Thankfully a W tonight! We need to overcome these poor 4th Quarters! NO excuses with the FBS talent we have!!

GOOD WIN. Tough game, not gonna rail on anyone for this one. Lamar fought back and the Jacks did what they had to do to get the win.

A win is a win and a TOP 25 win is a TOP 25 win! Statement win tonight for us!!!

I think this is a great win. We just beat a ranked team. Honestly, we dominated a ranked team and had a few drives we didn't finish, and some stupid penalties.

I didn't have an issue with coaching this week. Was there a couple bad play calls? Were there a few bad penalties? Did we miss a touchdown? Sure. But, obviously we aren't coaching for penalties and missing touchdowns. It's hard to win in college football. Even some of the best teams in CFB have had close games with unranked/trash teams over the past few weeks.

I thought play calling was aggressive when it needed to be and conservative when it needed to be. We got the job done and it was a job well done. Onto the next.

I am feeling optimistic.

Good Conference road win in a close game. This is what SFA needs to start to do consistently to turn this program into a winner. Closed it out did not fold. Another tough road game next week.

I do like winning, regardless of how.

But, the 4th quarter…puke.

Some quick ESPN 4th quarter math:

Lamar - 181 yards, 13:02 TOP
SFA - 4 yards, 1:58 TOP

These 4th quarter inadequacies have (1) already cost us a game, (2) nearly cost us today and (3) if not cleaned up, will cost us another game.

If not for Lamar dropping a layup TD in the 1st, this game could have been way different.

But, wins are wins and wins are better than losses.

The Hail Mary curse has been lifted.

14jacks said:

---

I think this is a great win. We just beat a ranked team. Honestly, we dominated a ranked team and had a few drives we didn't finish, and some stupid penalties.

I didn't have an issue with coaching this week. Was there a couple bad play calls? Were there a few bad penalties? Did we miss a touchdown? Sure. But, obviously we aren't coaching for penalties and missing touchdowns. It's hard to win in college football. Even some of the best teams in CFB have had close games with unranked/trash teams over the past few weeks.

I thought play calling was aggressive when it needed to be and conservative when it needed to be. We got the job done and it was a job well done. Onto the next.

I am feeling optimistic.

---

Lamar had more 1st downs, more total yards, more rushing yards, and fewer penalties.

I may stop short of calling our performance "dominating."

It was enough, and that's what counts.

Now you are just sounding upset and mad that we won the game. Disappointed much.

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

Now you are just sounding upset and mad that we won the game. Disappointed much.

---

I'm glad we won, for sure.

Very disappointed we didn't close that game out in a way I thought we shout/could.

Both things can be true.

I'm impressed with our offense. Zero turnovers against such a dominant defense. Consistently moved the ball. Did stall out a few times but didn't make stupid decisions outside of that wildcat call, which if it worked would've been genius.

From here on out I hope short yardage offense becomes a big emphasis on practice. We need some consistent power play to help us in 3/4th and 1 situations.

I don't know how to define this win.

MasterAxe2 said:

---

14jacks said:

---

I think this is a great win. We just beat a ranked team. Honestly, we dominated a ranked team and had a few drives we didn't finish, and some stupid penalties.

I didn't have an issue with coaching this week. Was there a couple bad play calls? Were there a few bad penalties? Did we miss a touchdown? Sure. But, obviously we aren't coaching for penalties and missing touchdowns. It's hard to win in college football. Even some of the best teams in CFB have had close games with unranked/trash teams over the past few weeks.

I thought play calling was aggressive when it needed to be and conservative when it needed to be. We got the job done and it was a job well done. Onto the next.

I am feeling optimistic.

---

Lamar had more 1st downs, more total yards, more rushing yards, and fewer penalties.

I may stop short of calling our performance "dominating."

It was enough, and that's what counts.

---

Lamar had 13 more total yards. 1 more first down. And 4 less penalty yards than us.

We had 30 more passing yards. We're damn near 50% from 3rd down compared to Lamar's 2/14 attempts. And we had less turnovers.

Stat pick however you want, call it for what you want, but we beat a ranked team and looked plenty good enough to be a ranked team. Can we clean things up? Sure. But I wonder what Lamar fans are thinking now.

"This is when having a purely spread offense beats us. You need to line up under center and power that in. Not wildcat. Even the pistol would've been good."

Regardless of what style offense we run, there is nothing to prevent us from running an I formation, taking the snap under center and having extra blockers lined up when we have 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 since we like to go for it.

