Game #11 - Can't State

[Let'sGoZips94]

47 minutes ago, 1981 grad said:

I hope I am not banned from this board but you have to give Kent State credit.  They have been absolutely terrible the last few years and they are a decent team.  This was a battle of 2 evenly matched teams and Kent executed in overtime and we did not.  They scored on their first play in overtime and we lost 4 yards and started behind the chains.  After Akron came back from that large deficit in the 4th quarter it was a gut punch to lose this game.  However, it was an entertaining game.

 

This is the biggest indictment against JoeMo there is. 

[clarkwgriswold]

I think Kamara is still running 10 yards behind Clark.

 

PCCC may just have found itself a head coach.  I also listened to him for a short time on their pre-game and came away impressed.

[ZippyDoo]

10 hours ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

 

Hire a football guy who is a motivator. JoeMo certainly isn't the latter. Both the Browns and the Zips have alleged offensive gurus at the helm and they both get owned by football guys.  

Joe Moe didn't miss the field goal, drop the punt, or throw the interception.  He also was not in the secondary letting the Kent wide receivers do whatever the wanted to like they never played defense before.  He did however, have the offense last night have over 500 yards offense a qb that threw for over 400 yards, a wr that caught for over 200 yards and an rb that had 96 yards rushing... BUT most importantly to me... his team DIDN'T quit down 18 going into the fourth quarter and fought back and tied the game.... somebody motivated that team on both sides of the ball...

 

But let me guess, we aren't going to give him credit for the offensive performance and we aren't going to give him credit for the team NOT giving him and scoring 18 points in the fourth quarter? we will just bash and hate on him and say he has to go cause he sucks....

 

It was a great game and it didn't go the way we wanted it to... sometimes that happens....

[Let'sGoZips94]

34 minutes ago, ZippyDoo said:

Joe Moe didn't miss the field goal, drop the punt, or throw the interception.  He also was not in the secondary letting the Kent wide receivers do whatever the wanted to like they never played defense before.  He did however, have the offense last night have over 500 yards offense a qb that threw for over 400 yards, a wr that caught for over 200 yards and an rb that had 96 yards rushing... BUT most importantly to me... his team DIDN'T quit down 18 going into the fourth quarter and fought back and tied the game.... somebody motivated that team on both sides of the ball...

 

But let me guess, we aren't going to give him credit for the offensive performance and we aren't going to give him credit for the team NOT giving him and scoring 18 points in the fourth quarter? we will just bash and hate on him and say he has to go cause he sucks....

 

It was a great game and it didn't go the way we wanted it to... sometimes that happens....

 

We're talking about a team in Kent that was 1-23 the last 2 seasons and had an interim HC up until a few weeks ago vs. JoeMo in his 4th year at the helm at Akron. So whatever positives you want to focus on, make sure they are accurately viewed through the appropriate lens. 

 

The scouting report on Akron shows that we struggle in the red zone. Kent's defense reflected this as they were giving Akron anything they wanted in between the 20s to prevent any big plays then locking down in the red zone. The total yards were largely meaningless. First drive, Akron got inside the red zone and were held to 3 points. Late in the 4th quarter, JoeMo had 3 plays from the 3 yd line - 2 were basic runs up the middle and 1 was a horrible pass play. He opted to take the 3 pts instead of going for it on 4th, a decision that will be hotly debated for a while. The offensive was wildly predictable most of the night, hence Kent's success for 2.5 quarters with bringing pressure and jumping passing routes. It wasn't until Akron started taking more chances and mixing things up in the 4th quarter that the points started to occur. A fluke onside kick recovery (incredible execution) and a fluke fumble were the only reasons Akron stayed in that game. Otherwise, Carney kicked JoeMo's butt. 

 

I don't really care about a team quitting vs. not quitting. These guys know there is always an opportunity to put out film for their next NIL deal, so in this era of college athletics, it's hard to take that discussion seriously. The fact is, the talking point of quitting vs. not quitting is being discussed because Akron was down by so many points to a previously 1-23 Kent team. As far as I know, Kent is in a similar financial situation for football. They made a move at HC to a true football guy and look how it's working out for them. Heck, I poo-poo'd Carney as a hire with his only success being victories over lowly UMass but I'm thinking that was largely denial from fear of them making a good hire.

 

It is possible to get this right. 

