Analyzing the roster....

[Roo]

Like I have said, we have watched PN7 play the last two years. If he is the starting QB again this year, this team is in for a world of hurt. He is not a DI caliber QB, he just doesn't have it.

Moore should be the starting QB, let's see what he has to offer. Nicely isn't going to get it done and if he is the starter....just going to have to prepare myself for another long long long season of bad Akron football.

[Doug Snyder]

While I believe that Moore is the better QB and better leader

That statement negates the rest of your post. If we "lose" PN7, DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS ON THE WAY OUT.

I understand your sentiments but I may not have described my position well enough. Although I may think Moore is better....that is based on Nicely's track record and what Moore has done at levels below D1. I have seen very little of both to actually make the call. That is why I hoped he would have made the debate moot by now. Since he has not...there is no real proof that he better and since Nicely has done all that he is asked and has been the started for more than a year...I believe he should be the starter in game 1. I don't think he will quit if he is not the starter...but he may mentally check out if he loses a job to someone who did not earn it on the field. We may need him this year. Lack of depth is my major concern this year. I also think it is important to establish the culture that you win and lose positions on the field and in practice.

That said...there is still 2 weeks for one of them to step up. But my guess is that Nicely will be the starter and Moore will take over by game 2-3.

[72 Roo]

While I believe that Moore is the better QB and better leader

That statement negates the rest of your post. If we "lose" PN7, DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS ON THE WAY OUT.

I understand your sentiments but I may not have described my position well enough. Although I may think Moore is better....that is based on Nicely's track record and what Moore has done at levels below D1. I have seen very little of both to actually make the call. That is why I hoped he would have made the debate moot by now. Since he has not...there is no real proof that he better and since Nicely has done all that he is asked and has been the started for more than a year...I believe he should be the starter in game 1. I don't think he will quit if he is not the starter...but he may mentally check out if he loses a job to someone who did not earn it on the field. We may need him this year. Lack of depth is my major concern this year. I also think it is important to establish the culture that you win and lose positions on the field and in practice.

That said...there is still 2 weeks for one of them to step up. But my guess is that Nicely will be the starter and Moore will take over by game 2-3.

I agree with that also.

[Dr Z]

I'm not sure how ZN posters can think that the Lone Range is better? What criteria are you using? Watching a practice? Hoping he is better than what you saw last year at the position? I'm hoping that both QB's can play in Columbus so we can get a real game time evaluation. Does anybody think the QB practice situation may be too hard to evaluate, and the only way to figure it out is game time situation?...which is what really counts. It's possible Columbus won't even give a good evaluation if both play, then we move on to Temple. It's not such a bad thing, as some suggest, that we need to decide who the starter is now. Maybe letting it play out is the best thing for our win loss record this year...and next. Isn't that what it's really about?

[Buckzip]

I'm not sure how ZN posters can think that the Lone Range is better? What criteria are you using? Watching a practice? Hoping he is better than what you saw last year at the position? I'm hoping that both QB's can play in Columbus so we can get a real game time evaluation. Does anybody think the QB practice situation may be too hard to evaluate, and the only way to figure it out is game time situation?...which is what really counts. It's possible Columbus won't even give a good evaluation if both play, then we move on to Temple. It's not such a bad thing, as some suggest, that we need to decide who the starter is now. Maybe letting it play out is the best thing for our win loss record this year...and next. Isn't that what it's really about?

I think it's either the SEC recruited hype or the fact that he Moore can't be worse.

I don't feel that anyone is saying Moore will be an All American. I just think they are saying PN sucks.

It's all about upsides.

Personally, I believe that unless PN flat out wins the job that Moore should start. If all else is equal, I want the high ceiling adn athletic guy over the unproven statue.

[akronzips71]

I guess I didn't make myself clear.

PN7 sucks.

There is NO downside to CM. What can he do, lose? We already have that in PN7. I could do a better job, and I am 62 years old with a bad knee and no arm. I can still lose just as good as he can.

[Buckzip]

I guess I didn't make myself clear.

PN7 sucks.

There is NO downside to CM. What can he do, lose? We already have that in PN7. I could do a better job, and I am 62 years old with a bad knee and no arm. I can still lose just as good as he can.

That isn't fair. He was a first season starter in a new system on a terrible team. Only a true experienced star would have real success in that system.

If you took a MAC caliber QB and let him play a little as a true freshman and then have him start as a sophomore under a new coaching staff and a new system on a terrible team with little talent, it wouldn't make that much of a difference from where PN7 was at the end of the last season. Anyone young QB would struggle in that scenario.

