• NCagalum
    271
    definitely the most talented offense the Ags have ever had. So many options. I really like using Lan Larison on kickoff returns. His rapid acceleration and putting his “foot in the ground” makes it seem he’s into the second and third wave of defenders before the first wave knows what hit them. I also love is forward lean as a running back. Gilliam was classic Gilliam and a great game. Tompkins is a Houdini and must continue using him. With HR TT and Carson Crawford in the game, the defense has absolutely no idea of what is going to transpire because all can run and throw. I have yet to see a Crawford pass that doesn’t work. And Hutton adds to the short pass run repertoire. What we didn’t see last night was downfield throws to Harrell. Overall I think the positive is that there are more ways than ever to create offense.
  • 69aggie
    377
    I appreciate Dimus’s post. He seems to be the only one who actually has first hand knowledge of the new band. Look, we all know many college bands have big problems with ridiculous traditions that “must be kept” and all that nonsense. Didn’t a southern college band have a homicide due to hazing? Wasn’t Stanfords band banned from games due to its raunchy behaviors? I think we should just move on from this stuff. For me, I don’t really care about having a crummy band, i care about the football team and we have a very good one.
  • NCagalum
    271
    Well I am a band alum and I cared about the band and the team, and the thing of it is, the team loved us back in the day. We were all representing the same university after all, and we the faithful (and sometimes only) rooting section . Coach Sochor would make it a point to talk to us and acknowledge us - and the impact we had on spirit. That what was so great about the relationships.

    Times change I guess and I am not defending bad behavior that ostensibly lead to this. But back in the day I think everyone took a bit more personal responsibility for themselves and just didn’t attend off campus parties that got too out of hand. It again was a different era when for instance we had a member who went by “squaw” (part Native American) and she nor anybody else was offended by it. She even wore a shirt with that moniker.
  • dlmusgrove
    27
    Coach Sochor would make it a point to talk to us and acknowledge us - and the impact we had on spirit.NCagalum
    Coach Hawkins and Coach Les constantly thanked the band, both before and after the suspension/reinstatement. Even in the Bee's article about yesterday's game, Hawkins mentioned them.
  • movielover
    534
    Coach Sochor, Foster, Hamilton, Williams, Stewart and others loved the band.

    A large contingent of the band traveled by van, to Kentucky, for the championship DII basketball game, during finals week.

    Same commitment to the women's basketball team in North Dakota, where the band reportedly also played for numerous community groups (by request).
  • dlmusgrove
    27
    I was student manager during the whole thing in 2019, so I was very heavily involved in all the decisions that were made through that process. I also know the current manager and incoming manager pretty well.

    There were definitely things that needed to go, and while the university definitely went further than they needed to on some things (likely at the advice of their lawyers), the overall changes were for the best given the cultural and structural issues the band had. Many of the positive traditions we had still go on, and at least before covid, the band still felt like the same band in spirit, even if we had a new name and weren't allowed to do certain things here and there.

    Prior to the suspension, the band's culture was already rapidly changing and students were very conscious of trying to make it a safe place for everyone. It clearly wasn't perfect and there were some big areas for improvement, but it was getting significantly better with passing each year. Now that so many people in the band have graduated and only the seniors had a full year, they have a lot of room to make new traditions and keep the things they liked from before, with little pressure to keep things the same "because they have always been that way."
  • CA Forever
    670
    I don't know. Maybe I'm just a salty (more recent) band alumni. If you had to make changes then you had to make changes... times change and that's just part of life. Everyone is gonna have different opinions on the situation, but seeing "UC Davis marching band established 2019" made me feel totally alienated from the organization it once was. No way for me to feel connected to something that was "founded" after my time and I don't think I'm alone in that. I can also understand that it's not about me or what I want.

