Navy Football Revisited
A few weeks ago I did a blog on Navy football and the tough road they seemed to have just to qualify for a bowl. The midshipman started the season beating Towson, then losing to Ball State and Duke. There was a lot of concern about whether this team was going to finish with 6 Division I wins, and some of you probably remember that blog.
But since then Navy has been tough, and turned that 1-2 record to a current 5-3 record. I’d like to revisit those past games and get some of you caught up on how they got to where they are, and what the future holds for them:
Picking up from the 1-2 start, it seemed like the Midshipmen were doomed to not even make it to post season, losing to a Ball State that few knew about, and then to Duke…I mean, losing to Duke is, well… you know…
(we kid because we love)
The problem wasn’t scoring, Navy was actually very good in scoring, but there was questions about the defense. And one of the big questions about running the option was that is it not designed to come back from 14 points or more down late in the 4th quarter. If a team jumped on Navy early and could put distance in the score, it would be hard for Navy to make a comeback without eating the clock up.
But Navy turned it around in their next game, defeating Rugters 23-21. Many still question the strength of the schedule, but all Navy can do is play the teams on their schedule. But then they began to stand out by beating ranked Wake Forest in their own home 24-17.
This was important because Navy needed Division I wins, and some quality ones at that. Beating Rutgers University would have been cool if they were the team of last year, but this year they seem to be the same old Rutgers. But that win vs. Wake Forest begin to bring hope to the team.
There must have been some magic in that old option game they found, for when they…
Hold up, that sounds like a Christmas song!
Anyway, Navy began to show us the true power of that option game by following up their win vs. a ranked team by defeating Air Force. I’ll be honest folks, I didn’t see that coming. I know you can throw out records when it comes to true rivals, and we know that Army, Navy and Air Force are true rivals, but I thought the air attack would ground the Midshipmen. I was wrong. A 33-27 victory suddenly made us pay attention to Navy, with their record swelling to 4-2.
Now, how can Navy qualify for a Division I bowl? They have to win 6 Division I games, or have one quality Division IAA (I know the terms have changed, just go with it for a minute). If the Towson win counts, then Navy needs 2 more wins to qualify for a bowl. If not, they need 3. So every game is still important.
Navy then ran into a brick wall in ranked Pittsburgh, losing 42-21. With 5 games left on the schedule, the Midshipmen needed at least 3 wins to ensure a bowl. This is important folks, because often times we talk only about national championships, but there are more stories of success than just who plays in the BCS Championship. Every game is important, every game is a test of will and some measure of success or failure. Seasons are judged by how you finished, and what you did in post season. Every game has great importance.
So today, Navy plays, and crushes, SMU 34-7, bringing their record to 5-3. With 4 games left on the schedule, they need 1 or two wins, depending on that Towson game. If you look ahead, their next game is against Temple…hmmm, can you say 6-3?
If you can, then this might be the qualifying game for Navy. But they still need another win, the next game will be a tough one…Notre Dame. Now, I know the Irish have not had a tough schedule, but some media will probably give them a top 25 ranking just because they are the Irish. This could be a good thing for Navy, to be able to play another top 25 team. But I think this one will be hard to win.
If they don’t their last two games are against Northern Illinois and Army. I am going to treat the Army/Navy game like a tossup, you just never know who’s gonna win that. So this means that it is possible that Navy’s post season could lie in that game vs. Northern Illinois.
This team is currently 5-3, and almost had a big win over Tennessee this year and a very close game vs. Minnesota. Navy will be playing in their back yard, so this could be a very tough game to win. Remember, if that Towson game does not count as a Division I win, and if they don’t upset Notre Dame, this could be the season making game.
Are the Midshipmen up to it…stay tuned….
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Why playoffs in college football?
Why Playoffs in Football?
I have less than an hour before kickoff, so I need to jump right in this so I can have time to watch the games today. Before I do, those who have read my first part of the wrestling blog can catch the rest on blogspot.com, which is where I will be blogging out ideas on how to get wrestling fans.
So, let’s look at this, why should there be Division I playoffs in football?
Lots of media whine and cry about this all the time, and they get upset when the teams they think should be in the championship mix are left out. Ironically, this is interesting because Penn State is currently undefeated, but has been left out of the championship picture before, even with an undefeated record.