MasterAxe2 said:

---

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

Now you are just sounding upset and mad that we won the game. Disappointed much.

---

I'm glad we won, for sure.

Very disappointed we didn't close that game out in a way I thought we shout/could.

Both things can be true.

---

You are correct with this. First few minutes of the game looked like we should have won by 30. Both can be correct.

But we did just get a good win against a ranked team.

Even the best teams in the country have things they can get better at. Not that we are the best team in the country, but we also have to appreciate progress.

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

"This is when having a purely spread offense beats us. You need to line up under center and power that in. Not wildcat. Even the pistol would've been good."

Regardless of what style offense we run, there is nothing to prevent us from running an I formation, taking the snap under center and having extra blockers lined up when we have 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 since we like to go for it.

---

I agree with you here. Should never be too one sided. We absolutely should have I-form in our offense, as well as other things. Certain circumstances call for certain play calls.

BigJack85 said:

---

I don't know how to define this win.

---

Just enough.

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

"This is when having a purely spread offense beats us. You need to line up under center and power that in. Not wildcat. Even the pistol would've been good."

Regardless of what style offense we run, there is nothing to prevent us from running an I formation, taking the snap under center and having extra blockers lined up when we have 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 since we like to go for it.

---

I agree with you, but there is a reason most college spread teams don't even have a formation where the QB lines up under center.

If you have one formation where you need that QB center exchange it probably isn't practiced much. The QB center exchange under center is much harder than out of the pistol or shotgun, so practice with it is normally needed to make it fast and clean.

And with how high school offenses are now, there's a very good chance a lot of these QBs haven't taken a snap under center in a game since maybe peewee.

We're still installing and getting used to the new offense. It won't be perfect for a while. Once they're comfortable enough, I'd like to see a true goal line package added, but it's gonna take practice I'm sure for Vidlak and the center to be able to smoothly get the snap down.

SFASawmillGuy said:

---

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

"This is when having a purely spread offense beats us. You need to line up under center and power that in. Not wildcat. Even the pistol would've been good."

Regardless of what style offense we run, there is nothing to prevent us from running an I formation, taking the snap under center and having extra blockers lined up when we have 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 since we like to go for it.

---

I agree with you, but there is a reason most college spread teams don't even have a formation where the QB lines up under center.

If you have one formation where you need that QB center exchange it probably isn't practiced much. The QB center exchange under center is much harder than out of the pistol or shotgun, so practice with it is normally needed to make it fast and clean.

And with how high school offenses are now, there's a very good chance a lot of these QBs haven't taken a snap under center in a game since maybe peewee.

We're still installing and getting used to the new offense. It won't be perfect for a while. Once they're comfortable enough, I'd like to see a true goal line package added, but it's gonna take practice I'm sure for Vidlak and the center to be able to smoothly get the snap down.

---

Very true. Only get reps on plays you expect to run. I hope you're correct on getting a goal line package later on down the road.

I do love our offensive style, but there are plenty of scenarios where we can change it up.

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

"I'm glad we won, for sure.

Very disappointed we didn't close that game out in a way I thought we shout/could.

Both things can be true."

Yes both things can be true. The way we started I was hoping to see us close the game out early but didn't happen. Funny how our opponents don't drop over and play dead just to please us on this Forum.
I get disappointed every time we have a 3 and out or commit penalties that allow opponents to continue a drive.
All part of the game and no coach or player can script every play and outcome.

Let's see if this team can continue to improve and keep the wins coming.

---

I dare approach the next game but SELA is very Jekyll and Hyde. We look more talented than most of the teams we play.

BigJack85 said:

---

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

"I'm glad we won, for sure.

Very disappointed we didn't close that game out in a way I thought we shout/could.

Both things can be true."

Yes both things can be true. The way we started I was hoping to see us close the game out early but didn't happen. Funny how our opponents don't drop over and play dead just to please us on this Forum.
I get disappointed every time we have a 3 and out or commit penalties that allow opponents to continue a drive.
All part of the game and no coach or player can script every play and outcome.

Let's see if this team can continue to improve and keep the wins coming.

---

I dare approach the next game but SELA is very Jekyll and Hyde. We look more talented than most of the teams we play.

---

First place on the line.

