For sure. Would be really nice to get to 8-1 because I would think 8-4 including a win over Idaho (hopefully they finish strong) would be enough. But I really don't want to be sitting at 7-4 needing a win against Sac to get in. Not to say that Sac is unbeatable or anything like that. I'd just prefer to not have that essentially be a play-in game for us for the playoffs.

Plus 8-1 puts us in position for a potential bye if results break right and we do well the last 3 games.

But yeah, it feels great to pound Poly but we're one week removed from needing a 95 yard drive and a last play TD just to beat a team that's now 1-5.

Didn’t come out flat today!

We easily could beat Idaho again but what the computer ratings are saying is that if we played Idaho again on a neutral site, they'd be favored (and would deserve to be). Our results outside of that game are not very impressive. Far from an FCS expert but our results are not those of a top-8 team. Idaho lost by 10 to Oregon, beat FBS Wyoming, won at Abilene Christian (now #10) and their only loss is by 2 on the road to us. Meanwhile our ranking is based on us almost always being a decent team (i.e. we started the season ranked) and beating Idaho. Put this way, if Idaho gets the 2-point and wins by 3 in OT, its highly unlikely that we're in the top-10 right now.

Now I get it, the goal is to win the game. And you should absolutely get credit for doing so in the polls. Case in point, we needed a 90+ yard drive and a last play TD just to beat a now 0-5 team and we moved up 3 spots because other teams lost. Just saying I don't necessarily disagree with the computer models that we're not the #6 best team in FCS.

Of course the good thing is we're going to have the chance to prove it over the next 6 games. Similar to how in 2021 we started out 8-1 and were No. 6 but got beaten by 18 and 20 points before SDSt crushed us in the playoffs. Or 2019 we were No.4 after four games but finished 5-7.

Got to win your clunkers and today seems like a clunker. As others have said, I’ll take it but they need to play better going forward if they’re going to make the playoffs.

Gamecast says overturned. Someone tell me what’s happening. LOL.

Yes!

Why do we run twice when we have to go 95 yards in 2 minutes?

Looks like we’re having a wonderfully annoying letdown game.

I don't know who put that highlight clip together but man do they show some weird plays while not showing others.

For example, Idaho's first drive of the second half, they have 1st and goal from the 7. They show the 1st, 2nd and 3rd down plays but not 4th down when Idaho went for it. They also didn't show the interception on Idaho's next drive.

Huge win. That could be the difference between getting into the playoffs and missing out. Obviously have to keep winning games, but this really helps.

Now just get the onside kick.

No good! LETS GO!

Ugh.

How deep did they throw? I'm just following the gamecast and it just says deep to the left. I would have preferred a shorter pass that you can complete even if you don't get the 1st.

This third down is almost the game here since Idaho just used their first timeout.

Huge first play. At the very least we've flipped the field.

Alright, not the worst thing there. Idaho still needs a TD and a 2-point to tie. At the very least, we need to get a couple first downs and hopefully make them burn some timeouts.

However, I'd much rather just not let them get the ball back.

For sure on the trick play. Definitely don't like that sort of thing on 4th down. I was strictly defending the choice to go for it rather than the play call.

It's a win probability thing. You're probably increasing your chances of winning slightly more by going for it than you are by kicking the FG. There's more risk obviously if you don't get it (TD and 2 pt + FG and you're in OT or 2 TDs and you're behind). But there's more reward if you do (keep the drive alive, burn more clock, potentially get a TD to go up 18).

I like the aggressiveness on 4th and short. Chance to burn more clock and kill the game.

However, for those that watch/follow more than me, do they direct snap to Larison fairly often? I probably would have preferred throwing the ball with the guy who is 23-29 on the game.