Game Number One: Wyoming

[UAZipster0305]

On 8/29/2025 at 7:06 AM, ZipCat said:

 

Unfortunately, this is not true. We've definitely watched waaaaaaay worse than this.

The iCoach years were way worse than this, but that was 15 years ago now, and I don't believe we've had a winning season since.

[ZipCat]

1 hour ago, GP1 said:

I've been saying this for years also. You should go back and read all of my posts and get back to me in a couple of years. 

 

And yet you're still here defending that Akron should be playing football, and spending tens-of-millions to do it.

[ZipCat]

3 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

The iCoach years were way worse than this, but that was 15 years ago now, and I don't believe we've had a winning season since.

 

We did. Under Terry Bowden. We had an 8-5 and 7-6 seasons with him, and then fired him the year he pulled off the first BIG-10 victory in Akron's history, for a no-nothing loser from John Carroll. 

[UAZipster0305]

Just now, ZipCat said:

 

We did. Under Terry Bowden. We had an 8-5 and 7-6 seasons with him, and then fired him the year he pulled off the first BIG-10 victory in Akron's history, for a no-nothing loser from John Carroll. 

Yes, you are correct. Thanks for the reminder.

 

I was a big fan of Bowden and still oppose his firing. It's been so long that I cannot keep straight the chain of failures and, relatively speaking, when our last successful season was.

[AkronAlumnus]

3 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Yes, you are correct. Thanks for the reminder.

 

I was a big fan of Bowden and still oppose his firing. It's been so long that I cannot keep straight the chain of failures and, relatively speaking, when our last successful season was.

Yup - he wasn't perfect but night and day better than anyone we've had since. 

[ZipCat]

10 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Yes, you are correct. Thanks for the reminder.

 

I was a big fan of Bowden and still oppose his firing. It's been so long that I cannot keep straight the chain of failures and, relatively speaking, when our last successful season was.

 

Same. Basically the Bowden years was the last time I got excited for Zips football. Now I always try to psyche myself up for the new season and then immediately remember why watching Zips Football is rough.

Edited 22 hours ago by ZipCat

[UAZipster0305]

On 8/29/2025 at 6:20 PM, kreed5120 said:

 

He was making similar comments last season as well. To me it just comes a crossed as he's incapable of adapting to the changing landscapes of college athletics. Kent also has a poorly funded football program. Sean Lewis found a way of turning lemons into lemonade. He was too busy finding ways of making due with what he had to make excuses. Perhaps Moorhead is just at a point in his career where he no longer has that drive.

Is there a single coach in the country that has "adapted to the changing landscapes of college athletics" post-NIL? I mean seriously, what mid-major has raised its profile to compete with the big boys since then?! NONE. It's not possible when any decent player that might be discovered or developed by a school like Akron can be bought by the OSU's of the world the very next season? Jason Taylor's and Dwight Smith's are a thing of the past for schools like Akron. I am not a fan of Moorhead, but I think he just recognizes the reality of the situation.

 

Also, the gap between the haves and have-nots is so large that OSU's financial success is allowing the Buckeyes to buy players in other sports like men's soccer. Never in its history has OSU men's soccer been so strong and never enough to arguably be consistently better than the Zips. That's what money can do.

 

As another example, consider this past NCAA men's basketball tournament. There were no Cinderellas, and the SEC and the "Big Ten" dominated because their football money allows them to buy basketball players. NIL has killed everything that was romantic about college sports, and schools like Akron are less likely to be successful than ever.

 

It amazes me that our men's basketball and soccer programs remain as good as they are given the circumstances. Good coaches and strong traditions are carrying the momentum, but I do not know how long that can last in the face of a paycheck for many athletes who grew up with little resources at home. You can't sell good coaching and tradition to athletes whose families need financial stability to thrive.

Edited 2 hours ago by UAZipster0305

[UAZipster0305]

15 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I think it had potential to be a fairly decent G5 job 10-20 years ago for all the perks you mentioned above. Akron was getting the IPF, new stadium, talent rich area, rapidly growing campus, etc.