Edited 21 hours ago by Let'sGoZips94

[exit322]

14 minutes ago, ZippyDoo said:

Joe Moe didn't miss the field goal, drop the punt, or throw the interception.  He also was not in the secondary letting the Kent wide receivers do whatever the wanted to like they never played defense before.  He did however, have the offense last night have over 500 yards offense a qb that threw for over 400 yards, a wr that caught for over 200 yards and an rb that had 96 yards rushing... BUT most importantly to me... his team DIDN'T quit down 18 going into the fourth quarter and fought back and tied the game.... somebody motivated that team on both sides of the ball...

 

But let me guess, we aren't going to give him credit for the offensive performance and we aren't going to give him credit for the team NOT giving him and scoring 18 points in the fourth quarter? we will just bash and hate on him and say he has to go cause he sucks....

 

It was a great game and it didn't go the way we wanted it to... sometimes that happens....

 

This in general isn't wrong.  He did recruit the players that did all those things, though.  And that means it's on him.

 

We finally have a "hey he gets credit for a great offensive performance" in...Game 47 of his time here.  And it WAS a really good offensive performance by a really limited quarterback whose NFL comp (if you adjust for MAC-level talent) is Mason Rudolph.

 

They didn't quit, though.  This is accurate.  And credit must also be given for that.

 

You're also right, this was a great game.  A classic game that likely made a few fans of college football, if not the Zips or Flashes.  If this was the norm and they were at least fun most of the time, I think you'd see many opinions (mine included) be different.

[exit322]

3 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

They made a move a HC to a true football guy and look how it's working out for them. 

 

It is kinda wild they're both former Fordham QBs and that's where the similarities end.

[Let'sGoZips94]

2 minutes ago, exit322 said:

 

It is kinda wild they're both former Fordham QBs and that's where the similarities end.

 

I thought it was ironic when they were showing the graphics of their respective stats at Fordham.

 

JoeMo had more passing yards at Fordham while Carney had more touchdowns.

 

Symbolic of what we saw last night. JoeMo plays well in between the 20s while Carney gets in the endzone where it matters. 

Edited 22 hours ago by Let'sGoZips94

[exit322]

3 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

 

I thought it was ironic when they were showing the graphics of their respective stats at Fordham.

 

JoeMo had more passing yards at Fordham while Carney had more touchdowns.

 

Symbolic of what we saw last night. JoeMo plays well in between the 20s while Carney gets in the endzone where it matters. 

 

That really is symbolic, haha!

[Lee Adams]

6 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

 

I thought it was ironic when they were showing the graphics of their respective stats at Fordham.

 

JoeMo had more passing yards at Fordham while Carney had more touchdowns.

 

Symbolic of what we saw last night. JoeMo plays well in between the 20s while Carney gets in the endzone where it matters. 

Interesting take about being good between the 20s.

[GP1]

It's odd to look at the stat sheet of the game. Going by stats, Akron should have never lost. It should have been a blowout in Akron's favor. We had one more turnover and they capitalize on a short field. That's the difference. Akron did give up six sacks, which is horrible. 

 

The botched punt was a huge point. Akron could have taken a ten point lead early in the game and instead was 4 points behind. I think Kent was eager to fold and would have collapsed down 10.  Akron gave them a reason to believe and the game turned into a dog fight.

 

Oh well, the nihilists are happy today. 

[a-zip]

There was one blatant pass interference call on a deep ball that was guaranteed TD.  I believe that was followed by a pick 6.  

14 point swing that totally changed the game!  BTW - when they showed the replay of the PI, there was a ref 10 feet away looking right at it.

Edited 21 hours ago by a-zip

[kreed5120]

I honestly feel many are in denial about the state of our program moving forward. As @LZIp shared we have the smallest football operating budget in the MAC and little to no NIL. Realistically no proven coach is going to want this job. Odds are much higher that we will end up with another Ianello or Arth. 5-7 wins are about all we can expect under our conditions.

 

There needs to be real vision behind the program if we want a chance to succeed. Boosters either have to step up big time or Akron needs to play more P4 games and invest that money we receive from OSU, Purdue, Iowa, etc. back into the program. Probably need to do some combination of both. I'm not sold on Joe as our long-term solution because frankly I don't think he sells the program well to boosters or local businesses, which is what's needed in this new age of college athletics.

 

IMO Joe should enter next season on the hot seat for 2 reasons. One is the school literally can't afford a $1 million buyout. This isn't pro sports. We don't have a billionaire owner. Two is we need to develop a long-term plan to how we're going to improve this otherwise it's just going to be groundhogs day. New coach, very much all the same problems.

