I know you're just disappointed with results. No question our passing game is better than our running game. I think the coach conceded they ran too much early.
But... we have to at least do enough with the run that they play us honestly. We can all agree we should run some but not too much, wherever that line is drawn.
I think it was the Montana coach who said regarding the fly option that they wanted the defense to at least have to guard against the fly sweep because it limited what the defense could do. That’s how it is with us and the run generally and the fly sweep in particular, plus we have to be able to pick up fourth and inches.

Well, there seems to be much disappointment with running game, so in that regard;
What do we think of Tehran Thomas? Has had some success in spots but dropped that fourth down screen. Should we feature him more?

Two out of the first three series featured an incomplete pass. On the first series we got a first down despite the incompletion. In only one of the first 3 series did we not pass, and that series the qb ran the ball.
Then after an interception we got a touchdown with some productive plays. So we were unproductive in the first 3 series, but not because we didn't pass. We didn't complete the two passes we tried.

I’m also in favor of being pass oriented. However, they probably thought we could successfully run the ball based on film. They were wrong in the sense that we couldn’t when it counted. We have to look at ourselves and see if we were too predictable in certain situations. We were not terrible statistically for the game as a whole but got stuffed whenever it really counted. Fourth and inches for example. But overall we were 4/16 on third down, and some portion of those were pass plays. We just didn’t succeed in key situations generally.

As a person who watched more football years ago before they got so protective, the penalty that resulted in ejection looked pretty questionable to me. A defensive player collides with a passer who is also running toward the defender. The defensive player is reaching out with both arms to interfere with the pass and then they have a pretty innocuous collision. They call targeting based on the bumping helmets. Roughing the passer maybe but an ejection was kind of extream.

We are much improved. Just not yet at level of our last two foes. Now we have an easier schedule so let’s see how we fare. Winning against Poly and Sac would make the season a success and we have a good chance of doing that.

OldAggie is right about the D. We gives up far too many big plays which reflects lack of athleticism. Every game features a routine play or plays where a ball carrier gets a little space and then its a TD or huge gain.
On offense we seem to have the horses, except on the offensive line, and are somewhat deficient compared to conference foes at running back.
Movielover, I think we played a lot of players on D due to the altitude.

Problem was that their defense was able to stop either run or pas at critical times. 4 for 16 on third down. Stopped on fourth and inches on one running play and then again on 4th down when running back dropped the pass.
On the other side we gave up a running play that went up the middle for 43 yards and I think that was third and long. They converted too many third and long situations.
The big plays against us are our major problem.

Three weeks ago, beating NAU would not have been seen a big upset, but they have looked real tough the last few weeks. This now looks like the least likely win on the rest of our schedule. I think have made great progress, you list our wins, but the EWU loss shows progress as well. I think our offense is now a big concern to the teams we play. We may just need a little more athleticism to stop some of the big gains. Hard to win when you give up the long plays we have.

Regarding the importance of this game, I think its hugely important because its next. I'm excited to think we might win. I don't think we're really a solid team that will put together a long win streak, and if you look at it as though we're just competitive with the other league members, and will win about half of those games, does it really matter which ones? I don't want us to lose any, but I think the most important thing is to sweep all FCS teams in California by beating cal poly and sac. Our team is getting better each week as its a new situation that players and coaches are adjusting to. Maybe EW is too big a test this soon, but maybe not.

I think for an FCS team our secondary is pretty good, although we don't have much of a pass rush without blitzing. I'd prefer we play a pass oriented team than one that is very strong rushing. Famous last words. We are going to have to score above our average to win this week, I think.

Davis predicted winner by computer algorithm. *

UC DAVIS 33.84 - 28.23 eastern Washington

•Sugarin has a "new feature" which predicts winners by various methods. The one that has us the winner compares strength of offense vs defense for each team, called "offense defense".
I think it is worth mentioning as it's an indicator that we have a legitimate chance to win this week.

it's also fun that our style of play still looks like old time Aggie football. Every game from here out we have a chance of winning. Can't predict which ones will fall our way. Makes each week suspenseful.

movielover its not so much emailing as it is having a web presence with content. Something that shows up in search engines. And not the one sided silver lining stuff in the departments page; that's good but also something balanced, other teams get that by default from local media, we don't

I wonder if there is a study that indicates English speaking foreign students don't read English posters. Or perhaps foreign students think that football games are open only to a secret society?
Perhaps if there was a newspaper not behind a paywall that wrote about the games some of the mystery would lessen.
Re clips: since it isn't happening in the press, anything that creates or feeds interest needs to be done in house or by students, does the Aggie cover sports anymore? Maybe they could up their game,

Said many times before but one of our problems in competing at D1 level is we get no more coverage than we did in D2. That's one reason we appear to be small time. I don't even see Davis Enterprise articles when I search google for sports news, I don't think google crawls their site.
Back in the long ago Far Western Conference days, the Chronicle would cover the league coaches conference call. Sac Bee is a lost hope, I think Sac State going D1 and still being small time contributes to that. In the long run, we can't hope the DE survives to cover the team, hopefully there will be further growth in online resources that will provide to a wider audience the stories we currently get from the DE. Subscribing to the DE for three football stories a week is isn't compelling for out of towners.

If you delete your cookies and browsing history you can restart the counter.

the injuries have hurt them but this is still a challenging game for us. They have a veteran qb, top level running backs and are a physical team. Disappointing for them means they've come back from standout to average in the Big Sky. It would be a mild upset for us to beat this team even at home. I'm hoping we get three more wins this year, this game might be one of them.

Looking at their last game, it looks like they fell behind early and went away from their style of play. They averaged five yards a carry but not a large number. They look like they could be trouble. Proven running backs, big play potential. Have to do what Montana State did which was score early.
Santiago got 150 yards against us two years ago.

No idea what to expect this week. They've lost badly a few weeks in a row, we've lost badly last game. They seem to be getting beaten in line play, both offense and defense and are apparently suffering from loss of middle linebacker. Whether we are physically capable of taking advantage of that is an open question.