 

The problem is the landscape of college sports has vastly changed over the past several years. At the same time enrollment has plummeted, causing financial strain to a University that took on too much debt falsely believing they were positioned to be the next Cincinnati. 

 

I think we were positioned to be the next Cincinnati; however, the 2008 financial crisis, Covid, and consistent defunding could not have been predicted, and all have had disastrous consequences for UA.

 

AND who would have thought that having been competitive during the Owens era with the worst facilities in the country that we'd have some of the best then hire a series of duds for coaches and choose to get rid of the only two who were successful (Brookheart and Bowden) and become consistently the worst in the MAC? 

[GP1]

2 hours ago, ZipCat said:

 

And yet you're still here defending that Akron should be playing football, and spending tens-of-millions to do it.

If we don't play football, there is no athletic department and we are less than Wright State. Happy?

Edited 20 hours ago by GP1

[kreed5120]

36 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Is there a single coach in the country that has "adapted to the changing landscapes of college athletics" post-NIL? I mean seriously, what mid-major has raised its profile to compete with the big boys since then?! NONE. It's not possible when any decent player that might be discovered or developed by a school like Akron can be bought by the OSU's of the world the very next season? Jason Taylor's and Dwight Smith's are a thing of the past for schools like Akron. I am not a fan of Moorhead, but I think he just recognizes the reality of the situation.

 

Also, the gap between the haves and have-nots is so large that OSU's financial success is allowing the Buckeyes to buy players in other sports like men's soccer. Never in its history has OSU men's soccer been so strong and never to arguably be consistently better than the Zips. That's what money can do.

 

As another example, consider this past NCAA men's basketball tournament. There were no Cinderellas, and the SEC and the "Big Ten" dominated because their football money allows them to buy basketball players. NIL has killed everything that was romantic about college sports, and schools like Akron are less likely to be successful than ever.

 

It amazes me that our men's basketball and soccer programs remain as good as they are given the circumstances. Good coaches and strong traditions are carrying the momentum, but I do not know how long that can last in the face of a paycheck for many athletes who grew up with little resources at home. You can't sell good coaching and tradition to athletes whose families need financial stability to thrive.

I wasn't talking about being able to compete with the Alabama or Ohio State of the world. G5 weren't positioned to keep up with those programs even before the changes. We can't even compete with the Rutgers, Indiana's, or top tier G5 programs anymore.

[dre22era]

1st off the folks who actually pay attention on here know I despise the MAC on the strength of it continuing to be a One Bid Conference on the Basketball side not getting an At Large Bid since Miami of Ohio in 1999 as the emphasis of the conference has always been on Football. With that said, the conference as a whole is not garbage. Schools like Ohio U and Miami of Ohio have consistent stable programs. Week 1 Toledo went to the wire against Kentucky losing 16-24, Ohio went wire to wire with Rutgers losing 31-34, Central Michigan Beat San Jose State 16-14 who recently had the 2nd best record in the Mountain West Conference 2 years ago. and Buffalo only lost 10-23 to Minnesota. The majority of the MAC competed this weekend.

 

Akron is the 2nd oldest Football Program in the MAC (1891), 2nd to Miami of Ohio (1888). 

We have the 6th largest football stadium in the MAC 

But its actually our Basketball arena that hurts us from moving to another conference. At 5,500 capacity we have the 10th largest arena in the MAC. 

 

I been beating the drum for years at Homers hiring these overrated outside coaches who come here with one foot out the door immediately playing the not enough resources victim card when we have a Legend around the corner pursuing a 6th state championship for Archbishop Hoban with a 142-25 record in his 13th season = Tim Tyrrell.  A local guy who knows this region and can aggressively recruit local talent and we can probably get him at a bargain price. 

But nah too many of you old outdated only go by the Book Homers rather keep bringing overrated assistants just because of who they held a clipboard for on paper. 