Have no clue how good SELA is: wins over TAMuC and HCU (although HCU blasted McN)

14jacks said:

---

MasterAxe2 said:

---

14jacks said:

---

I think this is a great win. We just beat a ranked team. Honestly, we dominated a ranked team and had a few drives we didn't finish, and some stupid penalties.

I didn't have an issue with coaching this week. Was there a couple bad play calls? Were there a few bad penalties? Did we miss a touchdown? Sure. But, obviously we aren't coaching for penalties and missing touchdowns. It's hard to win in college football. Even some of the best teams in CFB have had close games with unranked/trash teams over the past few weeks.

I thought play calling was aggressive when it needed to be and conservative when it needed to be. We got the job done and it was a job well done. Onto the next.

I am feeling optimistic.

---

Lamar had more 1st downs, more total yards, more rushing yards, and fewer penalties.

I may stop short of calling our performance "dominating."

It was enough, and that's what counts.

---

Lamar had 13 more total yards. 1 more first down. And 4 less penalty yards than us.

We had 30 more passing yards. We're damn near 50% from 3rd down compared to Lamar's 2/14 attempts. And we had less turnovers.

Stat pick however you want, call it for what you want, but we beat a ranked team and looked plenty good enough to be a ranked team. Can we clean things up? Sure. But I wonder what Lamar fans are thinking now.

---

We gave Lamar 3 unearned opportunities. We are fortunate to pull this off. Carthel could emphasize, throat stepping on. In upcoming practices.

I would venture to say that talent wise we are surely on par with SELA, Nicholls, UIW. That in itself does not equal wins but certainly we have the potential to win each game. or not. SELA and Nicholls are on the road so no easy task. Nicholls was respectable (final scores) in their FBS losses. They have UIW tonight so that will be an interesting result. Louisiana road games are not easy. Many of us long time Jacks would question the accuracy of Louisiana refs in those games FWIW. Wins will have to be earned, play for 60, make less mistakes than opponent and take advantage of their blunders.
I predicted 8-4 before season. Lamar, Nicholls and UIW were some of the possible 4. Obviously I want SFA to beat my guesstimate and I'll be disappointed if they don't. We still have to learn to become a winning program and culture. I like a lot of what I have been seeing but there is still plenty of work to do to get there.
Today's game was another step.

Glad we won this game. Looking much better than the past few years.

Don't want to beat a dead horse (too much), but holy crap the broadcast quality is worse than horrible. I'm wondering if there is ANYONE involved who has even rudimentary knowledge of the equipment. Seemed tonight like they were playing with the camera for a large chunk of time in the middle part of the game. It's ridiculous, it's maddening, and I believe SFA deserves better.

After 6

QB: #15 SAM VIDLAK 6-1; 207 (JR.)
G:6;ATT:167;CMP:111;CMP%:66.5;YDS:1,565;TD:17;INT:2
QB: #13 GAVIN RUTHERFORD 6-3; 210 (R/FR.)
G:3;ATT:10;CMP:13;CMP%:77.0;YDS:160;TD:1;INT:0;/R:4;YDS:7;TD:1
QB: #12 DALTON MCELYEA 6-3; 196 (JR.)
G:4;ATT:3;CMP:2;CMP%:67.0;YDS:35;TD:2;INT:0;/R:1;YDS:6;TD:0

RB: #23 QUALAN JONES 5-10; 242 (JR.)
G:6;ATT:87;YDS:578;AVG:7.0;TD:5/REC:5;YDS:40;TD:0
RB: #24 JAYLEN JENKINS 5-11; 185 (SO.)
G:5;ATT:44;YDS:333;AVG:8.0;TD:3/REC:2;YDS:44;TD:0
RB: #28 DEAGO BENSON 5-11; 205 (R/FR.)
G:5;ATT:17;YDS:94;AVG:5.5;TD:0/REC:0;YDS:0;TD:0
RB: #10 JERRELL WIMBLEY 5-11; 195 (JR.)
G:5;ATT:26;YDS:93;AVG:4.0;TD:2/REC:0;YDS:0;TD:0
RB: #8 ANTHONY WILLIAMS 6-1; 211 (JR.)
G:5;ATT:7;YDS:41;AVG:6.0;TD:0/REC:8;YDS:63;TD:1
RB: #35 CHRIS MARTINEZ 5-11; 195 (FR.)
G:3;ATT:4;YDS:19;AVG:5.0;TD:0/REC:0;YDS:0;TD:0
RB: #30 LUKE ULLRICH 5-10; 190 (FR.)
G:1;ATT:1;YDS:11;AVG:11.0;TD:0/REC:0;YDS:0;TD:0

