Monroe, you continue to post this misleading innuendo repeatedly even though it is demonstrably false, and I know that you are smart enough to realize that it is essentially a lie, but that you are hoping that if you repeat it often enough people will come to accept it as the truth. It's a typical, but pathetic strategy.

Would you like me to make a list of players that have come in, earned time, and moved up to starting positions ahead of other players? Would you like to give me a list of players that were backups who deserved to start, but who never did because the coaches played a "favorite" ahead of him? I thought not, as I'm sure you are aware that mine would be a long list, while yours would most likely be empty.

As a recent example, let's look at Windham. Some argued he was the best QB and should be starting, but the coaches unfairly had him third string because they liked their favorites. Now we've had several chances to see all three quarterbacks in action. Yes, Windham has the strongest arm of the quarterbacks. Yes, he has the quickest release, puts more speed on the ball and throws a tighter spiral. Is he the best QB? My opinion is that the coaches have the order right. Or, maybe you want to argue that Vick should have been starting ahead of TT? or Kyle Snyder ahead of TT? Or Ronnie Bell?

Just who are these mysterious NFL caliber players on Ohio's bench who never manage to see the field? The fact is that they don't exist. But of course, you already knew that...

The fact is that Irons is playing well, and that every time he plays well, he earns more time. That seems pretty normal to me, and I've seen a lot of great running backs over the years, and they pretty much all work their way up. AJ moved up faster than any back I've ever seen, and did it because he didn't fumble, while everyone else did. This year no one has lost their position by fumbling, so Irons has to win it by outplaying the others, which takes longer.

The coaches did a great job of identifying a potentially great running back to recruit. They did a great job of recruiting him to Ohio. By all appearances they have been doing a good job of coaching him since he arrived, and he is playing well. Maybe before he's done he'll set Ohio rushing records, and end up in the NFL. And, if he does all that, somehow it all will be a negative, because nothing positive can ever happen.

Monroe is telling the truth, you just can't handle the truth. Irons has been sitting behind people he is better than. Tettleton had it on cruise control for two years and the coaches did nothing. If we had Jim Brown and enough alumni asked about AJ and said is he going to have a big year, they would demerit Jim Brown to death to get AJ on the field. Then their cronies would inbox certain people that wanted to see Jim Brown play and say Jim Brown was not attending class or he wasn't pass blocking and the Cats would go 6-6 and play Utah State and the mediocre's would go wild. Remember we had Minnesota on the ropes, we beat Marshall.

What about the Phil Bates example? Is he the last Bobcat to play in the NFL? He only had about 100 plays total at Ohio, where a team averages about 75 plays per game. He only had about 15 receptions at Ohio, yet went on to be an NFL WR.

I would say his talent was underutilized at Ohio.

Jonathan Goodwin was an absolute stud for OHIO as a freshman up front and transferred to Michigan after his freshman season (his brother was hired as a GA at the same time) and today is a stud in the NFL.

We also have had two kickers transfer up. One was All-Big10 kicker Jim Delvern (sp?) who left because he was not allowed to kick barefoot or allowed to kick deep. The other was Brooks Rossman who flamed out as a Bobcat and went to Kansas State.

No, we just share some of the same opinions, there is no conspiracy here, I just want to see the Cats go to the next level. The Cats are like my Browns they always let me down, but I still love them. I am really scared for next year, if we don't get a QB and safeties, we may not even beat the MAC bottom feeders. And most of the coddlers here amaze me. I have been to many different college sport forums and I have never seen people act so anal over slight criticisms. I wonder if it rubs off on our team. Some of these guys will go on to play professional football and they will see and hear much worst. The truth is that the program is headed downward and we need to make some adjustments, before the 7-5's turn into 3-9's.

There better be an open competition at safety and quarterback, none of the incumbent stuff or else, we are going to have a tough season. Those two positions need to be upgraded significantly. The corner position will be a question mark as well as we lose four of our top cb's. We have two coming in that will need to redshirt due to their size, Provitt has looked good and bad at times. The coaches are responsible for recruiting and consistency of play throughout the season and they have failed in these aspects at times.

