No one said that. Ever.

No one said that, ever. No one has implied that. Ever. As a matter of fact, every one on this board is open to the possibility that Irons is the back with the highest ceiling and have said as much. We can all speculate as to the reasons why he isn't starting, but it's very possible he isn't ready. It's also possible he doesn't practice as hard. It's possible he has a bad attitude, or maybe the other backs have shown pass-catching ability that he hasn't. Maybe none of these things are true or maybe all of them are true. WE DON'T KNOW! But most importantly... YOU DON'T KNOW! So quit acting like you do. The more you insist you know something that you clearly don't, the more clueless you seem. And the more arrogant you seem. There are some people on here that BA members rely on for X's and O's and good information about how football is played. You're NOT one of them. Last year AJ was a freshman and that didn't stop him from getting carries, so the idea that FS is overly loyal to his upperclassmen is off. AJ won the job because he hung on to the football in a season when the running game struggled behind a young line. Guess what... How many fumbles this season by running backs? I can't remember a single one. Think the entire RB corps got the message? FS may be a great coach, he may not be, and we can speculate till the cows come home, but FS clearly knows how to handle this group of ball-carriers. You have no credibility here, so... just. stop.

And Merry Christmas.

If you've acknowledged the blowout losses, then that comment was obviously not directed at you.

It was directed at those (and they are out there) that continue to breeze past those losses as if they never happened and keep shouting "win streak at 3, scoreboard on NIU"

If they are going to celebrate the win streak (as I think 99.9% of us have) then don't ignore the giant elephant in the room....that those three wins came off a horrid three-game losing streak. One that we've seen over...and over...and over the last four years.

It's becoming an unsightly trend....and to ignore it or act like this modest three-game win streak (and win over NIU) somehow erases all that is being a bit unrealistic.

I've said it (repeatedly)....I am excited as anyone about the three-game win streak....but how it translates going forward (i.e. 2016 & beyond) is going to really determine where this program is headed. Will we get over the hump and start consistently competing (and beating) top-level MAC programs...or will we continue to get drubbed and just be an average MAC program that survives off wins over the bottom-feeders?

We weren't an average MAC program from 2009-2011.....we've regressed into one.

I'd like to see this program get back to competing for championships and competing for division titles....and competing with the best in this league.

It was a response this...

There are a select few on here that want to sweep the three losses mid-season to WMU, UB and BG (along with the lopsided ones from the last few years) under the rug and pretend they didn't happen.

They think a three-game win streak and a win over NIU suddenly rights the ship.

While it's great and all...it simply is a starting point to turn this program back into a championship contender. There is still work to be done.

And as I've stated, this three-game win streak will only matter if next season we don't see similar results to what we saw this year, last year, the year before that, etc. in MAC games that matter in the divisional race.

Poll Results: 52-4. I have never seen results to a BA poll as definitively/decisively to one side. With all the consternation I thought there might have been an issue that would have kept posters from offering an opinion. Boy was I wrong. Wonder about the four? Perhaps they might reassess their authority.

I'll bet some of you got blown out at work today. C'mon, admit it.

Yes, that is da scoreboard . . ."

Again, this was intended to be a simple poll to answer a simple question. The question is "Do most people have a single definition of success, being a MACC, or do they also have other measures of success, such as overall winning percentages and bowls?" The question was a test between two unusual and extreme positions. One team had a horrible record, only one decent season, but a MACC. The other had 9/10 seasons bowl eligible, and an overall good record, but no MACC. If people had a single definition of success (MACC), they would select Miami, since by that definition Miami's record was clearly superior. If they had a different definition of success, and included also overall winning records and bowls, they would choose Ohio's records.

The results clearly showed that people have a more complex definition of success, and that a MACC was not the only factor. That's all it showed, however, because that's all it was designed to show. It certainly didn't show that people wouldn't prefer a winning record AND a MACC because obviously they would, and there is no reason to even ask that question.


Amen.

You're making way too much sense, Mike.

Better to be called an old soul than an old sole. ;-) Sorry I couldn't resist.

Thanks ou79. That's some great research.

No, what I was referring to is having at least a break even record. Applying that criteria, it looks as follows:

1962 8-3
1963 6-4
1964 5-4-1
1966 5-5
1967 5-5
1968 10-1
1969 5-4-1
1971 5-5
1973 5-5
1974 6-5
1975 5-5-1
1976 7-4

Back then (60's) most teams only played a 10 game schedule. Therefore, as every team in the nation this year who at least had a break even season got a bowl invite, that is how I figured Bill Hess. You are also right, I did not go back to 1958. Using my methodology, Hess' 1958 team was 5-4 and therefore bowl eligible as well as '59 (7-2), '60 (10-0 and National Champs/MAC Champs) and '61 (5-3-1). So at the end of the day, he would have had 16 bowl eligible teams.

And Mike, putting together this post with the numbers OU79 and I are compiling (Ohio being bowl eligible under the current rules only 4 times from 1981 to 2004)...If someone had walked up to ANY OF US and said, "I can tell you almost everything that is going to happen. There is one thing I can not divulge. I can tell you Frank will have this team bowl eligible 9 times between now and 2015. Will be selected to a bowl 7 of those years and be 2 and 4 heading into the 2015 bowl game. We will be 9-2 against Miami. 3-2 against Marshall. And 4-1 against Temple (trust me, that will feel good in a few years). The team will beat the likes of Pitt and Penn State. Frank and Ohio will be featured in Sports Illustrated. Once his recruits age to graduation, Ohio will have a player drafted by the NFL almost every year. The team will graduate players and have no academic or recruiting black marks. Ohio will win three MAC East crowns and, play in three MAC Championship games. The one thing I can not tell you is their record in those games. Now, it is up to you. Do you want this hire to take place?"

No brainer - I know.

(And even if the condition was, "but you do not win a MACC" - most would have accepted the rise from the dust - especially, to your point, those of us that tasted dirt from the late 70's to 2004).

I also know that we all (team, coaches, administration, fans, etc.) want a MACC and are disappointed we have not won one. I also know that if the team had not had an historic collapse in our last attempt, that criteria would also be checked off - and only a few would be upset in 2015.

It has been a good roll - especially after an historic dry period. A recent slump (against better teams) is hopefully behind us. The team certainly appears united in moving forward and I'm excited for them.