 

[GP1]

49 minutes ago, dre22era said:

I been beating the drum for years at Homers hiring these overrated outside coaches who come here with one foot out the door immediately playing the not enough resources victim card when we have a Legend around the corner pursuing a 6th state championship for Archbishop Hoban with a 142-25 record in his 13th season = Tim Tyrrell.  A local guy who knows this region and can aggressively recruit local talent and we can probably get him at a bargain price. 

 

Why hire some local slapper when Jim Grobe is available?

 

Seriously, you analysis is good. Your solution is a disaster waiting to happen. There are former players chomping at the bit to become head coaches and are willing to go just about anywhere to become one. Sanders went to Jackson State. DeSean Jackson is the coach of Delaware State. Mike Vick is at Norfolk State. Eddie George went to Tennessee State and is now at BG. He is only one of two Titans to have his number retire. He's an incredibly handsome man. My brother is a high school football coach in central Ohio and says the buzz among recruits and coaches around George is huge. He might be the best hire in the MAC since Urban Meyer.or maybe Solich at OU. When you think if it in these terms, it shows how ridiculous the idea of a high school football coach taking over is. If anyone thinks Akron could never get a guys line this because they are so bad, you have to understand Jackson State, Delaware State and Tennessee State are worse places. It's not impossible. Akron just makes winning impossible. 

 

I'm going to say something and I desperately don't want it to become political. Approximately 15% of Americans are black. Approximately 52% of high level college football players are black. I asked before we hired Joe why we haven't hired a black head coach. Sanders turned around Colorado in five minutes. George is well on his way at BG. 

 

We'll be hiring a new coach in the near future. The solution will be to hire a coach who has a deep understanding of football and football organization up to the NFL level and is relatable to recruits and his players. He needs to be someone who just isn't smart, but can breathe some life into the program. 

Edited 14 hours ago by GP1

[dre22era]

8 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Why hire some local slapper when Jim Grobe is available?

 

Seriously, you analysis is good. Your solution is a disaster waiting to happen. There are former players chomping at the bit to become head coaches and are willing to go just about anywhere to become one. Sanders went to Jackson State. DeSean Jackson is the coach of Delaware State. Mike Vick is at Norfolk State. Eddie George went to Tennessee State and is now at BG. He is only one of two Titans to have his number retire. He's an incredibly handsome man. My brother is a high school football coach in central Ohio and says the buzz among recruits and coaches around George is huge. He might be the best hire in the MAC since Urban Meyer. When you think if it in these terms, it shows how ridiculous the idea of a high school football coach taking over is. If anyone thinks Akron could never get a guys line this because they are so bad, you have to understand Jackson State, Delaware State and Tennessee State are worse places. It's not impossible. Akron just makes winning impossible. 

 

I'm going to say something and I desperately don't want it to become political. Approximately 15% of Americans are black. Approximately 52% of high level college football players are black. I asked before we hired Joe why we haven't hired a black head coach. Sanders turned around Colorado in five minutes. George is well on his way at BG. 

 

We'll be hiring a new coach in the near future. The solution will be to hire a coach who has a deep understanding of football and football organization up to the NFL level and is relatable to recruits and his players. He needs to be someone who just isn't smart, but can breathe some life into the program. 

You do know Deion Sander was hired at Jackson state with absolutely no Experience Period. Never an assistant coach.

Guess what? = he was a HS coach at an academy he created that no longer exist. 

Michael Vick = No Coaching Experience 

Eddie George = No Coaching Experience 

Desean Jackson = No Coaching Experience 

But you believe my solution is a Disaster?

 

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by dre22era

[GP1]

4 hours ago, dre22era said:

You do know Deion Sander was hired at Jackson state with absolutely no Experience Period. Never an assistant coach.

Guess what? = he was a HS coach at an academy he created that no longer exist. 

Michael Vick = No Coaching Experience 

Eddie George = No Coaching Experience 

Desean Jackson = No Coaching Experience 

But you believe my solution is a Disaster?

 

 

 

I do. That's the point. I'm not certain that if your name is big enough and you have an understanding of how successful football organizations works, prior coaching experience is needed. 