Edited 20 hours ago by kreed5120

[exit322]

27 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

I honestly feel many are in denial about the state of our program moving forward. As @LZIp shared we have the smallest football operating budget in the MAC and little to no NIL. Realistically no proven coach is going to want this job. Odds are much higher that we will end up with another Ianello or Arth. 5-7 wins are about all we can expect under our conditions.

 

There needs to be real vision behind the program if we want a chance to succeed. Boosters either have to step up big time or Akron needs to play more P4 games and invest that money we receive from OSU, Purdue, Iowa, etc. back into the program. Probably need to do some combination of both. I'm not sold on Joe as our long-term solution because frankly I don't think he sells the program well to boosters or local businesses, which is what's needed in this new age of college athletics.

 

IMO Joe should enter next season on the hot seat for 2 reasons. One is the school literally can't afford a $1 million buyout. This isn't pro sports. We don't have a billionaire owner. Two is we need to develop a long-term plan to how we're going to improve this otherwise it's just going to be groundhogs day. New coach, very much all the same problems.

 

I think if Joe were hitting 5-7 wins  And not 12 total in four years.

We wouldn't be having many of these conversations.  That said, Joe is only leaving if he decides he'd rather be an OC somewhere else making the same (or more) money.  As noted, Akron doesn't really have the cash to do that.

 

And I think you're 100% spot on about the "selling the program."  I don't think anyone here is pretending this is, or should be, easy.

[Zippy87]

7 hours ago, ZippyDoo said:

Joe Moe didn't miss the field goal, drop the punt, or throw the interception.  He also was not in the secondary letting the Kent wide receivers do whatever the wanted to like they never played defense before.  He did however, have the offense last night have over 500 yards offense a qb that threw for over 400 yards, a wr that caught for over 200 yards and an rb that had 96 yards rushing... BUT most importantly to me... his team DIDN'T quit down 18 going into the fourth quarter and fought back and tied the game.... somebody motivated that team on both sides of the ball...

 

But let me guess, we aren't going to give him credit for the offensive performance and we aren't going to give him credit for the team NOT giving him and scoring 18 points in the fourth quarter? we will just bash and hate on him and say he has to go cause he sucks....

 

It was a great game and it didn't go the way we wanted it to... sometimes that happens....

 

Akron had the three possessions below account for 6 total points:

 

- 4th and 1 Kent 11 yard line

- 4th and 3 at the Kent 23 yard line

- 4th and 2 at the Kent 2 yard line

 

That's inexcusable, gutless football, especially playing at home in a rivalry game with so much on the line. 

 

Make all the excuses you want for the guy, but he coached ultra-conservatively, trying not to lose, while Carney coached aggressively and played to win. 

[exit322]

20 minutes ago, Zippy87 said:

 

Akron had the three possessions below account for 6 total points:

 

- 4th and 1 Kent 11 yard line

- 4th and 3 at the Kent 23 yard line

- 4th and 2 at the Kent 2 yard line

 

That's inexcusable, gutless football, especially playing at home in a rivalry game with so much on the line. 

 

Make all the excuses you want for the guy, but he coached ultra-conservatively, trying not to lose, while Carney coached aggressively and played to win. 

 

It's just time.  But Akron can't afford to fire.

 

So Joe's gonna have to leave on his own.

 

Good luck to the AD, who probably also has his hands tied behind his back.  Especially if Joe doesn't leave and we lock in another 4-win season.

[GP1]

37 minutes ago, Zippy87 said:

 

Akron had the three possessions below account for 6 total points:

 

- 4th and 1 Kent 11 yard line

- 4th and 3 at the Kent 23 yard line

- 4th and 2 at the Kent 2 yard line

 

That's inexcusable, gutless football, especially playing at home in a rivalry game with so much on the line. 

 

Make all the excuses you want for the guy, but he coached ultra-conservatively, trying not to lose, while Carney coached aggressively and played to win. 

Am I the only person who saw the last play of the first half?  It was hardly conservative. If they don't make a first down on one of the two they got FGs, the game ends in regulation. What if they just make another FG.

 

We live in a very either/or world. Some day we can have a discussion about this lack of thought being a result of the increased use of Maoist tactics, but that's another day. Monday morning QBs always assumed one other decision would have worked. Quantum physics tells us there are an infinite number of possibilities with each decision. Many do not involve success. For example, getting a first down at the 20 in the second scenario could result in throwing a pick six on the next play.

