Bright note, a lot of young players got valuable PT this season, all positions except QB

My nomination for Quote of the Year.

BlueGoldAg: "The writing was on the wall when we were lucky to beat San Diego and the exclamation point was added when we didn't show up to play against Montana."

At that point Hawkins or somebody has to ring the siren. Maybe I'm wrong or unorthodox, but I would have found a way to get Rodriquez athleticism in as a RB, QB, somewhere. Was it Weber who brought in a 3rd string QB for a quick running play?

A high scoring offense repeatedly scoring under 20 with a top QB is a puzzle that needs an answer.

Does anyone here have any idea of the QB pecking order or standouts?

They lack backbone, at least on offense. Lots of dropped passes, predictable play calling.

On D i liked how we used Nick Eaton to rush Thompson.

We’ll be back.

Well, sac wanted a blowout for their being blown out last year and they did not get it. A hard fought game that we lost. But, we have the future to look to. Go Ags.

Didn’t watch much of the game but looking at stats Sac had a bunch of rushing yards and the Ags very little.

As for the season, I would say that every team the Aggies lost to was better except for North Dakota. I think things would have been different with a healthy Tehran Thomas and Crawford. It seems like the last half of the season, other than Portland State, receivers just did not get a lot of separation. Thomas would have added another dimension and let Gilliam rest a bit - Gilliam is very, very good but can’t be expected to carry the team all the time.

I actually thought defense played fairly well especially these last few games. Can’t win if you can’t score.

I actually thought defense played fairly well especially these last few games. Can’t win if you can’t score.

Same problem the men's basketball team has had the last couple of years...

"Our defense was doing a pretty good job but we kept putting them back on the field," said Hawkins, about the second half. "We couldn't make a play offensively. We had too many three-and-outs. You start putting your defense out there over and over, and eventually, a good offense will find their rhythm."

Look at the TOP and rushing yards. And our 233 passing yards are deceptive bc we got 70-75 yds on one play. Gilliam averaged only 2.8 yards per carry.

Bob Dunning, Davis Enterprise

"Hawkins had high praise for his team’s season-long effort, and noted that the difference between this season and last year’s championship and playoff runs were a “few details” that need to be addressed.

“We played hard and we played well, but this is a great league and you’d better be really good in every game or you’re not going to win the championship.”

(Our offense only scored 10 points.)

I mean, Hawkins is kind of right.

Of the 6 FCS losses, they were to the teams ranked 1, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 27. They were blown out by Montana and lost handily to Weber. So they didn't lose to a bad team and they play in a tough conference. A big difference between the last two years is the schedule. Last year, the only ranked teams we played in the regular season were EWU and San Diego. This year we not only had 5 but we had five of the top 8. That's rough. Now, the counterpoint to that is to look at what we did against the non ranked teams. The only team we didn't hammer was Idaho State. This year the wins were closer. But lets say they pull out the North Dakota game and either Montana St. At 7-5 they probably get in. So while I'm not going to argue this wasn't a disappointing year, they weren't far off from having a decent year with another playoff berth.

Offensively, not that we needed reminding how much of a stud he was, but the loss of a guy in Doss who was good enough to make an NFL roster is massive for an FCS team. Last year he had 118 catches and 1334 yards. Our top two receivers this year had 99 catches for 1319 yards combined. That's a guy that can make an offense look a hell of a lot better than it might actually be.

I guess I think last year we overperformed a bit thanks to a stud WR, got a bit lucky with the schedule and ended up having a great year. This year, with a tougher schedule and losing said stud WR, I think expectations might have been a bit too high coming into the year, all things considered. If last year's team played this year's schedule, they probably finish worse than 9-2 in the regular season. If this year's team played last year's schedule, they probably finish better than 5-7 and probably make the playoffs. That's the way things work out sometimes.

I don't follow recruiting at all but hopefully last year's run gave us a bump in that department and we've got some good young players coming in that just need a little time. We'll find out in the next two years whether last year or this year was the fluke season and whether or not Hawkins can build something sustainable here.

Great analysis.

The reason we lost? Too many Hornet Golden One first downs.

As Sochor once said, “they need to win before its a rivalry.” They got us this year. See you next year J Street Tech.

Will their QB return? Listed as a Junior ... but in grad school ... redshirted at UNLV 1 year, played another ... we'll see what they do when he's gone.

The 530 total yards for the Hornets is a deceptive stat - I’d be curious how many of those came after missed tackles. It seemed like a recurring theme all year, we just couldn’t tackle, period. Shoulders AND wrap with the arms, it was maddening.

Either way is fine. Thomson is not a worrisome threat if you eliminate his (and the Hornet) running game. There was a series in the 3rd quarter where he air-mailed 3 pass attempts in a row and he was very inaccurate at times. Again, the tackling killed us in that regard as between him and the RB there were numerous instances where we had them at or behind the LOS only to see them wiggle free for positive yardage.

Overturning the interception without a review is right up there with the horrible out of bounds call on Chris Carter some years ago in the Causeway. Why was it overturned and why wasn't it reviewed? We at least deserve an answer from the Big Sky?

