The computer rankings and predictions are in the main still influenced by where the teams were ranked prior to any games being played,. Our recent game performance is better than Weber's. Sagarin rankings have the two teams adjacent to each other. Weber predicted the winner based on one methodology and us favored via another ( offense-defense). Anyone's game. I wouldn't bet against us though. The coaching staff seems to know how to get touchdowns, and we have enough offensive talent for them to work with.

We are fortunate that we are good at wide receiver and qb, which are required for us to play our traditional aggie style. By which I mean a pass predominant style, which we always had except Gould era.

Also, I like our backs They don't have great stats but are versatile and have varied skills.
Defense again was tough when it counted.

In retrospect the game showed PSU had serious flaws, bad kicker, frosh qb who played like one. Slow punter. We on the other hand had no glaring deficiencies a good team all around.

Next week is anybody's game, which is the way I think the season will be. We can play with these teams now.

The Big Sky isn't that tough, we've just happened to be bad since we joined. Evidence for that is our record against Big Sky teams before we joined, and look at the sagarin ratings of the teams all clustered around mediocrity. I think we will win games here and there and be competitive in most games in conference.

I see we have an American studies major, and a Native American studies major as well! Not knocking those majors. My view is if a player majors in anything he wants and makes progress to a degree, good.
But I'm still curious if we have some obstacle to transfers; because we get hardly any, except JC. I know it used to be hard or impossible to transfer from a JC without having completed 90 plus quarter units. I wonder if the same applies to transfers from other UC campuses. That would be dumb. It would be nice if the flow of players between davis and UCLA was not unidirectional. We lost a defensive end to them back around 2006 and this year a running back.

The hand clap for the snap seemed a little predictable, to say the least. The defense not only recognizes it but it is telegraphed by the hands starting to move towards each other. Maybe there is some variation not noted.

Optimistic about this weeks game. I think we are a slight underdog. If we're not competitive I'll be surprised. Wish we had shown ourselves a little better against the run. We bent a lot but didn't break, but maybe that wont be the case against tougher opponents. Still, I think we'll see the offense get better each game for a while. I'm sure other teams are not as comfortable against us as they were against Gould. Not playing so predictable and conservative is an immediate improvement. Have to feel confident with the coaching staffs experience. I'm feeling we'll have to outscore teams; but I think we can do that.

I don't think summer classes are representative. Some summer classes are open to high school juniors. But the point is UCLA and Cal are as prestigious and as academically rigorous as UC Davis. Maybe like Avis, Davis tries harder, but on the other hand the students at Cal or UCLA, as a group, were higher achievers in high school. I'm a Davis grad and proud of it. My daughter is a UCLA grad and I'm proud of that and rightly so.

So, no easy majors at davis? Berkeley and UCLA are quirky but so is Davis. I suspect we have the same BS courses they do; and I don't mean bachelor of science. I'm not saying accept a student athlete who isn't making progress toward a degree. We are not going to tarnish our sterling reputation by taking transfers from top tier University campus. We may pat ourselves on the back, but Cal and UCLA have bruises from patting themselves on the back too.

So, do we have internal obstacles in the form of campus or UC policies that limit inter-system transfers for athletes? Most FCS schools have a few former FBS players on roster. Our academic standards are high but they shouldn't be so high we can't take transfers in good academic standing from a UC school. One would think there would be some who find themselves in a situation where they would be better off at a lower level for one reason or another. It might benefit both schools and the player.

It wouldn't surprise me if we have some obstacle to transfers like requiring them to have 60 units or something like that.

I transferred from JC to UCD semester to quarter no big deal. The classes all line up and prerequisites all satisfied. If they leave mid year they may loose a few units going from semester to quarter, They would get all the units but might not satisfy a prerequisite, and have to repeat something.

In regards to a couple of players trying to move up as walk-instead at higher levels, that's going to continue to be rare. They give up a scholarship, playing time. What should be more common is players moving down because they don't get playing time. Why don't Cal or UCLA players transfer here? It's happened but only once or twice, and none since we've been division1 that I recall. I think they can do so without sitting out a year, but maybe I'm wrong on that.

I think we'll be competitive in the Big Sky. it doesn't seem there is a dominant team in the conference this year so each week we should have a chance to win. .We have seen in these first two games that our team has skilled QB and receivers, probably better than anyone expected.. On defense our linebackers and secondary seem pretty deep and solid. We are not going to be dominant on either side of the ball on the lines, but what is new about that? While we shouldn't be favored in most matchups, I think our new offense will move the ball and get some scores. I think in recent years our style doomed us to lose against physically superior teams, not so much anymore. Plus we'll sometimes roll the dice. Sometimes if you don't gamble you can't win, whereas if you do you might win.

Gould inherited a relatively veteran team, lots of returning staters,
and lucked into Manzaneras, a walk-on.
He had an opportunity to do better than 5-3.
He blew that probably due to bringing in a very inexperienced staff.

And we lost the time of possession contest.

I like the seeing 4 deep. We can guess the starters from last week, along with top subs. I thought we had moved away from fullbacks though. The frosh fullback seems to be quite athletic judging from his profile. Maybe he didn't make the trip to San Diego ?

No, but need to give it some time. I was encouraged by what I saw although I watched only second half.
Gould's best season may have been his first. That's what finished his tenure.
I liked our big plays, we had a 95 yard TD drive. Didn't look terribly slow on defense.
New QB looked good. That block on the screen for TD was awesome. Looked like a lineman on a cornerback knocked him backwards and fell on him.
I was entertained.

I am very happy we are scheduling at this level. I do not expect a competitive game, because we are a total unknown and they are a higher level team. But it's not beyond hope that we put up a good showing. One of the best games I ever personally attended was SDSU vs Florida State in the 70s when SDSU filled the stadium more than the Chargers did. San Diego State ended 9-1-1 having lost to Fullerton but tied USC. FSU was ranked 13th. The Aztecs totally dominated them, but didn't get a bowl invite. Aztecs had a tiny nose guard maybe 5'7" 190 or something like that; very quick. Pro level tailback. mystery how they lost to Fullerton.

Thanks SocherField, I hate to be alone in laughing at my jokes, that's not a good sign.

but the AD is Blue; that is some serious progressive diversity