    Anyway... hopefully we can get back to talking about football. GO AGS!
  • dlmusgrove
    27
    The rebranding they had us do was, first, likely for liability/PR reasons, but also because we were specifically having problems with alumni. Most were/are fine, but there were consistently some that were problematic, and it was a frequent student complaint that alumni would complain to current members about how things changed, were better how they used to be, etc. I prefer the old name, but they were trying to distance themselves from the past to solve actual problems. Since I'm not in the band anymore, I couldn't say if it's the right or wrong move to go as far as to say "established in 2019" (though I think that statement is somewhat disingenuous given that it still didn't feel all that different when I left). However, the band leadership and certain individuals I know in the school administration are genuinely trying to solve problems to make it a better place for the students.
  • Oldbanduhalum
    599
    I do hope that the members of the current band are able to grow it into something that they enjoy participating in and that they, and all Aggies, can be proud of. Kind of like rebuilding a sports team, it will take time and a lot of energy.
  • AggieFinn
    497
    I care about the Band-Uh! and they're a vital part of the program, not just football, but all sports where they are present. Their sound is the beating heart of Aggie athletics, and I understand liability, but I'm not one for soul crushing shake-ups for PR reasons.

    Let them keep playing and find their sound and their voice. Success makes everyone better, and it starts with football. Keep sending them out there, let them improve and hopefully be lead by people with real heart and musicianship.
  • 69aggie
    377
    Sorry old band alumni. I loved your service and talents. But I might suggest that the Aggie Band-Hh’s problems just may lay with the alumni of the band, not the current or former student AggieBand-UH. I have cousins and close friend who were members of the band. At a game maybe 8-10 years ago we were with my wife’s best friend who was a flute player with the old BandUh. And the Alumni Band was here as well. Their leader walked up her stands (Toomey) and saw my wife’s friend and said “there she is, she was so easy. . . “ she said Hi, but my wife was infuriated at this guy and said so. He backed off big time. Never came up again. BandUh had some big problems. Someone had to deal with it.
  • fugawe09
    191
    I appreciate your current lens as well as I hope you appreciate the lens that myself and others have that spans more years, some of us from a distance, others involved in much closer ways. It is saddening to hear you say you say that democratic self governance couldn’t be made to work in favor of making the band a corporate program. It is important to note that the last 15 years or so have been marked by assorted staff directors and campus rec managers manipulating the band to serve their personal interests as career spring boards rather than providing good mentorship and the problems of 2019 were indeed timebombs set several years ago by people long gone, exploited by an aspiring professional activist with an axe to grind and a failing newspaper willing to lead with anything that bleeds. The things that have many reasonable alumni are pissed about are that the university still wants to own the 100 years of deep community goodwill built by the band while simultaneously disowning the very people who helped build it. Further, the name change was partly a bad faith effort to circumvent a 1992 agreement that basically said the administration agreed to never do exactly what they did. They also unilaterally changed the text and intent of donor agreements after the donations were made to the endowment fund. We can litigate those things in a different thread if you wish, as I promise we are not just angry internet trolls. But back to the topic at hand - the new uniforms are objectively ugly, the performance just wasn’t good, and the drum heads were seen as a giant middle finger by some of the same people who will get shopped for donations next quarter. Hopefully they improve and are willing to improve relations with the alumni group - there is an important distinction between the organization and a few rogue individuals who are no longer welcome in it.
  • Toke69
    325
    DrMike, yes Scott Barry was doing the color and Marsh the play by play. I thought they did a very good job. They were probably biased but it didn't affect they way they called the game. For Aggies alums, it was nice to hear Barry allude to his days as a QB playing for Jim Sochor and following on the heels of Ken O'Brien.
  • agalum
    332

    Teddye Buchanan got ejected for targeting and, unfortunately, he will have to sit out the first half of the Weber game.

