zips try anything more, they need to get good at what they are supposed to be good at, which is a pro style offense. Until then, anything else is a waste of plays.

It's much more complicated than a successful offense being called a spread. Please see my description above. It could also be that spread offenses make teams successful. Your strongest piece of evidence isn't really that strong. Coach I is going to have an OC run whatever offense he wants him to run. This can hurt a program if the OC is not skilled at calling plays for that offense. Most coaches Latina's age have coached many styles of play in their careers.

Both wrong. Miami uses a pro-style (or did) and OU runs a variation of the Veer/Option. They RUN the ball. Look up Solich's history. You are starting to post like Zach. You're starting to get out of control. Let me help. The modern day spread offense is not what a lot of people think the spread "run and gun" offenses of the past were when teams threw on every down. I hated those offenses because a team couldn't run the ball when they needed to. Modern offenses spread the field out and running is an important part of that offense. The zone read running play is a base component in the spread offense. Shotgun, single back and single TE when needed defines the modern spread. The old spread offenses had zero back and zero TE. One of the best versions of the modern spread we have seen in recent years is the Brian Kelly spread offenses he ran at CMU and Cincinnati. This offense is similar to those offenses run at places like WVU and Northwestern. This offense takes a limited number of talented players, which is why teams like Northwestern and WVU use them, and place them at points on the field where they can isolate them against weak points on the defense. The offensive line blocking is heavy zone to the initial point of attack with backside blocking allowing for a cutback. Sometimes, the cutback is designed into a play creating a misdirection without pulling a guard on a trap. Like old option offenses, some players are left unaccounted for and it is up to the RB to decide on his running direction...a perfect offense of an offensive line that might be subpar. The QB in the modern spread needs to be able to run, but not a lot. One might say, "just enough". The old spread, the QB was a totem pole waiting to get sacked and would get sacked in the modern game. A pro offense still presents the defense with the totem pole. Sorry CK, but Dan L. at CMU was the best spread QB this league has ever seen and he has the rings to prove it. He could pass and run well. They spread the field and nobody knew where the ball was going to go. We have a QB on our team who excelled in this type of offense in high school. Too bad we won't get to see how he does with it now. In addition, I understand what Solich does at OU. It isn't the same offense he ran at Nebraska. These new types of option offenses are much more exciting and dynamic than they were 20 years ago when I was in school. They are a type of spread option. Navy is probably a better example. 20 years ago, teams who ran tripple option used two TEs and three backs in the backfield. Navy now uses one with flankers. The flankers widen the defense spreading it out and opening the options for the QB. Navy also has a very elaborate line scheme that a team can use when they have an offensive line, all of whom probably scored in the top 2% of the country on the SAT. I don't care for this type of option because if a team falls behind, the passing game just isn't there to come back....In that respect, it is little different than it was 20 years ago. Mike Haywood ran a spread offense at Miami. I don't care where he coached before he was at Miami, he ran the modern spread at Miami. He used the offense to take a loser and quickly turn it into a winner with froshs and sophs. Pitt hired him to coach the spread at their school because they had seen enough with Wanny and his pro offense. I saw Miami play last year and I know what they run. In fact, they run the same thing this year. I absolutely love the modern day spread offenses. Football is a much better game today than it was 20 years ago when I was in school. People who claim otherwise are the type of people who believe the 1950s were a great period in the world. This offense creates an excitement by creating a balance between running and passing that wasn't there 20 years ago. It allows for players to showcase their athletic ability instead of coaches squashing athletic ability by running the ball into the line every play because they believed that is how a team was physical. There are a lot of ways to be tough other than bashing your head against a wall. The spread is more than just run first or pass first. It is an entire offensive philosophy different than pro style in the sets, blocking schemes and play calling rhythm. It allows bad teams to get good with lesser talent than other teams. It is truely a team philosophy that can allow even average players to reach their maximum potential. That's why, to this day, I just can't believe we are running a pro style offense. It goes back to the question I asked over the weekend. Am I the only person with a television set? Everyone runs it for a reason.

If you want to talk facts, let's talk facts.Joe Novak was an old guy who never won a MAC Championship with all of that great talent he had because of his offense. I remember a little 6-6 Zips team spreading it out against his team and winning the league. I also remember his offense not being able to move the ball effectively against an average Zips team late in the game. They had an NFL running back and were so predictable we were able to stop them.Miami runs a type of spread offense. They ran one last season as well. Miami wasn't overflowing with talent last year. They had some talent and used it wisely. There is a fine line between good and average in the MAC. Miami is finding themselves on the average side this season.Al Golden...Please use this site and tell me the number of conference championships he won. Golden used his pro offense to lay an egg in the final two games last season against OU and Miami (both of whom run a type of spread). Maybe we can get this offense to take us 5-3 in the MAC and not win the league. I'm interested in being the best team in the worst league in the country. It can be done. Getting good in the MAC isn't the hardest thing in the world to do. The Zips make it hard and almost everyone else finds it pretty easy to have some good years.One would have to go all the way back to 2003 to find a league champion that didn't run some form of spread offense.One would have to be a complete idiot to ignore facts to say you can win the MAC with a pro style base offense.

It is about one on one, but it takes more studs to be good at the offense than it does with the spread. Schools like Alabama have a line of studs waiting to get in their school and on the field...They can run a pro offense because they have 11 studs...they have 11 more studs as back-up players. MAC schools don't get that volume of good players on any team so they have to be more creative and utilize what talent they have as best as they can. That is why the spread is so valuable at the MAC level. That's what made coaches like Urban Meyer and Brian Kelly so good in the MAC.

Good points. Positions in need of really good players are: 1. QB 2. One good WR 3. Left tackle on offense 4. A guy like Chisholm 5. Stud defensive end 6. One really good LB 7. One really good corner I know you guys hate when I bring up Wake Forest, but here it goes again. They are a low level ACC team that won a lot and went to a BCS game with a group similar to this. The rest of the talent on the team was average at best, but they won. 1. Riley Skinner at QB (Skinner rhymes with winner). He was a very good college QB who could run and pass AND pass on the run. 2. NFL WR Kenny Moore 3. I don't remember who their left tackle was so they were missing a little here but they had a solid front five. 4. They had 3 guys like Chisholm and they all played and were always fresh when they went in the game. 5. Don't remember the DE, but they had solid defenses because of #6 and #7 below. 6. NFL DB A. Smith (was also a great kick returner). 7. NFL stud Aaron Curry at LB It doesn't take 11 good guys in a spread offense. They had a small number of good guys and spent every Saturday trying to find ways to get that small number the ball as much as possible. The spread allows a team to be creative. A pro offense offers little creativity. On defense. They had two studs who could take out the other teams best WR and Curry could cover half the field by himself on running plays. I don't expect the Zips to have seven guys as good as Wake did, but I do expect them to have seven guys who are good enough to win in the MAC. Right now, we have 1.5 of the guys we need in Chisholm and Wagner (I'm not so sold on Wagner). The rest are I-AA players. It's a long way between 1.5 and 7.

I'd like to think he feels the heat regardless of what the fans think. When leadership of a sports organization listens to the fans, they turn into the Browns. We don't need that.