It was a dagger that gave the Hornets momentum going into halftime down 17-10 instead of 17-3 with the Aggies carrying the momentum. The tv announcers looked at the replay and said "he had his foot down, that was an interception...Hawkins must be livid right now."

The play was initially ruled an interception and a change of possession and then, for some unknown reason, it was suddenly overturned on the field. The play was reviewable since it apparently involved the whether or not the Aggie defender was in bounds. Hawkins could have challenged the play if the Aggies still had a timeout. Anyone know if we had a timeout at that point?

Here's a synopsis of college football reviews and challenges:



https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/30/17489766/ncaa-instant-replay-challenge-rule

YES. Why no challenge???

It seems like special teams and defense really helped put points on the board this year.

- ball inside the Cal 20 on the opening drive
- Eason pick 6
- Frazier pick 6 yesterday

Let's not forget that the Aggies were 5-6 two years ago (2017) with the same stud receiver (Doss) and QB (Maier). As was illuminated, many factors affect a team's performance and ultimate record. For myriad reasons 2018 was a magical season; 2019 as much.

Congratulations and many thanks to the seniors that have played their last game for "Aggie Pride". It takes a lot to strap-up everyday and step onto that battlefield. We're extremely proud of you!!!!

I wouldn't exactly call them "proven" coaches. We've now had one dream season and two disappointing seasons under this staff.

Yeah, maybe I am a little hasty to let go of coaches. The two 2-win Gould years after which we still kept him for another year are still fresh in my mind. The school and community raised the investment in the program and this current staff raised the talent level, I'll give everyone that. But we also need to raise the expectations now.

I honestly believe that given the name recognition and resources this school has and the associated recruiting advantages that we should not be finishing under .500 against FCS competition. I understand that the academic requirements are a limiting factor, but it needs to be clear to the coaches that they're expected to find a way to win regardless, like Sochor did in the D2 era and like Stanford did for many years in the Pac-12. Especially when you look at what this school offers recruits in terms of environment and opportunities compared to basically the entire Big Sky sans Cal Poly.

For the record, I am cautiously optimistic that we'll show some improvement on the current course -- as I've said before I think that this staff did make some positive changes, and we can't control for injuries, and I'm excited for the new facilities. But even if we improve to getting about 7 wins per year on average (which was probably our theoretical peak this year), that's still underperforming in my books. EWU just got 7, was a bubble team, and this is a really disappointing year by their standards.

I think on offense we obviously have some great athletes at wide receiver in Harrell, Vaughn and Babb, which raises the question of why the offense fell off so much after losing Doss, Kraft, and Crawford.
I know it’s not uncommon to have coaches who played QB coach wide receivers, but it seems to me that we might benefit from a receiver coach who can teach some receiver skills that were learned playing the position.

Interesting analysis.

To be fair to the coaches and challenges, we know a few O linemen were banged up. Injuries devastated RBs, which means 2 back and power back options are out. JM not mobile, and 2 playmakers out. Not sure why we didn't go more ball control / west coast passing.

Sac announcers even called our play calling predictable. Gilliam run on 1st down (2.8 yds per carry), toss it up on 2nd (?), then face 3rd and long.... not sure why we didn't throw to our TE more often.

Next year we're at Nevada (7-4), San Jose (4-7, QB Josh Love graduates), and Weber State.

comparing this era with the Sochor era is kinda crazy. When I played, our regular season consisted of 7-8 teams where we were CLEARLY more talented. This years team played 5 of the top 6 seeds, USD and a bowl-bound California.

You don’t win 10 games at this level with subpar coaching. We’ll be back

I agree. But I believe we were around .500 vs the UOPs and Santa Clara's of the world.

I concur. However, there're mitigating circumstances. Harrell was injured (back) early in the ND State game. He was able to finish that game, but re-injured his back at the beginning of the Montana game and didn't play at all against North Dakota. Crawford suffered a season ending injury against North Dakota; winnable game under normal circumstances. Not sure when Kraft went down, but his was also season ending. There were other untimely injuries as well.

It's a big ask of the OC and QB to re-calibrate their schemes. We didn't take the top off defenses like last year and our intermediate and seam routs (especially Preece) suffered as a result. Hats off to the players and coaches for their resilience and efforts this season. They comported themselves with Pride and Dignity.

On the flip-side, some of the refereeing we encountered was - shall I say - head scratching at best!

If misery loves company lets go to Stanford. Half my family is Stanford related and they are beyond exasperated at this point. Pure unadulterated misery at the loss to cal and a very poor year for them too. I would add that Shaws job is probably not that secure. Stanford alums are not known for their forgiveness as far as coaches are concerned. Maybe the curse of the Gould? No, too way to harsh.

Oh, I forgot this. In the Taylor interview he mentions he had a bad problem with losing and he asked Hawkins how to deal with that when he met Hawk at Boise. Hawk gave him a book. What is the name of that book? I think we all may want to read it this season. No?

Stanford (4-7) #123 in rushing offense out of 130 teams.

Bad problem w / losing? Do you mean he handled losing poorly?