    From the replays at the stadium, it didn’t even look like a penalty. I thought it was a total BS call. What were the announcers saying about it with their replay analysis?
  • CA Forever
    670
    I mean... Everyone agreed that is was a pretty soft call. Incidental helmet contact at the very worst. To me the word "targeting" heavily implies intent. Either change the name of the rule or change the enforcement. I get that they are attempting to protect players and that is exceedingly important, but some of the targeting calls in the last several seasons are headscratchers.
  • BlueGoldAg
    1.2k
    It wasn't an egregious hit but I think it was a fair call, imo, given how closely they are calling any helmet to helmet contact. It appeared to me that Buchanan hit their QB high in the upper chest and chin area with his forearms up and Buchanan's helmet did make contact with the QB's face mask. Buchanan gave him a little extra push a second late that was unnecessary and then the helmet to helmet contact got the flag. It was avoidable. Live and learn...
  • Riveraggie
    249
    I thought I saw incidental helmet to helmet contact on the play they reviewed near the end of game on whether Rodrigues got a first down around the 16 yard line.
    I think they need to split this rule and separate targeting which is an attempt to injure or spearing with the crown of the helmet from helmet to helmet contact. The two have little to do with each other, they’re like a Venn Diagram with a <20% overlap. They slander people with the implication there was a dangerous intent to injure when there was no such thing.
  • Fiat Lux
    14
    I think it’s become wildly obvious the rule is broken. There are too many bang bang plays where the defender has committed to a hit and the offensive player ducks their head or moves into a position that leads to helmet to helmet contact. I think it’s unfair to toss a guy out for something that he really couldn’t avoid. I agree the helmet to helmet hits need to get out of the game but the way they are penalized needs to be changed. I hope it’s something the rules committee and other decision makers start talking about.
  • Riveraggie
    249
    it’s unfair to toss a guy for parts of two games over something that had no potential for injury and no intent to injure. They should read the definition of the rule and limit targeting calls to dangerous plays as the rule clearly was intended to do.
    They can call unsportsmanlike conduct if they want to discourage an action that doesn’t rise to that level.
  • CA Forever
    670
    I agree with this sentiment. Make 2 different penalties of targeting for egregious and dangerous plays with crown of the helmet hits and then a personal foul for incidental helmet to helmet. What Buchanan did was absolutely not worth being tossed from the game... his facemask bumped the facemask of the quarterback. We're just ignoring that that happens in the trenches on every single play? Give me a break.
  • agalum
    332
    For those who attended the game, what are your thoughts on the new PA announcer? I thought he was terrible. Monotone, no excitement, seemed like he was taking a beta blocker. Surely we can do better. Livingston, who was running the show on the sidelines, would bring some energy into the mic.
  • eastbayaggie
    99

    I can barely hear him. It reminded me of the PA announcers on BART or subway tracks. You have to guess on what he had said based on the context of the situation.
  • Oldbanduhalum
    599
    To tell you the truth, the PA announcer didn't even register with me. Looking back I do remember the intro of the team through the tunnel. His call was "anti-climactic" at best. I thought Darius on the sidelines was very good, but I may be a bit biased as my son's girlfriend went to high school with him so we chatted a bit during the game. I thought his personality really came across well while he was trying to hype up the crowd.
  • DrMike
    742
    Darius was good; it just seemed like he ran out of material before the end of the first half. We need more gimmicks (quizzes, simba cam, dance cam) to keep the students engaged.
  • Oldbanduhalum
    599
    You're right, there did seem to be a lack of games (getting your face on the big screen always gets a big cheer). Maybe something that will get better as time goes by. By the way, I also liked the new horse for Maggie (Sugar, I believe it's name is). Didn't seem as fazed by the sound as the first one we had two years ago. And of course Pint got the biggest ovations of the night. Overall, one of the better atmosphere's we've had.
  • BlueGoldAg
    1.2k
    I hope we have that kind of atmosphere for our next home game as well. Will the students return or where the majority of them their only for the student stampede?

    Is there any reason we couldn't have a student stampede for every home game? Seems to me that that would be a great Aggie tradition to develop and a good way to get students in the stands.
  • Oldbanduhalum
    599
    I was wondering about the stampede too. This was for the second years since they didn’t get a chance last year. Next home game will be first years. We have five home games. Why not year three, year four, etc. I’d say running of the alumni but I’m not sure the liability insurance will cover.
  • BlueGoldAg
    1.2k
    The alumni stampede would be awesome!
  • agalum
    332

    Good idea if the novelty doesn’t wear off. What ever athletics did for this game worked. Keep it up.
  • BlueGoldAg
    1.2k
    They might have to give an alumni stampede an extra 10 minutes to make sure everyone makes it off the field! :rofl:
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to Aggie Sports Talk!

AggieSportsTalk.com, the pulse of Aggie athletics. The home of Aggie Pride. Create an account to contribute to the conversation!