Now, I'm not saying saying he will be a good player. I am pretty much saying we don't have enough evaluation time to decide that yet.

If the guy starts out the first 3 games and looks the same as last year I will agree 100% with you.

I say the first 3 because I don't think any QB in Zips history will look good in game one with this OL going against that OL.

Frey, Weems, or Clayton Moore may have a little success because they can move. However no statue will be able to be successful when they are under constant pressure.

With all that being said, if all else is equal, please play Moore.

[Zipmeister]

Moore should be the starter until he blows himself out of the job.

1-11 with Nicely. PN7 sucks, and I think everyone knows that. He was a replacement for a replacement.

There is NO downside to starting Moore. What is the worst that can happen, 1-11? 0-12? Been there done that with PN7. Time to move on. He just does not have the arm.

Sometimes you just have to take a chance. Moore could be REALLY good, and we need to find out, not leave a potential winner on the bench.

Does he have the flexibility to do that?

[ZachTheZip]

I guess I didn't make myself clear.

PN7 sucks.

There is NO downside to CM. What can he do, lose? We already have that in PN7. I could do a better job, and I am 62 years old with a bad knee and no arm. I can still lose just as good as he can.

That isn't fair. He was a first season starter in a new system on a terrible team. Only a true experienced star would have real success in that system.

If you took a MAC caliber QB and let him play a little as a true freshman and then have him start as a sophomore under a new coaching staff and a new system on a terrible team with little talent, it wouldn't make that much of a difference from where PN7 was at the end of the last season. Anyone young QB would struggle in that scenario.

Now, I'm not saying saying he will be a good player. I am pretty much saying we don't have enough evaluation time to decide that yet.

If the guy starts out the first 3 games and looks the same as last year I will agree 100% with you.

I say the first 3 because I don't think any QB in Zips history will look good in game one with this OL going against that OL.

Frey, Weems, or Clayton Moore may have a little success because they can move. However no statue will be able to be successful when they are under constant pressure.

With all that being said, if all else is equal, please play Moore.

But we weren't a terrible team with little talent. We were an ok team with ok talent, but we had a terrible coach with terrible gameday coaching skills. I believe that Brookhart would have gotten us at least five wins with that roster. I also believe that Ianello, if he allowed for at least a little bit of a transition with mixed formations instead of diving headfirst into his new schemes along with not redshirting numerous talented players at thin positions, could have won at least three games.

Nicely isn't as bad as people are making him out to be. But he's not as great as we thought he could be at the beginning of last year. If they're dead even, you play the QB with the higher ceiling, even if he's not there yet. I honestly don't care who Ianello picks, so long as he picks one by saturday. Nicely and Moore's skillsets differ significantly and the players and coaches need to know which one to revolve their play around. The O-line has a very different role for a mobile QB compared to a statue with an arm.

[Buckzip]

I guess I didn't make myself clear.

PN7 sucks.

There is NO downside to CM. What can he do, lose? We already have that in PN7. I could do a better job, and I am 62 years old with a bad knee and no arm. I can still lose just as good as he can.

That isn't fair. He was a first season starter in a new system on a terrible team. Only a true experienced star would have real success in that system.

If you took a MAC caliber QB and let him play a little as a true freshman and then have him start as a sophomore under a new coaching staff and a new system on a terrible team with little talent, it wouldn't make that much of a difference from where PN7 was at the end of the last season. Anyone young QB would struggle in that scenario.

Now, I'm not saying saying he will be a good player. I am pretty much saying we don't have enough evaluation time to decide that yet.

If the guy starts out the first 3 games and looks the same as last year I will agree 100% with you.

I say the first 3 because I don't think any QB in Zips history will look good in game one with this OL going against that OL.

Frey, Weems, or Clayton Moore may have a little success because they can move. However no statue will be able to be successful when they are under constant pressure.

With all that being said, if all else is equal, please play Moore.

But we weren't a terrible team with little talent. We were an ok team with ok talent, but we had a terrible coach with terrible gameday coaching skills. I believe that Brookhart would have gotten us at least five wins with that roster. I also believe that Ianello, if he allowed for at least a little bit of a transition with mixed formations instead of diving headfirst into his new schemes along with not redshirting numerous talented players at thin positions, could have won at least three games.

Nicely isn't as bad as people are making him out to be. But he's not as great as we thought he could be at the beginning of last year. If they're dead even, you play the QB with the higher ceiling, even if he's not there yet. I honestly don't care who Ianello picks, so long as he picks one by saturday. Nicely and Moore's skillsets differ significantly and the players and coaches need to know which one to revolve their play around. The O-line has a very different role for a mobile QB compared to a statue with an arm.

