L.C. clearly explained his reasoning for selecting this comparison.

He's merely testing the logic of two different Monroe rules at once;

[(1) The logic that says winning a MACC within the last 11 years makes your program at or above average. The three obvious examples from the last 11 years to contradict your pathetic excuse for logic and reasoning are Miami, Buffalo, and Akron.

(2) The rule that says a MACC is viewed as the ultimate goal by all Ohio fans. The poll then exposes this rule as false.]

Yes NIU, CMU, and BG have done well as MAC Championship programs. But a theory doesn't break at its strong point, it breaks at its weakest point (Miami, Buffalo, and Akron).

EMU isn't an eligible program to test the logic of your rules because they haven't won a MACC.

And further more, no person with intellectual integrity would watch a theory break at its weakest point and conclude, "Hey that doesn't count. Go back to the ideal conditions I defined to create my hopothesis! It works at its strongest point............."

You're a man child Monroe.

That is you, and you are unique, the rest of the world pays for performance. Ohio U is not a mediocre university and we should not settle for mediocre results.

+1

No, it's not a stupid poll. It's a poll between two very real alternatives. What some apparently would like would be a poll "would you like the status quo" or "would you like to win a MACC every other year and a national championship every 5 years". Now that would be a stupid poll because one of the two alternatives is unrealistic.

As The Situation correctly pointed out, this poll was designed to point out the fallacy of Monroe's doctine, but it does more than that. It's also designed to get people to think about the two very real alternatives. Alternative one is to maintain the status quo, and to continue to develop and grow the program, knowing that you are moving forward, not backwards. Alternative two is to get onto the coaching Carousel, and hope for the best. You might get "lucky", and win a MACC like Buffalo and Miami did. You might get really lucky like CMU and NIU and win more than one. Or, you might get results like Akron, Kent, or Ohio in the 80's.


Correct. They have far more money, far better facilties, and far more tradition, making it easier for them to hire a better coach, but it still hasn't worked for them, has it?


The Situation already answered your first question. You stated that Ohio was "below average", and by your definition Miami is "above average". The poll wasn't designed to determine if Ohio was #1, but only if your statement that Ohio was below average and that Miami was above average was true. It's not, based on the poll

For similar reasons, since no one is maintaining that Ohio is the worst in the MAC, so there's no reason to compare them to EMU. In any case, I have never presented Solich as a "deity", only as a competent coach. Based on the success/failure rate in this business I'd put him in the top third of coaches nationwide, but not in the top 10%. Can Ohio afford a coach in the top 10%? No, so it's not relevant, except that, if Ohio is on the coaching carousel, they might at some point get lucky and get a coach in the top 10% for a few years.

As for your final question, who are Boldon and Webb?

#fireMiles

Amazing that winning two SEC Championships and a National Championship is not enough. Appears their poll is:

What we have
What Alabama has

I regret that I wasted so much time reading about this poll.

Frank has done a fine job and deserves to finish his contract. It's nice that we now expect more than average or slightly above average with the Ohio football team. I remember the decades of losing. That said, I'm looking forward to another coaching staff.

LC, please read my messages, I don't want Solich fired. I want him to make adjustments. We need better play calling, I would like to see a QB that is a threat with his arm and better tackling. These things have killed us and can be fixed. We start off looking like we are going to be a great defense and then the tackling goes to shreds. We be Marshall and then get blown out by a MAC team later in the season. The middle of the season is killing us. I repeat, I am not calling for Solich's head. However, if we do not improve next year, I would look at not extending his contract.

Do you think the playcalling improved in the last three games this season? Honest question. To me it seemed like it really did. I'm not exactly sure what was different, although I know FS said they looked closely at the offense around that time and tried to narrow down the number of plays. Maybe the difference was more OL execution like LC said, I don't know.

That's what makes the poll interesting. You trying to force-feed a business analogy (Monroe, that you?) where it's not relevant is what's stupid. A poll that asked if you'd rather be 72-0 with 5 MAC titles vs 36-36 with no MAC titles would be pointless.

The poll makes perfect sense given the droning by a few on this board. Every one of us wants a conference title! EVERY. ONE. I'm also beyond disappointed that we have yet to get one in 11 years under FS. But it's not the only measure of success. If we won the MAC, would it mean as much to me as beating Penn State? It's close, but I don't think so. When we were the worst team in America in the early 90s, I'd always thought we'd eventually get good and catch the right break and the conference title will come, but I never dreamed we'd win at Penn State. I didn't bother because the concept of such a thing was too far-fetched.

Miami has more football history than we do, but they're a decade-long (and running) disaster and their last MAC title was a fluke inside a four-leaf clover with bloody chunks of rabbit foot in a pile of horseshoes. So, would you rather...? The question is absolutely relevant.

Some of you will accept any excuse.

Play calling and the D got better when people got healthy..whatever. It's a coaching staff's responsibility to win (or at least not get totally blown out) no matter what circumstances arise.

No; let's only count the games in which everything is okay, the opponents weak.

I expect us to reasonably compete in every game. We don't play any really good teams. Beefs,WMU,BG total thrashings are not acceptable.

But it's okay. Four years of that is offset by beating lousy Kent and Ball State.

Again the baggage is light and denial by omission of the best work the players presented. The players deserve their due credit from a "fan" who claims to support the program.

Apples and oranges. Basketball has far and away the number one facility in the MAC, PLUS it spends fifty percent more than the nearest conference member in annual budget. Football spends in the fiftieth percentile in budget. Not even close to an equal comparison.

Who ordained the concept that the only measure of a program's success is winning a MAC Championship? And why are those who believe otherwise wrong? Sorry, but I choose to hold my own opinions.