Facts.

MAC Since 2012

NIU 25-2
BGSU 19-7
Toledo 18-6
Ball St 17-7
CMU 14-10
Buffalo 12-11
Ohio 12-12
Kent 12-12
WMU 9-15
Akron 7-17
Miami 5-19
UMass 5-19
EMU 3-21

vs. "MAC Elite" since 2012 (over. 500 teams)

NIU 9-2
Toledo 7-5
Ball St 5-6
BGSU 2-6
Kent 2-8
WMU 2-10
CMU 1-8
Akron 1-8
Buffalo 0-8
UMass 0-8
Ohio 0-10
Miami 0-10
EMU 0-15

vs. "MAC Non-Elite" since 2012 (.500 or below)

BGSU 17-1
NIU 16-0
CMU 13-2
Ball St 12-1
Ohio 12-2
Buffalo 12-3
Toledo 11-1
Kent 10-4
WMU 7-5
Akron 6-9
Miami 5-9
UMass 5-11
EMU 3-6

We are a middle of the road (closer to the bottom than the top) program recently in this league. Totally unacceptable. Should be competing for titles and we barely battling to be .500.

Some people's attitudes towards this program remind me of the quote: YOU CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

The facts speak for themselves and the records speak for themselves. This ship has sailed. It doesn't get much if any better than 2010 or so. I wish I could say I was wrong but all I can say is I am glad we are no longer the EMU of the conference! We have moved from poor to average with a flash of good every once in a while. We're all gonna have to learn to accept that for now.

Amen. I feel like so many try to sugarcoat everything. We are no longer the EMU...that is true...and we are all thankful for that.

But there are people who think we are closer to NIU than we are to EMU...and I'm not so sure of that all the time. We show it from time to time....but we are not there consistently.

"They are who we thought they were" Dennis Green nailed it. This Bobcat program is who they are. A middle-of-the-pack team in a middle-of-the-pack league. I wish it weren't the case, but until the facts change...it's the cold, hard truth.

You mean like here?

Oh here?

The included data as described by Paul Graham in his "Ohio vs. Top of the MAC" thread:

2012
Kent - Lost 28-6 (-22)
Ball State - Lost 52-27 (-25)
Bowling Green - Lost 26-14 (12)

3/13 games played = 23%

2013
CMU - Lost 26-23 (-3)
Buffalo - Lost 30-3 (-27)
Bowling Green - Lost 49-0 (-49)

3/13 games played = 23%

2014
CMU - Lost 28-10 (-18)
Bowling Green - Lost 31-13 (-18)
WMU - Lost 42-21 (-19)
NIU - Lost 21-14 (-7)

3/12 games played = 25%

The excluded data over that period = 29/38 = 76%

This included list is more or less the "what MAC teams have we beaten in the last 2.57654321 years" rant you usually cram into any thread.

And as MonroeClassmate so astutely pointed out, some of the weakest teams in the MAC can cost you a trip to Detroit. Therefore, (even for those solely focused on the MAC Championship), excluding Ohio's record against the weakest MAC teams is a critically flawed approach.

You're not even critiquing my original post. You're functionally worthless at reading comprehension. This is no surprise to me at this point. Your critique addressed incorrect assumptions YOU MADE UP BETWEEN YOUR OWN EARS!

This story isn't about my opinion of the state of the Ohio Bobcats football program or about what I'd like to see done. This story isn't about suppressing other's opinion. You can plug in my opinion or your own into this story and the results will be the same. The approach was critically flawed, none of us would have landed a deal with such a brazen display of self-serving data manipulation.

That quote was taken severely out of context. If your children are anything like their father I hope they never go to journalism school.

If you think you and your "any man" income can impart a tangible change of your choosing on the Ohio Bobcats football program then I will refer you to the serenity prayer. God speed.

P.S.

If by chance you're implying I'm a school of business guy, I'll just address that by saying I'm an engineer.

And, do you recall a key to solving this problem? They added cellphone tower triangulation into the algorithm. I'm at a loss to figure out the football equivalent of that.

Last Saturday, I sat in the stands at Ryan Field on the campus of Northwestern U (see what I did there) and found myself surrounded by Iowa fans. This is one of the features of going to a game at NU - there is always ample seating for the visitors and as a result you get to meet a lot of interesting people. Last year we attended the Nebraska game (AKA The Knowledge Bowl -"what's the 'N' for?" ) The Nebraska guys I met chatted me up because I was wearing my Ohio sweatshirt (purple is not in my color wheel) their defining characteristic was an undoubting passion and commitment to the Huskers and that they knew most of the players' first names. Now the Iowa fans I met were remarkably different. They had passion, but were not as aggressive. They were a pretty self-effacing bunch, in fact. Many of the ones around me seemed micro-focused on their dissatisfaction with their Head Coach. While the game was still in question I was impressed at the bile and overall negative feelings toward their coach. When things went their way it was chalked up a "gift from Northwestern". As the lead grew they never seemed satisfied, in fact, there were many of them who actually seemed disappointed that Northwestern was such an easy opponent. They had become accustomed to their dissatisfaction.

As I left my little section of the stadium I thought to myself how miserable it must be to not take the time to enjoy the moment. Maybe there's just too much Cub fan in me for my own good.

Manny--

Swept up in your emotional dislike of me, you're not going to get the following. But I swear it's posted with good intent and to help you.

I write stuff on these threads that's difficult to understand at times. Sometimes, I do it go goof around. Sometimes I do it because I'm an idieot and I'm not expressing my thoughts clearly.

In your posts here, you are not clear.

You titled this thread 'a critically flawed approach.' I get that you meant to say that others are pursuing a bad approach. But when you title your thread that way, it seems as if you're saying that you're going to present a flawed approach. Better title: Here's what some of you don't get.' Something like that.

You wrote: "you've drawn a defined circle around a specific grouping of teams over a number of seasons. And you've chosen to exclude 73% of the games outside of that circle. These are Ohio football games played during the 2012, 2013, and 2014 seasons."

You have a lost referent that makes your lead sentence impossible to understand. What is 'the circle' and 'the number of seasons'? You don't clearly define these term. Arguing with me that you do--well, that's more a judgment for the reader, the intended audience to make than the writer. (It doesn't help if I know what I meant if my audience doesn't grasp what I mean.)

I took 'circle' to be Solich's whole career at Ohio. Apparently (from your later posts), the circle is only those games played in 2012, 2013 and 2014. 'Number of seasons'--don't see that clearly defined anywhere. I might get it if I read and re-read your initial post and pieced it together--but that's not my job as the reader.

In a later post in this thread, you said that you were describing the games which Paul pointed to in his 'how have we fared against the top of the MAC in 2012-14.' How in the heck was I supposed to know that. It's not stated explicitly in your lead post here and, again, it sure wasn't anyhow clear until you did state it in a later post in this thread.

You should have just more clearly stated: Some of you are looking only at 2012-14 and taking only 27% of the games played in those three seasons.

Let me stop to breathe and continue this in another post...this one's too long already.

cellphone tower=BIGMANZ??? :)

A healthy Lowery would qualify.

Monroe,

Lol.

Let me tell ya, IT SURE AIN't EASY BEING A BROWNS!! The Browns drive me nuts.

Good post, and with the "Knowledge Bowl" today, it reminds me that I need to find something purple to wear.