Wasnt thinking about defensive linemen yet, butI hope the new guy is good. I suspect he’ll lose weight.

The article had examples where they recruit guys with the frame to add weight and then they get bigger lifting, or so they say.
In the article they have a guy who was 240 ending up at 350. We tend to have guys gain maybe 10 or 15 lbs.
What does that mean? Who knows?
Maybe our guys are the right size for what we do, maybe not.
Cal Polys coach Walsh says something along the lines of bigger guys are better at horizontal blocking than vertical. It seems to me that big heavy lines tend to be better at pass blocking than run blocking, maybe related to what Walsh says. In the olden days linemen got downfield to block and they had pulling guards etc which required more mobility. Pass blocking requires that the lineman mostly stays on his feet and is hard to move so being big is advantageous. Walsh says run blocking has changed and is less vertical as well,

It seems unusual for us to have players get more than moderately bigger during their career here, going by roster weight. We have one guy, Colton Lamson, whose gained 50lbs in comparison to 2017, but he’s the exception. We aren’t small on the offensive line but we don’t have guys who are 310+. Not saying that’s good or bad, just different

Kelly and Hoyt, two players who had scholarships here plus guarantee playing time left to walk on at a Pac12 school. Plus the guy from 2006 whose name escapes me.
Make it so they don’t have to sit out and we might lose more, Not a bad thing if there is a two way flow but there hasn’t been.

We deserve this wish.....We don’t have to be world class in running the ball, just good enough so that running in typical running situations is not precluded. It would make all aspects of offense better.

We lost a linebacker or defensive lineman to UCLA the year after the win over Stanford. I guess he felt he was as good as those guys and left. He played some at UCLA

I don’t think the redshirt rule is for flexibility although it provides that. The motivation for the two rules is probably to foster parity by allowing transfers from overstocked schools to less loaded rosters. The less loaded rosters will also get more games out of the players they have. Hopefully the big name schools will not attract tranfers in a Golden State Warriors manner. Will be good if players transfer to where they can get playing time and not good if they transfer to where they can be a backup on a big name school. Wouldn’t surprise me if they cut roster size down the road. They effectively made rosters bigger due to longer eligibility.

The unanticipated history at Davis seems to be that we have more of our talented players transferring to FBS schools than transfer down to us, The transfer rule might make that worse. We’ve had players on scholarship leave us to walk on at UCLA and Arizona State. Defensive lineman Jordan Hoyt just earned a full scholarship at ASU.

Allowing redshirts to play will be a bigger factor in FCS than FBS due to their smaller rosters and number of scholarships. Law of diminishing returns would indicate that adding more depth will help a team with 60 scholarships more than one with 80

on offense we need to be more effective in the ground. We need to be able to pick up first downs on third and three by running the ball. I know we expect Tehran to be a factor with that but we are also needing to replace two offensive linemen and we have some good young big lineman who may improve our run blocking. This will help inside the twenty at both ends of the field. I remember one play I think against Weber where we had third and short deep in our end, threw to Doss along the sideline where he was double covered and it was incomplete. Short punt followed, resulting in short drive for TD. On third and one or two we have to be confident we can get it.

So far this year we’ve had the enterprise cover one position. At this rate we’ll have the whole team analyzed by Halloween

is the Blue Force the defensive side of the team? I believe they will rise to the occasion. We’ll have a really good idea after the first two games.

I can see it both ways. Lots of challenging games can fall either way. Optimistically our skilled offensive players give us an edge.

Finally an optimistic opinion about our schedule..
We can win 2 of our out of conference get ranked and we don’t have to play the two Utah schools who shared eague title

Yep, the 6’7” guy is tight end size maybe he blocks as well. The 6’5” guys bio seems like a good athlete. But we’re deep at receiver. Hope coaches can finds role if they have ability. We need to wait and see how things sort out, might see some surprises.

Me too,
Media and poll voters don’t expect much. We were 5 & 6; lost to Sac, and our schedule is tougher, The time to prove them wrong is just weeks away.
Success to me is do several of the following, doesn’t need to be all:
1) Beat San Jose
2) Beat a team in our conference we haven’t beaten since we joined, either Montana or Eastern Washington These are both on the road
3) Beat everyone in FCS in California
4) Have a winning record

So many questions so few answers, the joy of rooting for the Aggies!
Hopefully coaches identify talent and find spots for a lot of guys to succeed. Our JC WR is interesting. Was an all state punter in high school. Didn’t catch too many passes at American River, or punt. But with all our QBs throwing passes in practice we need a lot of receivers.

No huddle fast tempo will also get the number of plays up.
We won’t be one dimensional. We have a few other wide receivers in addition to our returning starters coming off injury. Plus good redshirts, freshmen. Jarred Harrell redshirted after injury, he was a 10.7 second 100 guy. Remember the big plays against Weber by Vaughn, one 60 yards? I’d love to get an update on how Harrell and Vaughn are.

Not much change there I think he averaged 10 catches.
To throw to Doss 20 times we need first downs so there are lots of plays and everyone else gets plays too.

He’s great. Wish we had two of him.