WR: #4 KYLON HARRIS 5-11; 160 (JR.)
G:6;REC:38;YDS:501;TD:5
WR: #7 BLAINE GREEN 6-1; 213 (SO.)
G:6;REC:22;YDS:395;TD:3
WR: #18 JORDAN NABORS 5-11; 185 (SO.)
G:6;REC:13;YDS:192;TD:3
WR: #17 ROHAN FLUELLEN 5-11; 170 (R/FR.)
G:6;REC:13;YDS:165;TD:2
WR: #14 ISAIAH DAVIS 6-3; 190 (SO.)
G:6;REC:6;YDS:152;TD:2
WR: #19 TY LOVE 6-2; 200 (SR.)
G:6;REC:4;YDS:38;TD:1
WR: #87 TA'ERIK TATE 6-1; 180 (FR.)
G:3;REC:2;YDS:30;TD:0
WR: #82 TYJUAN ATKINS 6-0; 190 (SR.)
G:2;REC:1;YDS:25;TD:1
WR: #81 CHRIS TAYLOR 5-10; 175 (JR.)
G:4;REC:2;YDS:23;TD:1
WR: #84 DAX BRIDGES 5-10; 190 (JR.)
G:1;REC:1;YDS:17;TD:1
WR: #83 CANNON LEMBERG 6-0; 170 (FR.)
G:4;REC:1;YDS:13;TD:0
WR: #11 DERRICK BOHLER 6-2; 201 (R/FR.)
G:3;REC:1;YDS:8;TD:0

TE: #88 LAVAR LINDO 6-4; 245 (JR.)
G:6;REC:4;YDS:54;TD:0

OL: #71 ROBERT KELLER 6-7; 310 (JR.) GP:6
OL: #55 ERIK GRAY 6-1; 280 (SO.) GP:6
OL: #73 NATE ADAMS 6-7; 321 (SR.) GP:6
OL: #56 JAKE HENRY 6-3; 290 (G-SR.) GP:6
OL: #72 DARREN WIANCKO 6-2; 300 (JR.) GP:6
OL: #57 JARED MANOS 6-0; 250 (JR.) GP:6
OL: #77 JAYMON LAMB 6-5; 250 (R/FR.) GP:5
OL: #61 JASON CROWDER 6-1; 290 (R/FR.) GP:4
OL: #74 GIOVANNY ALEGRIA 6-6; 335 (JR.) GP:4
OL: #68 SETH MARTIN 6-3; 285 (SO.) GP:3
OL: #54 CHIMDIA NWAIWU 6-6; 255 (SO.) GP:3
OL: #50 WILL THOMPSON V 5-11; 265 (JR.) GP:2
OL: #52 ZAVIER LEONARD 6-7; 310 (JR.) GP:1
OL: #67 KOLT DE LA TORRE 6-2; 310 (R/FR.) GP:1
OL: #66 CAMERON VARGAS 6-4; 280 (FR.) GP:1

DL: #2 AARON AUSTIN 6-2; 210 (SO.)
G:6;TKL:25;TFL:3.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:3;FF:1;FR:0;PD:1;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #3 EDWARD BOBINO III 6-2; 340 (SO.)
G:6;TKL:23;TFL:3.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #99 VICTOR IDUSUYI 6-1; 325 (JR.)
G:6;TKL:13;TFL:4.0;SCK:1.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #91 ELIJAH FIELDS 5-11; 270 (SO.)
G:5;TKL:12;TFL:2.0;SCK:1.5;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:2;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #23 TREVION SNEED 6-1; 260 (SO.)
G:6;TKL:12;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:2;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #22 XAVIER POTTS 6-0; 315 (R/FR.)
G:6;TKL:11;TFL:1.5;SCK:0.5;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #97 KY THOMAS 6-3; 250 (SR.)
G:6;TKL:10;TFL:3.0;SCK:0.5;QBH:3;FF:0;FR:0;PD:2;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #49 TIM MUHAMMAD 6-4; 230 (R/FR.)
G:6;TKL:7;TFL:2.0;SCK:1.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:2;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #95 K'MARD KIMBLE 6-2; 300 (FR.)
G:5;TKL:7;TFL:2.0;SCK:0.5;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:1;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #58 JOEY FINLEY 6-3; 240 (SO.)
G:4;TKL:6;TFL:1.0;SCK:1.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DL: #96 KAIDEN TURNER 6-2; 250 (R/FR.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:0.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:1;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0;TD:1
DL: #92 NICHOLAS PEREZ 6-2; 255 (FR.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0