Nevertheless, after that first catch, which wasn't badly defended, but which was perfectly thrown, I don't recall Wells giving up much at all. After that they mostly were working on Layton, Provitt, and the safeties.

I'm coming at this as a former coach, high school volleyball and track. We played the best kids regardless of class and often caught hell for it (once had a team with no senior starters). I have to believe that this staff is playing the best kids otherwise they wouldn't be in the positions that they are today.

I'm sure the coaches are playing the ones that they think are the best.

I think that there are two reasons why Irons has been a subject of debate. In most cases where there is a talented young player moving up through the ranks the fans aren't really aware of him until he does something good in game. A good example of that was Poling. Even when Poling moved up to starter, fans weren't sure about him, but he has surprised and impressed us all. By contrast, with Irons, there has been a buzz around Irons since he committed, and I probably contributed to that with my comments about him at the time. In addition, particularly this year there were rumors about how good he would be before he ever set foot on the field, so fans were actively looking for him to do well, and he hasn't disappointed.

The second reason is that the running game has struggled this year, especially against WMU and Buffalo, but to a lesser degree against Minnesota. The average fan blames the running back when that happens, but usually it is more complicated than that. In this case I blame the offensive line, and not the running backs because the backs had no holes to hit, so far as I can tell, in those games. To my eye the offensive line played with a lot smaller gaps against BG, and it worked significantly better, with the result that all the backs had better days.

My point isn't that Irons isn't good. I still think he is very good, and is only going to get better. As a result, I expect that his playing time will continue to increase, and that he will continue to perform well.

Regardless of all this other stuff, is it really that difficult to see the dynamic size, speed, explosiveness, power of the various running backs, with one standing out clearly above the others?

Clue: you don't have to get into line splits, meaningless running stats in a game in which we got killed, who's injured, who's a 3-star recruit, etc, etc. It's just so obvious to the eyes.

L.C., this is logical, researched and articulate. It's also rational. Those factors are completely unacceptable in certain quarters, though I think the majority of BAers (posters and lurkers) will see the wisdom of your analysis.

I have discovered fairly recently that there are many more lurkers here than posters. At this very moment, for instance, we have 11 registered users signed in and 56 guests. Now, some of those guests might be posters who aren't logged in, but from what I've discovered most of them are not. I suspect many of those lurkers just don't want to jump into the shark pit. If we had more posters who used their intellect rather than raw emotion, I suspect that some of those lurkers would become posters. In other words, the tone of one's post really makes a difference in how others view this board. This doesn't mean we shouldn't criticize what we don't like or think is wrong about the program. However, that criticism should attempt to actually bring relevant facts to bear on the issue under discussion. And, for those of us who are not great Xs and Os guys, like L.C. and some others on this board are, we should approach our criticism with at least an iota of humility. Taking myself as an example, there are things that I don't like -- not ever going under center on 3rd or 4th and long, not enough Irons so far, three straight seasons with too many injuries, etc. -- but at the end of the day when I make a criticism on one of these points I know that I probably don't know enough to be a legitimate critic.

Edit: I used the word "unacceptable" in the above in my friend Chuck Landon's meaning of the word! ;-)

I think an underrated RB attribute is escapability. We can talk about vision, quickness, breakaway speed and power, but how about if the guy gets hit and keeps going, gets hit again and keeps going and again and again. Kalvin McRae was a beast in that department. I guess you could file that under power, but to me power is more about moving a pile of guys. Not everyone can break tackles once hit.

I guess that is where we differ. I will agree that we LOOKED better on the ground vs. BG, but I also think the BG defense was not as good as WMU or Buffalo. If we can run on Kent, I'll be happier.

Correct OCF, we should only address real issues in which we can effect change. Shuttle service anyone?