[exit322]

I'm not sure hiring a coach who is basically at the state's "Nick Saban Alabama" school (even if he's part of the reason why) is going to work at the country's "Ohio's Louisville St. Thomas Aquinas" school.

 

Seems like it's too big a jump to move up a level and to go from a program that's highly invested in football success to one that's highly invested in football failure.

[ZipCat]

17 hours ago, UAZipster0305 said:

Is there a single coach in the country that has "adapted to the changing landscapes of college athletics" post-NIL?

 

I'd add, what Mid-Major team has elevated itself significantly to "compete" with the big boys, and sustained that, over the past 25-years? None. Zero. Nobody. A few teams have had scattered success to be interesting...to get a Top-25 ranking, and then inevitably melt into irrelevance. WMU? TCU? Marshall once? 

 

It all exists as a 6-figure stepping stone for an entire industry that frankly wouldn't exist if it weren't heavily subsidized by the debt of students and institutions. And it's time to call BULLSHIT on all the "brand exposure" folks, because how has that been working out for 99% of Colleges and Universities with declining enrollment? 

 

Yeah, OF COURSE coach Moorehead can't compete here. NOBODY can. There was a narrow Window maybe the program could have become something, in the 2000s after they built the stadium. That time is no basically 20 years ago, and it was ruined by iCoach and further ruined by firing Terry Bowden for a no-name loser from John Carroll. 

[GP1]

1 hour ago, ZipCat said:

 

I'd add, what Mid-Major team has elevated itself significantly to "compete" with the big boys, and sustained that, over the past 25-years? None. Zero. Nobody. A few teams have had scattered success to be interesting...to get a Top-25 ranking, and then inevitably melt into irrelevance. WMU? TCU? Marshall once? 

All of this is true. There are a total of zero. I just don't think that the success of G5 programs should be based upon how we complete against more resourced programs. There is a path forward that involves making athletics benefit the athletes students alumni fans and general communities around the schools. In the case of football it includes, but is not limited to, playing games at times and days of the week that are convenient for people to attend.

 

My understanding is Kent had a respectable crowd yesterday. It's amazing what you can do if you play on a beautiful afternoon day on Saturday. I'd love to know what the rationale was for us playing on a Thursday night so tens of people could watch it on ESPN+. The onslaught of stupidity around the Akron football program is amazing. 

[GP1]

12 hours ago, dre22era said:

we have a Legend around the corner pursuing a 6th state championship for Archbishop Hoban with a 142-25 record in his 13th season = Tim Tyrrell.  A local guy who knows this region and can aggressively recruit local talent and we can probably get him at a bargain price. 

 

Gerry Faust was a high school legend but that's not my point with this post. 

 

Coaches who do well at private high schools where they have a recruiting advantage as a contributing factor to their success build a lot of resentment from coaches in surrounding high schools. Those coaches are critical to recruiting success. If Timmy ever got the job at Akron, there would be so many coaches with a hard on for thim they would happily undermine his recruiting. He would be DOA. Jealousy and pettiness are alive and well within the personalities of high school coaches. 

[ZipCat]

7 minutes ago, GP1 said:

All of this is true. There are a total of zero. I just don't think that the success of G5 programs should be based upon how we complete against more resourced programs. There is a path forward that involves making athletics benefit the athletes students alumni fans and general communities around the schools. In the case of football it includes, but is not limited to, playing games at times and days of the week that are convenient for people to attend.

 

My understanding is Kent had a respectable crowd yesterday. It's amazing what you can do if you play on a beautiful afternoon day on Saturday. I'd love to know what the rationale was for us playing on a Thursday night so tens of people could watch it on ESPN+. The onslaught of stupidity around the Akron football program is amazing. 

 

And, with all due respect, that time has sailed. That time to be a "benefit to athletes, students, alumni fans and general communities" was 20-years ago. The market is too oversaturated at this point, and anyone worth their salt will immediately move onto greener BIG-10 pastures like the RooWards people (if you remember RooWards that was a smshing success).

