Happy or Unhappy

[UAZipster0305]

@trimmy10, just for clarification, when you say Ianello "has no intention of winning," you don't really mean to imply that he prefers losing to winning, do you? Because in all the years I've followed sports, I've never heard of a coach or player who doesn't prefer winning to losing. Now we've all seen coaches and players who've tried to win and weren't able to, so I'm going to assume that's what you really meant unless you say otherwise.

if Ianello (or maybe the OC, I don't know who calls the plays) preferred winning, we wouldn't kick a FG when down 20. Whether you make it or miss, you're still down by three scores. It does absolutely nothing to help you win. It's just basic math. So you should go for the TD because if you get that you can cut it to two scores and then the onside kick is actually meaningful. Our players aren't dumb, they can do the math. They saw that by choosing to kick a FG in that scenario our coach chose losing over winning. To a person with the mindset of our coaches, purposefully blowing the chance to win with plenty of time left gives the staff the opportunity to run the plays that they feel need to be evaluated in a game situation. Halfway through the season they're more concerned with putting together schemes than winning. They're doing the stuff that should be done in the spring and pre-season while other teams have successfully completed most of that stuff by the second week and are putting it into practice to try and win games.

This says it all for me, DiG! iCoach is complacent about winning because he seems to think he has at least another three seasons to do so.

[Dave in Green]

OK, I've got it now. More than one person actually believes that a college football coach prefers losing to winning. This definitely rates consideration as a Guinness World Record entry.

[zippy5]

hell I could recruit at... Arizona where blue chip guys come thru the door on a daily basis.

ok pal

[K92]

No coach prefers losing to winning. Ianello would prefer to win. Kicking a field goal while down by 20 in the 4th quarter is not proof that he prefers to lose. It is proof that he gave up and conceded the victory. There is no justification for a move like that. I believe you play hard for the win for the entire 60 minutes. You can't explain this one away. RI is either a quitter or totally incompetent. There is no possible strategic scenario that says 3 points is the correct call in that situation. Even the most casual football fans know that. It is a very disturbing development. The mood in the parking lot discussion after the game was DESPAIR. I can't continue to look for bright spots and glimmers of hope in a vast sea of abject failure. This program is at an all time low. It has gotten so bad that even the prospect of beating the shit out of Can't seems rather empty. That's sad.

[UAZipster0305]

OK, I've got it now. More than one person actually believes that a college football coach prefers losing to winning. This definitely rates consideration as a Guinness World Record entry.

I'm a bit disappointed in you, DiG. You're one of the most solid, logical, and level-headed posters here, and I've never known you to put words into anyone's mouth but that seems to be what's happening here. What ZtZ and I have essentially said is that there is no emphasis on winning because we're still in the building process. The current attitude is that if we happen to win while playing a scrimmage style game, great. If not, no big deal because it's all about developing the players, schemes, etc. A NE Ohio sports fan should easily recognize this mantra from Cleveland professional sports...always rebuilding...and all the fans continuously drink that Kool-Aid, which just perpetuates the cycle.However, this is a far cry from saying iCoach would rather lose than win. Where did you come up with that notion anyhow? It was never stated implicitly or explicitly.

[Zipmeister]

OK, I've got it now. More than one person actually believes that a college football coach prefers losing to winning. This definitely rates consideration as a Guinness World Record entry.

I'm a bit disappointed in you, DiG. You're one of the most solid, logical, and level-headed posters here, and I've never known you to put words into anyone's mouth but that seems to be what's happening here. What ZtZ and I have essentially said is that there is no emphasis on winning because we're still in the building process. The current attitude is that if we happen to win while playing a scrimmage style game, great. If not, no big deal because it's all about developing the players, schemes, etc. A NE Ohio sports fan should easily recognize this mantra from Cleveland professional sports...always rebuilding...and all the fans continuously drink that Kool-Aid, which just perpetuates the cycle.However, this is a far cry from saying iCoach would rather lose than win. Where did you come up with that notion anyhow? It was never stated implicitly or explicitly.

