Thomas w only 4 touches. I'm guessing we were playing conservative to protect Maier.

We didn’t play conservative, we just didn’t play no huddle. We didn’t want a lot of plays in the game
It’s like gambling. When the odds are against you making fewer bets gives you a better chance to beat the odds. Part of the gamble was some of our trick plays working, I don’t think any did, and also going for it on fourth down near mid field and later forgoing a field goal for a fourth down play both we gambles we lost. Carson Crawford must be a pretty good passer in practice. It will be nice to see him throwing some completions.
It would have been interesting to see how the no huddle would have worked though.
Not much hope for the run game against this opponent but kudos to Modise

Seems like we escaped relatively unscathed, but I am concerned that Maier looked horrendous for the better part of a half starting with the last drive of the 1st half. Everything was behind the intended receiver by 2-3 yards consistently. He’ll need a far better effort in Cheney and Missoula.

Haven’t seen final stats but Harrell didn’t play apparently, and neither did Logan Montgomery. We had some dropped passes by some of our other receivers. It is curious about Montgomery.

Montgomery and Moore, receivers #2 & 3, out for season.? ... I thought I saw Quincy Bennett in street clothes... it looked like Daniel Fells was with Mrs. Arp on the sidelines.

Maier has looked off for 2 games.

Moore not on this year’s roster. Montgomery suited up against San Diego, picture was in Enterprise. His absence from games is mysterious unless he is redshirting Freshmen Kraft and Costello and a few others played. I suspect Maier missed having Harrell out there.

On the other hand, I don’t think Stanford should really be in the conversation for the CFP. Costello leaves much to be desired, and the P12 is down this year (well, don’t tell Herm Edwards that). The only chance they have is for Love to go off and win the Heisman, and with a disastrous game against the Aztecs, and missing today’s game, he’s going to need 200/game from here on out. Going to Eugene, South Bend and Montlake? Yikes. They need the next Andrew Luck to be in the mix.

FWIW
https://twitter.com/RedditCFB/status/1041078605382471680

Overall positive day, defense was fairly impressive and hopefully shows our growth, not just Cardinal missteps. Coach Shaw postgame, realises they didn't beat us by the margin expected. Congrats to CJ again showing he is a playmaker. Should help recruiting. How did the TV broadcast sound? OK ...

- We didn't take advantage of early Cardinal miscues.
- Cardinal TOs and penalties (10) gave us a shot.
- Second game Maier doesn't look like himself.
- Cardinal fan: "If your QB was on, this is a different game."
- Big error, botched snap on punt hitting the sweep guy? Ags also blow time clock with slow offense.
- Botched punt and FG.
- [Edit] Crawford throwing is becoming as predictable as CJ last year. We do have other skill players who played QB in high school.

Hopefully no big injuries, Idaho at home will be a true barometer. They were 4-8 last year, but had a lot of close losses. They'll be rested with a week off.

Go Ags!

Looked to me like the timing was off with the pass game. Probably a combo of Stanford’s physical (and really good DBs), their front line getting enough pressure to disrupt passing lanes, and some new guys getting more looks. Maier was okay, considering the step up in defensive quality. He wasn’t helped by several early drops. We have to clean that up.

Defense was really solid today. Got decent pressure on the QB, did a good job against the run and battled against some big talented receivers. They were hurt with drive that started in great field position. Gives me real hope for the rest of the season.

Special teams? Bad, really bad. Short punts, and a blocked FG. Punting game was night and day vs last week. After the shank on the 2nd punt (first kick was a beauty putting them on their 15), punter seemed to be shaky. Directional kicks weren’t good, and line drives on the others. Gave them field position all day. Hopefully a onr-off and he’ll be back to his earlier form.

2-1 heading into a winnable home game. Be great to be 3-1 heading into a bye with some more winnable games following

Idaho a tough call. They stepped down, right? 4-8 last year, lots of close games that turned into Losses for them.

A victory there and I'm extremely happy.

They did move down so they’ll be tough. Fresno beat them up 79-13 in week one before they beat D2 Western New Mexico 28-13. So not off to a torrid start. If we’re not too banged up and get focused on a FCS team, I like our chances

We have seen what the offense can do against FCS teams in earlier games including last year. Change on offense are mostly limited to a few offensive linemen. Those new OL guys haven’t embarrassed themselves.
The big question was the defense. So far this year it seems they can get critical stops and turnovers.
It looks like we have the players we need to be a very good team. Lots of room for improvement everywhere but the pieces all seem to be there.