So let’s chew on this for a second. Why do we want playoffs?
I wonder a lot about this, and I personally think it is a personal belief of the media. It just seems to me that the media wants to force the NCAA to have playoffs for Division I, but the hypocrisy here is that when you report news and sports, you are to do just that… report it, not CREATE it.
We all have our opinions when it comes to sports, I am no different, but we cross the line when we start thinking that the sports world ought to do what we want them to do. This is one of the reasons there is such a big debate for playoffs in college football, especially in Division I…
(and YEAH, I know it’s the FBS or CBS or CSI or something, but hey, it’s my blog!)
So why have playoffs? What is the real reason behind it? Well, as you know, the playoffs is a tournament styled form of competition which gives more than 2 teams a chance to compete for a championship.
Sounds simple but follow me….
The key words being “more than two”. If it’s just two, then it’s called a championship, a competition between the two BEST teams. But to imply that there should be a playoff means that there are more than 2 teams that could make a case as being the best.
Now, factor out professional sports because we’re talking about college kids here, remembering that those guys in the pros get paid for it. So the idea of playoffs in Division I is based on the idea that there should be more than 2 teams competing for the National Championship.
THIS is where the argument really begins. Every year people in the media start creating the hysteria, many times they start after 2 weeks. What if this team and this team and THIS team finish undefeated, what happens then?
In fact, we can use the current BCS ranking as an example. Currently Texas is number one, followed by Alabama and Penn State. All three are undefeated. What if all three finish the season undefeated?
Well certainly the Big 10 will cry out for justice because they felt that the conference was slighted a chance in the National Championship (although they’ll GLADLY take the Rose Bowl and all that MONEY!).
But there’s another argument here, one many don’t really say much about. Many people want to see the playoffs because they want to give the “little guy” a shot at the championship.
The “little guy” being teams out of the power conferences. I bring to your attention Boise State, currently ranked #12 and came off a win last night over San Jose State.
The media wants to see schools like this in the national spotlight, and I don’t blame them. It’s always a “feel-good” story when teams out of the power conferences go undefeated. Several teams have had some success, and several others are in the mix… they call them “BCS Busters”. Teams like ECU, TCU, Utah, BYU and others have made news because of their early or continuing success.
And because of that, the media wants us to root for the “little guy”. So when a team goes undefeated, we immediately want the world to crown them champions, or put them in the National Championship. And when they can’t get that, they try to force them in with the idea of “playoffs”.
But how legit is this?
Now it might sound like I’m talking in favor of the power conferences, as if that rich cat in Oklahoma State just sent me a whopping donation on my blog, but that’s not it. I mean, I graduated from a Southern Conference school (not to be confused with SEC), so I know about the “little guy”. But many times the media, in an attempt to look for a great story, tries to create one.
Still….should there be playoffs in football?
As mentioned earlier, the reasons for playoffs in Division I are theoretically to give the overachieving “little guy” a chance, and to place more than 2 teams in competition for the National Championship. But there are so many other factors, such as money, but the media doesn’t care about that…only the colleges and universities.
But let’s say there is a playoff…who gets invited? Right now the teams out of the power conferences that are ranked are Boise State and Utah…but that’s 12 teams down. You can’t have a post season with that many teams and hope to finish before the end of the year. That’s too many teams! So if the idea is to get the “little guy” in, the idea becomes a crusade just to get teams like Boise State and Utah in. And even though those teams are good, where do you draw the line on who is good, and who are the BEST?
How many teams would be in it, or should there be a “sliding scale”? For example, if Texas and Alabama finish undefeated (just saying) and all the other power conferences lose at least one game (including Penn State) then is there REALLY a need for a playoff if you have the two best teams?
But what if Boise State…
NO! I said the two BEST TEAMS, not the feel good stories of the year! I am not going to argue about Boise State being good, they are very good and have proven it year after year. And we know about that game where they beat Oklahoma. But you cannot tell me that this team, which has only beaten ONE top 25 team in #17 Oregon State is in the same category as any power conference team that goes undefeated.
If Boise State goes undefeated, they would have beaten 2 teams that were ranked throughout the course of the year (Oregon State and Fresno State). That’s fine… but tell me how many ranked teams Texas and Alabama would have beaten, not to mention the conference championship game?