LB: #14 JOSIAH COTTON 5-11; 232 (G/SR.)
G:6;TKL:32;TFL:3.5;SCK:0.5;QBH:3;FF:0;FR:0;PD:3;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #36 JAYDON SOUTHARD 6-0; 210 (JR.)
G:6;TKL:26;TFL:2.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #0 JERMAINE BROWN 6-1; 210 (SR.)
G:4;TKL:23;TFL:1.0;SCK:1.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:1;BLK:0
LB: #25 LUKE WATSON 6-2; 225 (JR.)
G:6;TKL:16;TFL:1.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:1;BLK:0
LB: #26 TONY ANYWANU 6-2; 246 (JR.)
G:6;TKL:13;TFL:4.5;SCK:2.5;QBH:2;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #11 LANE LEWIS 6-2; 215 (SR.)
G:6;TKL:7;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #45 JEMARI SEALS 6-0; 210 (SO.)
G:4;TKL:4;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #29 RYAN WILLIAMS 6-1; 195 (SO.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #42 MICHAEL WOODS 6-3; 220 (FR.)
G:1;TKL:1;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #32 DANIEL ANENIH 6-2; 230 (JR.)
G:1;TKL:0;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #51 FAVOUR AWODOYIN 6-4; 217 (FR.)
G:1;TKL:0;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
LB: #39 LOWOTE JURKIN 6-4; 220 (FR.)
G:1;TKL:0;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0

DB: #15 TRASHAWN ADAMS 5-11; 190 (SR.)
G:6;TKL:28;TFL:2.5;SCK:1.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:0
DB: #20 JAHEIM MULLEN 6-0; 204 (G/SR.)
G:6;TKL:21;TFL:1.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:1;FR:1;PD:0;INT:3
DB: #5 JEREMIAH WALKER 6-0; 200 (SR.)
G:6;TKL:15;TFL:1.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:2;INT:0
DB: #1 BRUCE HARMON 6-0; 200 (SR.)
G:5;TKL:13;TFL:1.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:1;FF:0;FR:1;PD:0;INT:1
DB: #27 TYLER HUTCHERSON 5-9; 160 (R/FR)
G:6;TKL:13;TFL:1.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:1;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #13 AARON SEARS 5-10; 190 (SO.)
G:4;TKL:12;TFL:1.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #29 MIKE PATTERSON 5-11; 162 (R/FR.)
G:6;TKL:11;TFL:0.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #9 DYLAN TOOKER 5-9; 190 (SR.)
G:5;TKL:10;TFL:1.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #6 CHARLES DEMMINGS 6-1; 185 (JR.)
G:5;TKL:8;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:1;BLK:0
DB: #24 AZARIAH LEVELLS 6-0; 185 (JR.)
G:4;TKL:4;TFL:2.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0
DB: #34 CHANCE SAUTTER 5-10; 179 (R/FR.)
G:4;TKL:4;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #38 KAMERON REDDIC 6-0; 185 (FR.)
G:3;TKL:4;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0
DB: #12 MONTEGO JOHNSON 5-11; 187 (SR.)
G:4;TKL:3;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #28 JAKE GILLESPIE 5-9; 180 (FR.)
G:3;TKL:3;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0
DB: #17 DONOAVAN LANG 6-0; 175 (FR.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:1.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:1;INT:0
DB: #35 JORDAN JACKSON 6-1; 177 (SO.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:0.5;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #37 JAYVIN MAYFIELD 6-0; 175 (FR.)
G:2;TKL:2;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0
DB: #30 HOLLIS ROBINSON 5-11; 181 (SO.)
G:5;TKL:2;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:0;BLK:0
DB: #89 COLE LEMONS 6-3; 185 (SO.)
G:6;TKL:1;TFL:0.0;SCK:0.0;QBH:0;FF:0;FR:0;PD:0;INT:1;BLK:0

LS: #47 TUG SANFORD 6-0; 200 (SO.) GP:6
LS: #00 BLAKE ROBINSON 6-1. 220 (FR.) GP:1

P: #22 CALLUM EDDINGS 5-11; 155 (JR.)
G:6;ATT:24;YDS:1,004;LNG:58;AVG:41.83;TB:2;FC:11;I20:7;50+:6;BLK:0
K: #81 BRODY MCNEW 6-2; 175 (SO.)
G:1;ATT:1;YDS:36;LNG:36;AVG:36.0;TB:0;FC:0;I20:0;50+:0;BLK:0

K: #41 CHRIS CAMPOS 5-11; 255 (SR.)
G:6;FGA:9;FGM:8;LNG:40;EXPA:33;EXPM:33
K: #40 JACOB HAND 5-10; 160 (R/FR.)
G:6;KO:47;YDS:2,965;AVG:63.1;TB:27;OB:1

djsfw57 said:

---

Glad we won this game. Looking much better than the past few years.