 

But If you want to know what the rational for Thursday night games was, it was $$$$. ESPN handed the MAC money, that the MAC wouldn't otherwise be getting, for that Weeknight slate of games. It was negotiated in 2014 as a 13-year deal that will expire at the end of 2027. It amounted to like $10-million a year for the MAC, which is like $830,000/year per team. I think it's pretty obvious why the MAC made that decision. They aren't getting that in gameday ticket sales, regardless if it's on a Saturday. Like Akron pulled 11,000 in reported attendance, which is more like 6,000 in reality? How much of that is actually paid customers and not free student tickets? Half?

 

It's pretty obvious why the decision was made. They'll make more money to cover the outrageous costs of D-1 Football doing ESPN+ Weeknight games than they ever will doing Saturday afternoon games. I agree with you, it's dumb and destroys culture ... but the best attended game in the past 15-years was a Thursday Night Akron vs. BGSU game in the rain. And that's because they had a tuition giveaway, so the house was packed with students, and the Zips were actually contenders in the MAC that year.

[GP1]

7 minutes ago, ZipCat said:

 

And, with all due respect, that time has sailed. That time to be a "benefit to athletes, students, alumni fans and general communities" was 20-years ago. 

Actually, it's every day and they never really tried. UofA is a taxpayer supported institution. If it isn't doing those things every day and in every way possible, it needs to start. No better time than the present. 

[UAZipster0305]

21 hours ago, GP1 said:

You have identified a key problem. 

 

What if instead of a marketing problem, it was a public service problem? The public has historically stomached funding public services that don't make money because the benefits outweigh the costs. For example, the only public transportation system that makes money in the USA is the NYC subway system, at least it used to. The rest are basically welfare programs for people who can't afford transportation but need to get places such as work. 

 

So again, what if at a modest cost, the football program benefited the athletes students alumni fans and general community around Akron? What if it's as simple as playing football games on days of the week and times that allow people to attend a fun day at the University their tax dollars support? 

 

The same argument is made by the right against Amtrak...it doesn't turn a profit. You know what?...neither does our highway system or airports or libraries or schools or fire or police departments. In the early years of this country for profit police and fire departments were tried, and they were an absolute disaster. Basically, when you try to put a price on everything, nothing has value anymore.

 

All of the G6 need to band together and create a competition level between FCS and 1-AA. Suppose there would be about 4 conferences and ~64 total teams. A quarter would play a single elimination championship bracket after the conference season while the others would play out-of-conference games that could help determine how many wild card invites for the tournament a particular conference gets for the following season. Level playing field, every game is meaningful, players get paid a living stipend, but they aren't free agents...I'd watch that!

[UAZipster0305]

19 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

I wasn't talking about being able to compete with the Alabama or Ohio State of the world. G5 weren't positioned to keep up with those programs even before the changes. We can't even compete with the Rutgers, Indiana's, or top tier G5 programs anymore.

 

Let's be serious...we aren't even consistently competing with Toledo and haven't been for more than a decade.

 

We were though one chip shot FG away from defeating Indiana a few years ago though. Granted, that relative situation has changed since.

 

In the Owens era (I believe it was), we lost 28-14 to OSU, and they got a score or two late to pull away. We lost in OT at the NIT to OSU in men's basketball about ten years ago. We have a stellar record against OSU and more success in men's soccer. So yes, we do compete with OSU, BUT that cannot happen when the the difference comes down to being able to pay players or not.

 

Like GP1 says, find a new model for football at the conference level. Otherwise, football will continue to be a major drag on all other sports and the reputation of UA as a whole.

Edited 2 hours ago by UAZipster0305

[GP1]

16 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

The same argument is made by the right against Amtrak...it doesn't turn a profit. You know what?...neither does our highway system or airports or libraries or schools or fire or police departments. In the early years of this country for profit police and fire departments were tried, and they were an absolute disaster. Basically, when you try to put a price on everything, nothing has value anymore.

