You forgot Northern Colorado.. They almost beat Colorado State, but got robbed on a bogus non-touchdown call..

But yeah, most of the Big Sky looked bad this weekend.

Right, I also excluded New Mexico, who played a close game with Idaho State.

Colorado State and New Mexico are not in the same class as the teams I listed. Davis and Montana State play CSU/UNM team more competitively.

The Big Sky scores I listed just show the huge competitive imbalance between FCS and upper-echelon FBS conferences.....and for Davis (and Poly fans) to not freak out about final scores in these games.

Agreed. Our NG was great! Two 6'4" corners don't help, along w their QB and RB.

The Power 4 or 5 are almost like an actual semi pro league.

Interesting to see true freshman Treynor
Cleeland gets some reps as QB #3. Well built (225), mobile in HS.

We had a chance in the first half to score, but a 'well thrown' ball was intercepted. Was that one of their long corners? That's the kind of ball that could possibly be thrown another 3 - 5 yards farther - our WR had to come back to the ball. And if he can't get it, no INT.

a table skirt and a pop-up backdrop would have fit in one suitcase so this didn’t look like a deposition.

There are quite a few things that cost nothing and that show some degree of planning and prep that Rocko has not mastered.

Hireanother Associate AD to handle that. Or, can't Athletics Comms ask a few basic questions in advance?

Don't we have a sports information director?

If they read this message board: I would like UC Davis health stadium to offer campus produced food items to eat sourced from the campus farms like the dining halls do!

I think there are at least three FT paid staff, plus a supervising Associate AD, who divvy up the sports, but FB and MBB must have more support. There has been semi recent turnover in staff.

Don't forget, our Marketing Comm staff had trouble giving away 1,000 free tickets to a recent football playoff game.

I see that Washington did not get a single vote in the AP poll this week.

It's really more like a Power Two with the ACC and B12 as tweeners.

Harper looked more comfortable in the pocket than Pinnick but was inaccurate in his throws. I guess I won't keep thinking we should put Harper in the game. I liked the one good throw from Cleeland. Wouldn't mind seeing him a little more in other games when we can work in the #2.

Does Washington deserve to be ranked? Time will tell.
Obviously they looked pretty good, but they haven’t played a tough enough schedule to overcome their initial placement. Pretty depressing if thats not a top 25 team.

I hadn't realized while watching the game that we were resting a good number of starters in the 2nd half (beside Pinnack). Good for the long term health of the team....not so great for the point differential!

We dropped one position to #9 in Stats and Coaches polls, puts us right with Idaho. Sac dropped to #21. SDSU and Montana St are very competitive, went to 2 OT. I don’t know much about Illinois St or Rhode Island but the polls are hot on them. Not sure why Montana went up. D2 Central Washington gave them all they could handle until running out of depth in the trenches in the 3rd quarter.

I'm never going to understand polls.
I would guess if we played #5 Rhode Island this weekend, we'd take it to 'em though.

Sac staying in the top-25 is a stretch.

Speaking of Washington. Can someone update the future schedules to reflect playing at Wazzu?

I agree with you but they were a playoff team and I think they won a first round game.

Their top WR, Rashid Williams, was injured early and missed most of the game.

It was an ominous start, did we come out flat?

"It took Jacob Lane only one snap to establish his presence against the Aggies (1-1).

"Lane, the junior edge rusher, got a great jump on UC Davis quarterback Caden Pinnick’s first snap count before bull rushing right tackle David Porotesano several yards backward. After discarding the offensive lineman, Lane wrapped up Pinnick for a 8-yard loss and the first sack of his collegiate career."

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/washington-huskies-football/3-takeaways-from-uw-huskies-blowout-win-vs-uc-davis/

The polls, I think moreso the coaches than the Stats (or AP Poll for FBS) are very over reactionary. You're much better off looking at computer rankings to find out which teams are better. That's not to say the computers are perfect.

Like last week we barely beat Utah Tech while South Dakota and Illinois St both lost FBS games so we jumped them in the coaches poll. But this week we lose an FBS game while Illinois St beats an FCS team and they jump us. Why does Montana St drop 3 spots after losing a 2OT game to the No.2 team? I guess Illinois St's 41-13 win over Morehead St and Rhode Island's 31-17 win over Stony Brook were both super impressive.

At least in Illinois St's case, they get the MVFC gauntlet to prove themselves since they play NDSt, SDSt, SD and Southern Illinois.

I find it irritating that analysts keep touting the five returning O linemen, when one is not going to play until later in season. Porotesano is a red shirt freshmen who played in two games prior to this season. ( I don’t know why the team does not classify anyone besides transfers as a redshirt-whatever, makes the team look older than it is,)

The computer rankings have little data until there are a few games played and they have comparative scores. At this point in the season most or all computer rankings are still influenced by last season or preseason predictions, so garbage in garbage out. Last season is largely irrelevant this year due to player movement. I’m a believer in computer rankings but only after five or six games,

Very true. Voters are biased by their preconceived thoughts as well. So yeah any polls/computer rankings at this point should be taken with a grain of salt.

I also can't stand the coaches poll in any sport since it's pretty well known that many coaches don't actually vote or are heavily biased towards their conferences when they (or whichever staffer fills it out for them) do vote. I mean, I get why because the coach isn't getting paid to pay attention to all of the other teams to be able to form opinions on where teams should be ranked.

Polls, Schmolls, won't matter until about week 8 or 9.

We got smoked plain and simple, and Washington certainly looks like a Top 10 team, or did we just make them look that good? I don't know, but playing a decent Southern Utah team at home, who whooped Idaho State, and actually just lost to San Diego -- will be a good measuring stick. Will be watching the NAU @ SUU game on Saturday.

BYU 69 PSU 0
Oregon 59 Montana State 13
Boise St. 51 Eastern 14
Utah 63 Cal Poly 9
Washington 70 Davis 10
Arizona 48 Weber 3 — SochorField

This is a 60-8 average beatdown for the Big Sky. I'm not sure it warranted a drop in the polls....but it is what it is. More motivation to get better.

This is one person's take on the Top 766:

Interesting tidbits:
Washington #29
North Dakota State #40. Damn!
Tarleton State #78 and #2 in FCS
UC Davis #141 and #16 in FCS
Sacramento State #177 and #42 in FCS

Id argue that their top WR was actually Denzel Boston #12 who is draft eligible and by all accounts that I've seen is supposed to go in the top 3 rounds... Considering that I think cofield and Richardson did a pretty nice job on him throughout the game

my previous post being in response to this one*

During the alumni zoom, a couple interesting tidbits came out. One that stood out - it was mentioned that the Washington payroll was $30M in NIL. Plough echoed what was said here - the gap between schools like us and the elite is bigger than ever. Apparently, the number of large differential games this last weekend (can’t remember the criteria) was historical.