We’re talking a whole different plane of competition. So if a power conference school goes undefeated, they get greater favor than a team not in a power conference school. Now, Utah has a legit argument too, if they go undefeated, and I personally think they might jump OVER Boise State because if they go undefeated, they would have had the tougher schedule.
And all this is fine when we talk about undefeated teams…but it really gets wild when there are NO undefeated teams…what do you do then? What if all the undefeated teams lose, who then is the best teams to compete in the BCS Championship. Well of course we have the rankings to identify that, but it still makes for debate.
I know there is no real answer to the playoffs issue, but I wondered how much easier it would be if some of the conferences took some measures to help themselves. For example, the Pac-10 and Big 10 don’t have conference championships, which means in theory they can have two undefeated teams that don’t have to play one another…just a theory. Why not get the power conferences to at least 12 teams so they can have a championship like the SEC, ACC and Big 12? Would it be so hard for the Pac-10 to absorb Fresno State and San Jose State for example, making them a 12 team conference?
Would it be too hard to get the MWC and WAC together again, so you’d have Boise State, BYU, Utah, Air Force, TCU and others in a much more competitive conference? You’d have enough to have a conference championship, and if anybody comes out of THAT undefeated, then you’d have a real argument for a BCS Champion contender.
I think before you start throwing teams in the playoff mix, you first have to identify the best teams. Until you do, we’re just picking the teams as the rankings show it, and lots of times those rankings can be deceptive…I mean, where is that #9 Clemson team now? Where is that West Virginia team now that was so highly ranked, or that Wisconsin team? Let the teams prove it in their conference, and in the conference championships. Would it be too hard for the Big 10 to add one more team? Now, I can’t help you with the Big East, but you get my point.
Anyway, just something to run my mouth about. I’ve been typing too long and I got 7 minutes to get some pancakes, bacon and get my spot for college football!!!!
I have less than an hour before kickoff, so I need to jump right in this so I can have time to watch the games today. Before I do, those who have read my first part of the wrestling blog can catch the rest on blogspot.com, which is where I will be blogging out ideas on how to get wrestling fans.
So, let’s look at this, why should there be Division I playoffs in football?
Lots of media whine and cry about this all the time, and they get upset when the teams they think should be in the championship mix are left out. Ironically, this is interesting because Penn State is currently undefeated, but has been left out of the championship picture before, even with an undefeated record.
So let’s chew on this for a second. Why do we want playoffs?
I wonder a lot about this, and I personally think it is a personal belief of the media. It just seems to me that the media wants to force the NCAA to have playoffs for Division I, but the hypocrisy here is that when you report news and sports, you are to do just that… report it, not CREATE it.
We all have our opinions when it comes to sports, I am no different, but we cross the line when we start thinking that the sports world ought to do what we want them to do. This is one of the reasons there is such a big debate for playoffs in college football, especially in Division I…
(and YEAH, I know it’s the FBS or CBS or CSI or something, but hey, it’s my blog!)
So why have playoffs? What is the real reason behind it? Well, as you know, the playoffs is a tournament styled form of competition which gives more than 2 teams a chance to compete for a championship.
Sounds simple but follow me….
The key words being “more than two”. If it’s just two, then it’s called a championship, a competition between the two BEST teams. But to imply that there should be a playoff means that there are more than 2 teams that could make a case as being the best.
Now, factor out professional sports because we’re talking about college kids here, remembering that those guys in the pros get paid for it. So the idea of playoffs in Division I is based on the idea that there should be more than 2 teams competing for the National Championship.
THIS is where the argument really begins. Every year people in the media start creating the hysteria, many times they start after 2 weeks. What if this team and this team and THIS team finish undefeated, what happens then?
In fact, we can use the current BCS ranking as an example. Currently Texas is number one, followed by Alabama and Penn State. All three are undefeated. What if all three finish the season undefeated?
Well certainly the Big 10 will cry out for justice because they felt that the conference was slighted a chance in the National Championship (although they’ll GLADLY take the Rose Bowl and all that MONEY!).
But there’s another argument here, one many don’t really say much about. Many people want to see the playoffs because they want to give the “little guy” a shot at the championship.
The “little guy” being teams out of the power conferences. I bring to your attention Boise State, currently ranked #12 and came off a win last night over San Jose State.
