How did his time as an Aggie prepare him for his NFL career?

No mention if the track is in or out, though Hornet Stadium is probably one of biggest track venues in Northern California and idk if it was in play for the lead up to LA Olympics. — fugawe09

In the video above, Orr says there will be a separate track and field facilities right next to the new stadium.

The $35M is apparently contingent on a Pac-12 invite:

https://x.com/JackFreeman_13/status/1841919925247737882?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1841919925247737882%7Ctwgr%5E226ec619ddcd402808dab60b961ee5f3bb9ca1c2%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fbigskyfans.com%2Fthreads%2Fthe-pac-mwc-dominoes-begin-to-fall.29863%2Fpage-17

It's a really disappointing email. Across the Causeway, there is a committee of business and government leaders coordinating this effort to let the college football world know that this program is interested in going to the FBS/Pac-12. They have a website, have generated a lot of press coverage merely by forming this committee, and just announced a $35M fundraising achievement (which generates even more press coverage and support). Meanwhile at UCD, after waiting nearly 2 weeks following a cryptic tweet from the AD, we finally get this email that reveals UCD isn't serious about moving up and asking us to buy season tickets for basketball. What?

What catalyzes fan and donor support is having an athletics department actually take a leadership role in spelling out a vision that the fanbase and community can get excited about. Tweeting a picture and hoping the donations start pouring in, without any public expression that our program is interested in moving up, is an inferior approach.

In Plough's comments and now Rocko's, there seems to be this strange reluctance to commit to being interested in FBS without a commitment from the fanbase to support that move. But they'll never know if that support is there if they don't take ownership in ambitiously pursuing it, as Sac State has done. Sac and UCD each faced a decision about whether to keep its football program relevant or get left behind. Sac immediately told the world it wants to be in the Pac12 whereas UCD waited 2 weeks only to lecture its fan base on how we can't do this without money. That silence and inaction is itself a decision and the biggest question in the conversation now, unfortunately, seems to be whether the FBS would take Sac State without UC Davis.

During this week's episode they give a shoutout (around the 47 minute mark) to an AST user who apparently went over to the Aggie Pack to give cheer suggestions to the MCs.

This was a really great episode. Loved hearing the in-game thought process that went into some of the major decisions, lessons learned from the game, and overall coaching philosophy around which Plough centers how he works with the players. Also loved the shoutout to SB3, he's one of the best in our community and hearing his name and impact in a space I wasn't expecting really shows how small/close our community can be, and how Aggie Pride is not just about football but the lifelong connections we make with some really incredible people here.

On another note... which one of us was the one who went over to the Aggie Pack and started teaching them cheers? I find that so amusing given the frustrations we've seen on these boards about the crowd noise. At some point it would be great to hear an interview with Scott Judson and Chris Perry, the Aggie Pack MCs from the first few years of Division I when we had a raucous (and football-informed) student section.

Couldn't agree more. I love Bob Dunning and his coverage of the Aggies but to be frank I kind of ignore his score predictions at this point because under no circumstances will he pick the Aggies to lose. You want listeners to care about your opinion and the insight you're able to provide as informed, experienced analysts of the game. That's the value added (among many other things) you bring to this podcast and something you should take pride in, not feel ashamed about when you're getting slack from the team about picking against them. Just remember what Plough said his two words were for Biggs: you can hang your hat on the fact that you have the integrity to reveal your true opinions about the team, and the humility to allow the coaches and players to let you hear it when you're wrong. If the Aggie Pride Podcast is emulating the wisdom of Bob Biggs, I can't think of a more appropriate name for your show.

Just heard this week’s episode. Great shoutout to the boards! It’s so great to see what you two are doing… I know I’m preaching to the choir but weekly coverage like yours is what the fan base has needed for so long. I’ve got young kids as well and can’t even imagine finding the time to take on such a commitment like this without a pure passion for this program and community which you both clearly have.

Would encourage anyone with the means or ability to make a contribution, however big or small, to the show. Let’s show Aggie Pride Podcast the love and support it deserves. Go Ags!

I don't even understand this criticism. Bringing your kids to a post-game press conference made the team worse the following week? I don't think it impacts the team's performance in any meaningful way other than to reaffirm the idea that some things, like family, are more important than football. Sochor, Hawkins, etc. have all talked about how that culture sets UC Davis football apart and it's important for the players and other coaches to understand that.

The other two digs against Plough are similarly strange. I frankly don't care how a coach wears his hat or about his idiolect when he's talking about wins. As long as we're winning, he could proclaim "we're gathering ginormous dubyas" and it would be all the same to me.

