I probably should have put this in a new thread, but I am too lazy so here goes. This week sees us at Minnesota, BG at Purdue, CMU at Michigan State and WMU at the Evil Empire (OSU). Go Bobcats and go MAC!

Is it possible Minnesota isn't actually very good? Could we beat them and still feel like we need to improve for the "meaty" part of our schedule. I agree you take them one at a time but as a fan I can look at BG and NIU as the games that really matter.
By the way we went to 7-0 in 2012 so the idea of saying every week that we are
3-0, 4-0 , 5-0 etc. and its the first time since 2012, is a bit annoying.

This looks like it could potentially be a winnable game against the Big 10. That has me VERY excited.

Like GoCats105, I initially marked both Marshall and Minnesota as loses. I thought we could be competitive in both games, but I thought both Marshall and Minnesota were going to be very hard games to win. We've lived up to my hopes so far this year. We have a good team.

The potential to be 4-0 is a very big thing.

Hmmm...After losing to Ohio and Virginia (by 1 pt?), as I recall Penn State went on to finish 8-4.

I think Penn State was better in 2012 than Minnesota is this year, but we already played that game, and now we have this one, so let's win it. It's winnable, but won't be easy. A win, though, besides being an important win over the Big Ten, would also be a partial payback for a loss to Jerry Kill in 2011.

You may be on to something here.

Carl, re "follow orders and shut up." I'll offer the same message but with a slightly different "take": "Complete the mission. Excuses not accepted."

and one more...give your commander your best advice, and if he disagrees, salute and say "Yes, SIR"

Yes, I agree with that amendment to my original too terse statement. General George McClellan would have been wise to have followed Lincoln's directive in the Spring of 1862; if he had the war might have been ended two years earlier and much bloodshed avoided. McClellan would have had a "MacArthur moment" and would have been dismissed even earlier (a good thing, IMHO) if a telegraph operator had not deleted two sentences at the end of a telegram to the president, after his army had suffered a defeat on the outskirts of Richmond: "If I save the army now, I tell you plainly that I owe no thanks to you or to any other person in Washington. You have done your best to sacrifice this army." McClellan was a buffoon of a general who had an ego the size of Donald Trump's.

I started this discussing how the military principles; Economy of Effects, Sustainment and Security would lead me to rest players less than 100%. Do not coaches do this every week by listing players as probable or questionable?

Next mentioning General McChrystal seems to have touched a nerve. President Obama picked him for his fourth star. Probably did so because of an outstanding record of mission accomplishment. I expect there was infighting between the General and members of the administration with moments when the president had to make final decisions. While in command the General fought hard for troops and usually won. However, Generals serve "at the pleasure of the President." Then there was the Rolling Stone's article, the access, etc. Perhaps an Ohio trained journalist might explain to me that this article was business as usual and good journalism.

Finally, a few questions.

What is more important, accomplishment of the mission or the welfare of your troops? Answer. In the military, accomplishment of the mission.

What is more important, winning games or the welfare of OUr players?

Last week I watched a high school JV player knocked out and removed to hospital on a backboard. Fortunately he is back in school, just a hairline fracture in the neck area. I recently found a web page that keeps track of injuries by team. Click the link, scroll down and ask yourself, is this excessive. What are we accomplishing through all this?

http://www.donbest.com/ncaaf/injuries /

Again, what is more important, winning games or the welfare of the players?

Bcat2, I apologize if I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying that Frank should hold back completely healthy players from the Minnesota game just on the fear that they might be injured so that they could be ready for MAC play. I totally disagree with that, and I'm sure Frank does too. However, if you were saying that he shouldn't play guys who are not 100 percent, I would agree with that, but that would also hold true for any league games as well.

It would be so sweet to spoil their homecoming weekend. I know we can do it.