The media wants to see schools like this in the national spotlight, and I don’t blame them. It’s always a “feel-good” story when teams out of the power conferences go undefeated. Several teams have had some success, and several others are in the mix… they call them “BCS Busters”. Teams like ECU, TCU, Utah, BYU and others have made news because of their early or continuing success.
And because of that, the media wants us to root for the “little guy”. So when a team goes undefeated, we immediately want the world to crown them champions, or put them in the National Championship. And when they can’t get that, they try to force them in with the idea of “playoffs”.
But how legit is this?
Now it might sound like I’m talking in favor of the power conferences, as if that rich cat in Oklahoma State just sent me a whopping donation on my blog, but that’s not it. I mean, I graduated from a Southern Conference school (not to be confused with SEC), so I know about the “little guy”. But many times the media, in an attempt to look for a great story, tries to create one.
Still….should there be playoffs in football?
As mentioned earlier, the reasons for playoffs in Division I are theoretically to give the overachieving “little guy” a chance, and to place more than 2 teams in competition for the National Championship. But there are so many other factors, such as money, but the media doesn’t care about that…only the colleges and universities.
But let’s say there is a playoff…who gets invited? Right now the teams out of the power conferences that are ranked are Boise State and Utah…but that’s 12 teams down. You can’t have a post season with that many teams and hope to finish before the end of the year. That’s too many teams! So if the idea is to get the “little guy” in, the idea becomes a crusade just to get teams like Boise State and Utah in. And even though those teams are good, where do you draw the line on who is good, and who are the BEST?
How many teams would be in it, or should there be a “sliding scale”? For example, if Texas and Alabama finish undefeated (just saying) and all the other power conferences lose at least one game (including Penn State) then is there REALLY a need for a playoff if you have the two best teams?
But what if Boise State…
NO! I said the two BEST TEAMS, not the feel good stories of the year! I am not going to argue about Boise State being good, they are very good and have proven it year after year. And we know about that game where they beat Oklahoma. But you cannot tell me that this team, which has only beaten ONE top 25 team in #17 Oregon State is in the same category as any power conference team that goes undefeated.
If Boise State goes undefeated, they would have beaten 2 teams that were ranked throughout the course of the year (Oregon State and Fresno State). That’s fine… but tell me how many ranked teams Texas and Alabama would have beaten, not to mention the conference championship game?
We’re talking a whole different plane of competition. So if a power conference school goes undefeated, they get greater favor than a team not in a power conference school. Now, Utah has a legit argument too, if they go undefeated, and I personally think they might jump OVER Boise State because if they go undefeated, they would have had the tougher schedule.
And all this is fine when we talk about undefeated teams…but it really gets wild when there are NO undefeated teams…what do you do then? What if all the undefeated teams lose, who then is the best teams to compete in the BCS Championship. Well of course we have the rankings to identify that, but it still makes for debate.
I know there is no real answer to the playoffs issue, but I wondered how much easier it would be if some of the conferences took some measures to help themselves. For example, the Pac-10 and Big 10 don’t have conference championships, which means in theory they can have two undefeated teams that don’t have to play one another…just a theory. Why not get the power conferences to at least 12 teams so they can have a championship like the SEC, ACC and Big 12? Would it be so hard for the Pac-10 to absorb Fresno State and San Jose State for example, making them a 12 team conference?
Would it be too hard to get the MWC and WAC together again, so you’d have Boise State, BYU, Utah, Air Force, TCU and others in a much more competitive conference? You’d have enough to have a conference championship, and if anybody comes out of THAT undefeated, then you’d have a real argument for a BCS Champion contender.
I think before you start throwing teams in the playoff mix, you first have to identify the best teams. Until you do, we’re just picking the teams as the rankings show it, and lots of times those rankings can be deceptive…I mean, where is that #9 Clemson team now? Where is that West Virginia team now that was so highly ranked, or that Wisconsin team? Let the teams prove it in their conference, and in the conference championships. Would it be too hard for the Big 10 to add one more team? Now, I can’t help you with the Big East, but you get my point.
Anyway, just something to run my mouth about. I’ve been typing too long and I got 7 minutes to get some pancakes, bacon and get my spot for college football!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