I do agree our defense has been the reason for these wins. I don't think I've seen any quotes or clips of him patting himself on the back but it's probably worth mentioning that HCs are responsible for how their defense performs, too.

wow the Bison always find a way to win. Reminds me of that time at Toomey we were up 24-0 at the half only to lose 24-28 in the last minute of the 4th. That was my freshman year… was in the Aggie Pack at the north end zone and we were trying to be as loud as possible. It wasn’t making any difference as the Bison marched away from us converting one 3rd down after another. Silver lining though is that when I was in the dining commons that night feeling the heartbreak from the loss, it made me realize how much I cared about Aggie football and I’ve never stopped watching since. As weird as it sounds, seeing us losing such a close game to a great opponent probably made me a more committed fan than if we had just steamrolled a cupcake that day — it was certainly at least more memorable. Anyway, I digress… you can never count the Bison out of a game.

My favorite part of the article:

"UC Davis, Cal-Berkeley and UCLA are the only three of 10 schools in the University of California system to field a football team. If the Pac-12 wanted to get back into the UC system, the Aggies are the only answer."

I've seen a lot of "Cal Davis" but never "Cal-Berkeley". Cal Berkeley admittedly does make some sense but since it's not actually what they call themselves it feels particularly appropriate in an article about how Cal Davis UC Davis might be flipping the script.

This is such a cool idea -- gotta admit I was always envious of other Big Sky programs that have regular podcasts and would sometimes listen to those just for their brief coverage of the Aggies. Thank you both for doing this! I'll definitely be listening each week.

On that note, something another team's podcast did (I don't remember which one unfortunately) was to dedicate a part of each week's show to a "fantasy" segment in which they made player picks at some of the offensive positions. Each host would choose a different QB, WR, RB, etc. playing that week (they would rotate who got to "draft" first) and then the following week they would compare stats (TD = X points, yards = Y points, just like fantasy) and actually maintain a season-long ranking for how each host was doing week after week. With only two of you it might not make sense to keep a running tally for who is doing better overall but it could still be a fun way to showcase/summarize the standout players of the conference each week. I think anything that attracts other fans to listen to the podcast makes the podcast better.

I totally realize that putting something like this together is probably a lot harder to execute than it is to share in a message board so I take no offense if you ignore this idea or shelve it for a future season. I'm just excited to know we'll have more coverage of the Ags this season! They certainly deserve it.

Just watched this Fox40 interview of Caden Pinnick … he’s a 3 sport athlete (football, basketball, baseball) and wants to play all 3 in college. Is that even possible? Would Les consider something like that?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SbbGNUxkUaY

Last year’s results showed us that the committee doesn’t give you much credit for “quality losses” (we weren’t even one of the first 4 out despite only having losses to FBS and top 10 teams). Seems like number of losses is more important than whom the losses were to.

Would it be better to be a Sac State with 4 losses to Montana, MSU, Idaho, and UCD OR a UCD with 3 losses to Montana, EWU, and NAU? That Stanford win will be doing all the heavy lifting if we beat Sac and they still get in over us.

I said this in another thread but I think the wildcard will be Montana’s AD being on the committee. No doubt he watched his team play both Causeway teams and of course we fared better against the Griz than the Hornets did.

We’d have a better overall record than sac state too because FBS losses are thrown out. So 7-3 vs. 7-4 and we would have the head-to-head. The only way Sac gets in over us in that situation is if the FBS win is given more weight than our record and H2H win. But it’s also possible that neither 7 win team gets in — will probably largely depend on how many other teams are on the bubble.

I don’t know how the NAU/EWU affects us given that we lost to both teams.

In 2018 we must have benefited from having the Montana AD on the selection committee. He probably attended UCD’s rout of his Griz in Missoula … it’s a safe bet to assume that our performance in that game had something to do with us getting seeded despite having been blown out by EWU 2 weeks before the selection committee met.

The Montana AD is one of the 2023 selection committee members so I’m hoping that our one touchdown loss to the Griz + Sac’s blowout loss to them both factor prominently in his mind if it comes down to choosing only one of the Causeway teams to enter the field.

We would have the better record (UCD's 7-3, not counting the Oregon State loss, vs. Sac's 7-4, counting the Stanford win) and the head-to-head. They would have one or two quality wins (Stanford + maybe Nichols State) and we would have one quality win (Sac). All their losses would be to playoff teams or playoff eligible teams (the 3 Big Sky leaders + UCD), whereas our losses would be 1 playoff team and 2 mid-tier Big Sky teams. So it really could go either way. Let's just win and worry about all this on Selection Sunday.

Every season has that moment where you realize this might just not be the year. In 2019 that was the Montana game.

What hurt the most about that were the sky high expectations we all had following the previous year. In 2018 that moment of realization did not occur until the last minute of the quarterfinal game vs. EWU...

Half a century of Aggie Pride! That’s amazing.

I forgot about this. Does that mean we'll probably see Mascheratti this year?

What's the point of doing a hurry up 1 min offense to end the half if you don't use your last time out to take a shot at the end zone?