[Zippy87]

1 minute ago, GP1 said:

Am I the only person who saw the last play of the first half?  It was hardly conservative. If they don't make a first down on one of the two they got FGs, the game ends in regulation. What if they just make another FG.

 

We live in a very either/or world. Some day we can have a discussion about this lack of thought being a result of the increased use of Maoist tactics, but that's another day. Monday morning QBs always assumed one other decision would have worked. Quantum physics tells us there are an infinite number of possibilities with each decision. Many do not involve success. For example, getting a first down at the 20 in the second scenario could result in throwing a pick six on the next play.

 

No, we all watched that play and the entire game. The only time Moorhead became aggressive was when they got behind and he had to. 

[MDZip]

5 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Quantum physics tells us there are an infinite number of possibilities with each decision. Many do not involve success

 

[GP1]

5 minutes ago, Zippy87 said:

 

No, we all watched that play and the entire game. The only time Moorhead became aggressive was when they got behind and he had to. 

Conservative play calling didn't cost them the game. Akron filled up the offensive stat sheet.

 

Games are lost, not won. Akron gave up six sacks. Akron had more turnovers. Akron gave up big plays. Akron only sacked Kent once. 

Edited 14 hours ago by GP1

[Zippy87]

1 minute ago, GP1 said:

Conservative play calling didn't cost them the game. Akron filled up the offensive stat sheet.

 

Games are lost, not won. Akron gave up six sacks. Akron had more turnovers. Akron gave up big plays

 

Filling up the stat sheet doesn't matter if you don't execute to finish drives, or when you settle for field goal attempts when your opponent is back on their heels. Certainly wasn't the only reason they lost, though.

[GP1]

8 minutes ago, Zippy87 said:

 

Filling up the stat sheet doesn't matter if you don't execute to finish drives, or when you settle for field goal attempts when your opponent is back on their heels. Certainly wasn't the only reason they lost, though.

FGs provide some momentum as they offer some positive feedback for a good drive. Getting stopped on fourth down hands momentum to the other team. On two occasions the Zips were stopped on fourth down. Two wasted possessions or the surrendering of field position in a close games kill. 

 

I've watched a lot of football in my life. One thing I always notice is teams that play not to lose end up plodding along and winning a lot of games. However, Akron didn't play not to lose last night. They played to lose with turnovers, giving up big plays and sacks. 

[Zippy87]

2 hours ago, GP1 said:

FGs provide some momentum as they offer some positive feedback for a good drive. Getting stopped on fourth down hands momentum to the other team. On two occasions the Zips were stopped on fourth down. Two wasted possessions or the surrendering of field position in a close games kill. 

 

I've watched a lot of football in my life. One thing I always notice is teams that play not to lose end up plodding along and winning a lot of games. However, Akron didn't play not to lose last night. They played to lose with turnovers, giving up big plays and sacks. 

 

I would argue that each time they settled for a 3 point attempt instead of pushing for 7, it gave Kent momentum, not us. The first drive - where we pushed down the field at will and then settled - set the tone for the entire game. 

[GP1]

8 hours ago, Zippy87 said:

 

I would argue that each time they settled for a 3 point attempt instead of pushing for 7, it gave Kent momentum, not us. The first drive - where we pushed down the field at will and then settled - set the tone for the entire game. 

What if they didn't make it?

 

Chuck Martin at Miami plays not to lose. He is a football version of Charlie Coles. His record at Miami is two games under .500.  He has won over 60% of his MAC games. He has been to bowl games around 7 is his 10 season at Miami. This is what winning in the MAC looks like. 

 

Playing not to lose in the MAC is a winning strategy because so many of the teams are just dying to lose. You can't make losers feel like they can win, or they will sneak up on you. That's what happened to Akron. 

Edited 2 hours ago by GP1

[zippy5]

1 hour ago, GP1 said:

What if they didn't make it?

 

Then we'd lose, just like we did anyway.

[kreed5120]

Are you really trying to argue settling for a field goal on 4th and goal from the 3 yard line when you're down 11 late in the 4th quarter?

 

Even after kicking the field goal you're still down 8 so you would need to convert a 2-point conversion from the same distance that you settled for a field goal on. The difference is a touchdown gives you 6-8 points while a 2-point conversion only gives 2. It's logical to take the risk when the return is greater since no matter what you will have 1 play from the 3-yard line with the game on the line in both scenarios.

 

That was the one particular call that I found egregious. I don't mind taking the field goals earlier in the game, but near the end of the game we absolutely should have went for it on 4th and goal.