I have edited your post (#18) in this thread to help prove your point.Call it what you want, it's not working. And iCoach has no brains at all...his play calling and game decisions are all the proof you need of that. Where are all the commitments from these 3/3+ recruits that our "recruiter" of a coach should be landing? A gorgeous fall day of football and the best part is the partying that takes place a few hours BEFORE the game!And to anyone supporting the program after this year, you're just contributing to the problem. I hate to say it, but the only thing that will get iCoach out after two seasons is a concerted effort from the fans/alumni. From the end of the season forward until iCoach is gone, that is likely the best thing we can do to show our support and to improve the program.I am amazed that the players remain motivated to still play hard. And whoever said that on an individual basis, we match up evenly on talent with most other MAC teams is spot on! It's the coaching that is lacking and preventing these players from performing well as a team.

[GoZips]

The most positive thing I can say about the current situation with Akron footballis that the AD is standing firmly behind the embattled football coach. The AD,with his hand solidly in the back of his coach is continuing to give the coach highpraise.This is a time honored tradition among ADs right up to where they shove the coach under a bus.

[Dr Z]

Are you all happy with the coaching and QB play?

No I am not. One of the biggest differences in the game to me was how Tettleton moved his team. 71% efficiency on third down, 74% completion overall. Made me jealous. Unofficially, I think I counted five times on first down that we ran off tackle to the short side of the field. That is the game plan we come up with coming off a bye week? Attack the short side of the field on first down with the run?

[Dave in Green]

I'm a bit disappointed in you, DiG. You're one of the most solid, logical, and level-headed posters here, and I've never known you to put words into anyone's mouth but that seems to be what's happening here. What ZtZ and I have essentially said is that there is no emphasis on winning because we're still in the building process. The current attitude is that if we happen to win while playing a scrimmage style game, great. If not, no big deal because it's all about developing the players, schemes, etc. A NE Ohio sports fan should easily recognize this mantra from Cleveland professional sports...always rebuilding...and all the fans continuously drink that Kool-Aid, which just perpetuates the cycle.However, this is a far cry from saying iCoach would rather lose than win. Where did you come up with that notion anyhow? It was never stated implicitly or explicitly.

@trimmy10, the above statement makes it clear that you believe that Ianello would rather win than lose. This was not clear from your exchange with GP1:

And iCoach has no intention of winning...his play calling and game decisions are all the proof you need of that.

I think he wants to win. The problem is his ideas on how a team wins are wrong.

We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter because the outcome is still the same.

[ZachTheZip]

Ianello wants to win... eventually. He doesn't care whether we win or lose now. In fact, it appears as if he believes that losing in the present will somehow lead to winning in the future. It's all part of his plan. However his plan never involved establishing a winning culture, and that contributes to why it will fail.

[GP1]

Unofficially, I think I counted five times on first down that we ran off tackle to the short side of the field. That is the game plan we come up with coming off a bye week? Attack the short side of the field on first down with the run?

I don't have a problem with running to the short side of the field if they can make the blocking numbers work. I don't see the games, but if we are having trouble blocking the strong safety, then lining up strong to the field and running backside isn't a bad idea if they can make it work. At some point, player have to perform. OU has always been good at counting the numbers and running away from the strong side. Looks like we aren't as good as them at doing it...or much else.

[Dr Z]

Unofficially, I think I counted five times on first down that we ran off tackle to the short side of the field. That is the game plan we come up with coming off a bye week? Attack the short side of the field on first down with the run?

I don't have a problem with running to the short side of the field if they can make the blocking numbers work. I don't see the games, but if we are having trouble blocking the strong safety, then lining up strong to the field and running backside isn't a bad idea if they can make it work. At some point, player have to perform.