For what it's worth, I was just happy to be able to see the Ags play on TV out here in Hawaii. I think this is only the third time I've seen them play in the past 40 years. One time they came to Hawaii and got trounced by the Warriors. I also saw them lose to Cal. So it was a loss to the #9 team in the country. I was proud of the way the guys competed and my first look at Keelan Doss was great.

Great news, Toke! My guess is we didn't get to see Doss go deep much due to the pressure on our QB.

Where the announcers positive about Davis? Did we have good or new campus plugs?

Checked the stats on Stanford's previous two games -- USCs offense was a little more productive yards wise than ours but in the ballpark, and we performed a little better than SDSU. The Aggie TD was the first time Stanford allowed one since the first quarter against SDSU.

A difference in this game as lack of receptions by WRs not named Doss, Harrel didn’t play.
Corners safeties and outside linebackers made most the tackles. Too bad Stanford doesn’t have the post game interview like San Jose State

WR, yes. It seems DBs and LBs typically make most of the tackles, seems like the line has their hands full w oppo. Does Stanford typically have post game interviews?

It seems like we brought far less fans than 2005. Why? Novelty worn off? TV? DII era aging?

I watched on PAC 12 TV. Comments were very fair and even some times complementary to UC Davis. They did say at one point that the Stanford D line was significantly bigger than our “typical FCS sized line”. Several were even “NFL size”. Very difficult to run against those guys.

Good showing by the Aggies. I knew we had reason to be concerned about your offense when we play you, but after listening to the Stanford game we now will also need to worry about your D.

historically our inside linebackers usually make more than their share of tackles.

I think the 11:00 start was a hinderance. There was a bus from Davis that was mostly full; not sure what time they had to leave. Alumni pregame section was full. Our section ( part of our season ticket packet ) was mostly empty. Some folk were standing in the breezeway but I think most didn’t make the trip.

1. 11am kickoff
2. 2005 was the first
3. Televised on P12N
4. Less interest in attending a game against a top-10 ranked Stanford team after 2014

The direct snap to the RB was sweet ... was it Gilliam?

thought it was TT, but might be wrong.

It was Gilliam

Not that it is really is surprising anymore, but no story in the eBeeversion for either us or Slac. Print?

The print edition (and thereby the pdf-esque e-edition) has the Aggie game on the front page of the Sports secion and Slack in a small column on page 3. I'm sure the Davis game only made the front page because it was an early game at 'furd, and since no Kings player is currently making the news because one of the cup holders in his car is chipped. Both the Davis and Slack games were on the road so the Bee had no writers on scene and instead used AP wire service reports. Do they even have sports reporters to send to home games? Maybe they can cover home games like they covered Fourth of July fireworks and State Fair foods,....by sending interns. "Please ReadLocal, even if we no longer WriteLocal."

I was able to watch the game on the PAC12 Network from northern Wisconsin. Here are some of my thoughts:

1) Really solid effort by the defense all around. I was hoping we would be able to keep them under 50 and we held them to 30. I was surprised how much pressure we were able to get on the QB at times and how well we contained their ground game for the most part. They only had a couple of really big gainers. We got those two early picks but could only get 3 points out of them...those were costly missed opportunities against a team like Stanford.

2) The offense wasn't firing on all cylinders but they played pretty well when you consider the defense they were up against. We dropped too many passes that hit our receivers in the hands though. Maier didn't seem to be a his sharpest but he was having to release the ball quickly. I thought our O-line did a really nice job considering the size and speed of Stanford's defense. Keelan Doss was spectacular against some very, very good Stanford DB's.

3) I thought our offense played better when they went up tempo in the second half. I understand the thinking behind slowing the game down and trying to limit the time Stanford's offense had the ball, but I think our offense is at its best playing fast like we did in the first two games.

4) Our punting was not good and that needs to improve. Those short fields we game Stanford really put pressure on our defense.

5) I thought we looked like we deserved to be on the field with the Cardinal. Games like this are typically a blowout for FBS teams. We held our own and made some excellent plays especially on defense. Stanford was the better team for sure but it wasn't a cake walk for them by any means. I think this game showed us just how good this team has the potential to be. If we continue to improve, we can compete for the Big Sky title and make it into the playoffs.

6) Overall, this was a proud effort by the Ags. The program is most definitely on the rise!

great summary. I totally agree with your points. I was at the game and a lot of the plays were difficult to see from the visitor section. This team might end up being special.