You may be correct about it being coaching, but we can't quantify that really.

I completely agree with starting Moore unless PN7 looks really good.

A moving QB not only changes the o-line, it changes the entire feel of the offense.

I moving pocket is much easier to improvise in than a statuesque still pocket.

[Spin]

Missing from the roster is JD recruit Anthony Schrock. Is he still on the team? Did he transfer or wash out?

My sons played on the same HS team as him.

[Blue & Gold]

Missing from the roster is JD recruit Anthony Schrock. Is he still on the team? Did he transfer or wash out?

My sons played on the same HS team as him.

I'm pretty sure he transferred out. Dissappointing to me; I thought/think he has a lot of potential.

[Buckzip]

Missing from the roster is JD recruit Anthony Schrock. Is he still on the team? Did he transfer or wash out?

My sons played on the same HS team as him.

I'm pretty sure he transferred out. Dissappointing to me; I thought/think he has a lot of potential.

IIRC, I remember after ICoach was hired they interviewed him and he said he commited to the school, not the coach.

Well, I guess he realized the coach that recruited him was a bit different than the one that coached him.

To me, and I may be wrong, he was Akron all the way. Coach I made him change his mind.

[Zipgrad01]

Missing from the roster is JD recruit Anthony Schrock. Is he still on the team? Did he transfer or wash out?

My sons played on the same HS team as him.

I'm pretty sure he transferred out. Dissappointing to me; I thought/think he has a lot of potential.

IIRC, I remember after ICoach was hired they interviewed him and he said he commited to the school, not the coach.

Well, I guess he realized the coach that recruited him was a bit different than the one that coached him.

To me, and I may be wrong, he was Akron all the way. Coach I made him change his mind.

Look at the guys coming in to the program. Look at the guys leaving the program. I am ok with Ianello getting his guys in here based on the talent level increase in just 1.5 classes. Half of his first class was done by the time he was hired and he had practically no time to finish it. I am pleased with what I am seeing in talent upgrades so far. I just hope we have a .500 or so record to help bring in better ones.

[ZachTheZip]

How do you know conclusively that the talent level is improving? Maybe it's staying the same as it was, but all you're doing is replacing spread-style players with pro-style players?

[g-mann17]

How do you know conclusively that the talent level is improving? Maybe it's staying the same as it was, but all you're doing is replacing spread-style players with pro-style players?

You answered your own question.

If there is a difference between spread players and pro style (outside of qb I doubt there is much) and you run a pro style offense, players more suited or accustomed to that style would be a talent improvement.

Kind of like if your company is an electrical company you would want electricians more so than masonry workers.

[dreal1scout]

Kind of like if your company is an electrical company you would want electricians more so than masonry workers.

beautiful analogy

[Spin]

Anthony Schrock is playing for Walsh, leading the team in receptions. Several of his Wadsworth teammates are there as well.

[Blue & Gold]

Anthony Schrock is playing for Walsh, leading the team in receptions. Several of his Wadsworth teammates are there as well.

Good for him. At least now he's probably having fun playing the game.

[Lee Adams]

How do you know conclusively that the talent level is improving? Maybe it's staying the same as it was, but all you're doing is replacing spread-style players with pro-style players?

You answered your own question.

If there is a difference between spread players and pro style (outside of qb I doubt there is much) and you run a pro style offense, players more suited or accustomed to that style would be a talent improvement.

Kind of like if your company is an electrical company you would want electricians more so than masonry workers.

What happened?

[g-mann17]

How do you know conclusively that the talent level is improving? Maybe it's staying the same as it was, but all you're doing is replacing spread-style players with pro-style players?

You answered your own question.

If there is a difference between spread players and pro style (outside of qb I doubt there is much) and you run a pro style offense, players more suited or accustomed to that style would be a talent improvement.

Kind of like if your company is an electrical company you would want electricians more so than masonry workers.

What happened?

You're negativity ruined the team.

We do have talent, but Fire-nello doesn't know how to use any of it.

[Lee Adams]

How do you know conclusively that the talent level is improving? Maybe it's staying the same as it was, but all you're doing is replacing spread-style players with pro-style players?

You answered your own question.

If there is a difference between spread players and pro style (outside of qb I doubt there is much) and you run a pro style offense, players more suited or accustomed to that style would be a talent improvement.

Kind of like if your company is an electrical company you would want electricians more so than masonry workers.

What happened?

You're negativity ruined the team.

We do have talent, but Fire-nello doesn't know how to use any of it.

If I have that much influence maybe I should pick the next coach!