 

All of the G6 need to band together and create a competition level between FCS and 1-AA. Suppose there would be about 4 conferences and ~64 total teams. A quarter would play a single elimination championship bracket after the conference season while the others would play out-of-conference games that could help determine how many wild card invites for the tournament a particular conference gets for the following season. Level playing field, every game is meaningful, players get paid a living stipend, but they aren't free agents...I'd watch that!

That's too complicated and results for one season shouldn't impact the next with the exception of more difficult schedules the following season based upon how good you were the previous. 

 

What if they just had eight divisions and every team in a division had to play each other in a 10 game season. Ten games is enough for the Ivy League and less games will help keep costs down. 7 divisional games and 3 non-division games. Establish some tie breakers. The top two teams per division make a playoff of 16 teams. Champion determined and they move on to the next season. 

 

60 scholarships is enough. If the NFL can have games with 48 dressed, college can survive with 60. Players don't get paid. They can get a job if they need money. Players get to transfer once for coach leaving or after they graduate. Only five years total. No injury red shirt years. Contract says if they transfer before graduating, they have to pay back scholarship. If team cuts player, school must fund scholarship until player completes what would be eligibility years or player is free to transfer once. 

[UAZipster0305]

35 minutes ago, GP1 said:

That's too complicated and results for one season shouldn't impact the next with the exception of more difficult schedules the following season based upon how good you were the previous. 

 

What if they just had eight divisions and every team in a division had to play each other in a 10 game season. Ten games is enough for the Ivy League and less games will help keep costs down. 7 divisional games and 3 non-division games. Establish some tie breakers. The top two teams per division make a playoff of 16 teams. Champion determined and they move on to the next season. 

 

60 scholarships is enough. If the NFL can have games with 48 dressed, college can survive with 60. Players don't get paid. They can get a job if they need money. Players get to transfer once for coach leaving or after they graduate. Only five years total. No injury red shirt years. Contract says if they transfer before graduating, they have to pay back scholarship. If team cuts player, school must fund scholarship until player completes what would be eligibility years or player is free to transfer once. 

There are an infinite number of ways to do college football better than NIL for MAC-level programs. I provided one. You suggested another. They all have merit.

 

As for the prior season not impacting the next, this happens due to rankings whether we like it or not, and that's not determined by anything on the field but rather mere opinion. My suggestion at least let's all schools participate in a meaningful post-season and let's next season jockeying be determined by results on the field.

Edited 1 hour ago by UAZipster0305

[kreed5120]

1 hour ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

Let's be serious...we aren't even consistently competing with Toledo and haven't been for more than a decade.

 

We were though one chip shot FG away from defeating Indiana a few years ago though. Granted, that relative situation has changed since.

 

In the Owens era (I believe it was), we lost 28-14 to OSU, and they got a score or two late to pull away. We lost in OT at the NIT to OSU in men's basketball about ten years ago. We have a stellar record against OSU and more success in men's soccer. So yes, we do compete with OSU, BUT that cannot happen when the the difference comes down to being able to pay players or not.

 

Like GP1 says, find a new model for football at the conference level. Otherwise, football will continue to be a major drag on all other sports and the reputation of UA as a whole.

My comments weren't pertaining to MBB or Olympic sports. It was specifically about FBS football. We were never capable of competing with the OSU or Alabama's of the world in football. 

 

I have no idea why you're trying to take my words out of context. Of course we could compete in MBB. I never stated otherwise. There are always a Cinderella in the tournament. Roster sizes are much smaller in basketball and basketball is a global game so it's harder for bigger schools to hoard all the talent. Also, 1 or 2 guys having a career night from 3 is a great David vs Goliath equalizer. Football is more challenging because even if you do have some skilled players, you won't have the depth or size in the trenches.

 

As for soccer we won a national championship so that's self explanatory. I've long stated we should focus on basketball and soccer as our dollars would go further there since everyone else is prioritizing football. It's not nearly as much of an uphill battle.

Edited 56 minutes ago by kreed5120