Agreed, but it was not effective once, I think the most we gained was one yard, we might have lost more than we gained overall. It seemed odd to me that after multiple times of it not working, they continued to try it. Every time they run it I kept thinking of that quote of RI's this week: "we have to be more effective on first and second down to succeed on third." That was not happening with that first down play.The one adjustment that I did see different this week, was the shotgun. I didn't count how many times we went out of the shotgun, but it was surely a record under iCoach. So I have proof that he can change something. BTW, shotgun, under center, same result. It did not seem to help the accuracy of LR8 at all. In fact, I think it was third and one once out of the shotgun, empty backfield, we ran a quick in to the WR and LR8 threw it about four foot over his head.

[GP1]

Agreed, but it was not effective once, I think the most we gained was one yard, we might have lost more than we gained. It seemed odd to me that after multiple times of it not working, they continued to try it. Every time they run it I kept thinking of that quote of RI's this week: "we have to be more effective on first and second down to succeed on third." That was not happening with that first down play.The one adjustment that I did see different this week, was the shotgun. I didn't count how many times we went out of the shotgun, but it was surely a record under iCoach. So I have proof that he can change something. BTW, shotgun, under center, same result. It did not seem to help the accuracy of LR8 at all. In fact, I think it was third and one once out of the shotgun, empty backfield, we ran a quick in to the WR and LR8 threw it about four foot over his head.

Are we trying to run up the middle at all? Sometimes when a team is struggling to run, it can be helpful to just line up and go forward with limited thinking. On OLineman doesn't have to be the most talented to smash up on someone.

[UAZipster0305]

I'm a bit disappointed in you, DiG. You're one of the most solid, logical, and level-headed posters here, and I've never known you to put words into anyone's mouth but that seems to be what's happening here. What ZtZ and I have essentially said is that there is no emphasis on winning because we're still in the building process. The current attitude is that if we happen to win while playing a scrimmage style game, great. If not, no big deal because it's all about developing the players, schemes, etc. A NE Ohio sports fan should easily recognize this mantra from Cleveland professional sports...always rebuilding...and all the fans continuously drink that Kool-Aid, which just perpetuates the cycle.However, this is a far cry from saying iCoach would rather lose than win. Where did you come up with that notion anyhow? It was never stated implicitly or explicitly.

@trimmy10, the above statement makes it clear that you believe that Ianello would rather win than lose. This was not clear from your exchange with GP1:

And iCoach has no intention of winning...his play calling and game decisions are all the proof you need of that.

I think he wants to win. The problem is his ideas on how a team wins are wrong.

We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter because the outcome is still the same.

Right. I don't think he cares about winning now. That is not to say that he would prefer losing to winning.I'm not going to continue arguing semantics though; you made your point, DiG. I'll try to be less ambiguous in the future.It's a sad state of our program when that's what our post-game discussions involve.

[Dave in Green]

@trimmy10 and @ZachTheZip, I think you've both now clearly stated reasonable viewpoints that leave me with no doubts about where you stand. I agree with both of you and others who've said that Ianello is more focused on winning in the future than in the present.I don't agree that he is not at all interested in winning now, but just that he is more interested in producing a longterm, sustainable winning program as opposed to the old George Allen "the future is now" philosophy.GP1 makes a good point that this is the plan that UA bought into when they hired Ianello.I'm always looking for signs of progress, and am disappointed at the lack of tangible results. It may mean that Ianello's plan needs more time to produce results, or it may mean that the plan and/or execution of the plan is flawed.In any case, we can all agree that long-suffering Zips fans do not have the patience to suffer quietly through yet another slow-moving plan to turn the Zips into consistent winners as long as that plan is not producing tangible results.