Don't want to beat a dead horse (too much), but holy crap the broadcast quality is worse than horrible. I'm wondering if there is ANYONE involved who has even rudimentary knowledge of the equipment. Seemed tonight like they were playing with the camera for a large chunk of time in the middle part of the game. It's ridiculous, it's maddening, and I believe SFA deserves better.

---

I mean..:have you seen our own broadcasts? We're not exactly the beacon of expertise.

djsfw57 said:

---

Glad we won this game. Looking much better than the past few years.

Don't want to beat a dead horse (too much), but holy crap the broadcast quality is worse than horrible. I'm wondering if there is ANYONE involved who has even rudimentary knowledge of the equipment. Seemed tonight like they were playing with the camera for a large chunk of time in the middle part of the game. It's ridiculous, it's maddening, and I believe SFA deserves better.

---

You realize, we have little control over Lamar's broadcast?

It's a Homecoming takeover 😜#AxeEm x #EastTexasTough pic.twitter.com/AAfws2hEJM

— Lumberjack Football (@SFA_Football) October 13, 2024

djsfw57 said:

---

Glad we won this game. Looking much better than the past few years.

Don't want to beat a dead horse (too much), but holy crap the broadcast quality is worse than horrible. I'm wondering if there is ANYONE involved who has even rudimentary knowledge of the equipment. Seemed tonight like they were playing with the camera for a large chunk of time in the middle part of the game. It's ridiculous, it's maddening, and I believe SFA deserves better.

---

I agree with 57. Go ahead and beat that dead horse.
It deserves it. That broadcast was one of the worst I've ever seen. It was as though the people operating the cameras (cameras shaking, and sometimes aimed at the ground) and the director changing from camera to camera every ten seconds (sometimes while the camera was being moved somewhere else) were students at Beaumont Jr. High. The people who do SFA's games at least don't give me a headache while watching.

If Carthel can't identify a couple of DB's who can defend a deep pass, then our goose will be cooked before we even step on the field against a good passing team like UIW. Lamar's receivers ran right by our DB's three times.

Vidlak's stats are outstanding!

BigJack85 said:

---

I don't know how to define this win.

---

I'd define it as a tough win against a not-bad opponent. These kinds of victories are needed to demonstrate the team's ability to pass a tough test even when they may not be at their best at the end of the game. My view anyway.

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

I would venture to say that talent wise we are surely on par with SELA, Nicholls, UIW. That in itself does not equal wins but certainly we have the potential to win each game. or not. SELA and Nicholls are on the road so no easy task. Nicholls was respectable (final scores) in their FBS losses. They have UIW tonight so that will be an interesting result. Louisiana road games are not easy. Many of us long time Jacks would question the accuracy of Louisiana refs in those games FWIW. Wins will have to be earned, play for 60, make less mistakes than opponent and take advantage of their blunders.
I predicted 8-4 before season. Lamar, Nicholls and UIW were some of the possible 4. Obviously I want SFA to beat my guesstimate and I'll be disappointed if they don't. We still have to learn to become a winning program and culture. I like a lot of what I have been seeing but there is still plenty of work to do to get there.
Today's game was another step.

---

I think you are spot on, L&L. I honestly saw in August that the season outcome would be 7-5 at best. That was before Vidlak and Jones came on the scene. Defense backfield needs work for sure but defensive front looked good, especially in final Lamar drive. Just got to shore up secondary weaknesses. And continue Carthel's cognitive decision-making therapy (don't fire that therapist, we're making progress)...OK, that's a bad joke...

I think next week's game will be a real test. Good we have Houston Christian and Incarnate Word at home. Incarnate Word scares me the most. Who knows what could happen?

UIW destroyed Nicholls last night 55-10. Leaves little doubt to whom is the heavy favorite in SLC.