[Aaron]

I feel absolutely betrayed as a fan of Akron Football right now. It's not the losing - I'm used to rooting for losing teams, its not all bad. I feel worst about the fact that we aren't even competitive in these games. I show up at the stadium relatively assured that we will lose, and the team has done VERY little to shake that. Great, we beat an FCS team - that doesn't change things. I haven't missed an Akron home game since I started coming to them in '97, and I don't recall seeing a team less competitive than what Coach Ianello has fielded. Win or lose, I want a team that looks like it's actually TRYING and coaches that put the players in the best position they can be to win. That hasn't been evident these past couple seasons, and without a major turnaround in the last half of this season (beating Can't + 1-2 more wins) I will have a hard decision whether being at the games to support the Marching Band is worth having to sit through a beatdown.

[GP1]

I feel absolutely betrayed as a fan of Akron Football right now. It's not the losing - I'm used to rooting for losing teams, its not all bad. I feel worst about the fact that we aren't even competitive in these games. I show up at the stadium relatively assured that we will lose, and the team has done VERY little to shake that. Great, we beat an FCS team - that doesn't change things. I haven't missed an Akron home game since I started coming to them in '97, and I don't recall seeing a team less competitive than what Coach Ianello has fielded. Win or lose, I want a team that looks like it's actually TRYING and coaches that put the players in the best position they can be to win. That hasn't been evident these past couple seasons, and without a major turnaround in the last half of this season (beating Can't + 1-2 more wins) I will have a hard decision whether being at the games to support the Marching Band is worth having to sit through a beatdown.

This is a very good post. It's not the losing...It's the not being competitive. When I go to a game, I want to see teams compete at a high level. The Zips don't do that right now and it is a killer for any fan because the hope is gone. Tom Jackson said something last night about being upset when he watches a game and one team or both isn't living up to the "professional standard". I'm sure a lot of Zips fans feel upset the Zips aren't living up to even "MAC standards". It's the best reason to not go to a game.

[ZachTheZip]

It seems as if there's an interesting parallel between us and CMU right now.

[RowdyZip]

It may mean that Ianello's plan needs more time to produce results, or it may mean that the plan and/or execution of the plan is flawed.

It's hard to say this when any college team has 100% turnover every 4 to 5 years. If his "plan" had any merit whatsoever, halfway through his 2nd year wouldn't we have to be at least competitive? I hate to echo people here, but I skipped the game Saturday to go to an overcrowded, overpriced Cedar Point. I'm not sure what would've been worse, dropping $150 and riding 5 rides in 10 hours or watching the Zips give up nearly 600 yards of total offense and get squashed despite being +2 in turnovers.What's sad to me is that I'm embarrassed of the program. Maybe that's selfish, but when my co-workers are aware that I'm a big Zips fan and all I get come Monday is, "How much did 'you guys' get crushed by Saturday?" It's embarrassing. The only saving grace is that the majority of them are suckeye honks and their season, scale wise, is in the dumps as much as ours.

[Lee Adams]

It may mean that Ianello's plan needs more time to produce results, or it may mean that the plan and/or execution of the plan is flawed.

It's hard to say this when any college team has 100% turnover every 4 to 5 years. If his "plan" had any merit whatsoever, halfway through his 2nd year wouldn't we have to be at least competitive? I hate to echo people here, but I skipped the game Saturday to go to an overcrowded, overpriced Cedar Point. I'm not sure what would've been worse, dropping $150 and riding 5 rides in 10 hours or watching the Zips give up nearly 600 yards of total offense and get squashed despite being +2 in turnovers.What's sad to me is that I'm embarrassed of the program. Maybe that's selfish, but when my co-workers are aware that I'm a big Zips fan and all I get come Monday is, "How much did 'you guys' get crushed by Saturday?" It's embarrassing. The only saving grace is that the majority of them are suckeye honks and their season, scale wise, is in the dumps as much as ours.

Yes,we may not be winning but games would be much more competetive and we would see improvement in certain areas of the team. They have promise at WR and RB. There was some talent on the team last year. The AD and coach said it themselves. Problem is,a lnumber of guys playing now are going to graduate. If Ianello's guys are any good,next year should be there year where there is significant improvement in the won-loss.