Air Force vs Navy

Discussing Army Black Knights football, basketball and more. United States Military Academy sports forum. West Point athletics discussion board.
armyfan1993
New Recruit
Posts: 324
Joined: December 2016
x 30
x 13
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by armyfan1993 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:01 pm

Watching the highlights, a little of the game, and reading their beat writer's reports, it sounds like Navy laid an absolute egg. All season that I've watched the Mids I have not been impressed; it truly is a Malcolm Perry or bust offense it seems. The QB run over the tackle spot is a staple, and has been for years, but at this point it's predictable. Perry never seems to hand it to the FB, I rarely see him pitch it, and he has a noodle arm. Their backup, Lewis, is a far better manager of the triple option, and honestly is a more dangerous threat rather than keying in on Perry with 8 or 9 guys. And he's a better passer.

On top of that, Air Force really seemed to have their way with Navy's front 7 after the first quarter. Their QB was impressive and quick. I think the AF game for Army may not be the breeze that we may have expected.
0 x

User avatar
DoubleOvertime99
New Recruit
Posts: 243
Joined: December 2016
x 40
x 19
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by DoubleOvertime99 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 5:34 pm

armyfan1993 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:01 pm
I think the AF game for Army may not be the breeze that we may have expected.
Nobody should ever expect a breeze in a CIC game.
0 x

FSUBulldog0
New Recruit
Posts: 192
Joined: December 2016
x 1
x 5
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by FSUBulldog0 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:03 pm

prairie wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:43 pm
AF played a good game but Navy is not that good this year They were very one dimensional. In their first 6 possessions, Perry rushed 15 times, threw 1 incomplete pass, and there were only 4 rushes by other Navy runners. Lewis in relief wasn’t any better beginning on the last possession in the first half.

Navy could not really establish the FB dive. If an option team cannot do that on a consistent basis, they cannot be successful. I still have visions of Navy FB dives that went for 30+ yards against Army during the losing streak. I can’t really say that I’m concerned about AF any more than I was before this game because this is NOT the same Navy team that we’ve seen in the past. It’s almost like KN got dazzled by the shiny object (Perry) and went fundamentally away from the foundation of establishing the FB dive consistently.

It’s safe to say that Navy’s dominance has come to an end. Since 2016, Navy is 1-4 in CIC play. In the prior 14 seasons, they were 24-4 in CIC play with all four of their losses coming to AF. It was an unbelievable run by Navy 2003-2015, but their loss today exposed their weakness: They have no line push and cannot establish the FB dive. For an option team, that spells out game over.
Navy has been one-dimensional ever since Keenan Reynolds graduated. It’s all QB, all the time. Will Worth, Zach Abey and now Malcolm Perry, it’s almost always a QB run. Worth added a bit of a passing element but it’s almost like they forget that they have A and B backs. They used to pound people with good FBs but now seem to rarely run them.
0 x

prairie
New Recruit
Posts: 143
Joined: December 2016
x 30
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by prairie » Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:32 pm

FSUBulldog0 wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:03 pm
it’s almost like they forget that they have A and B backs. They used to pound people with good FBs but now seem to rarely run them.
They still have a lot of skilled A backs but apparently little in the way of reliable B backs. They converted a 210lb safety this season. It seems strange to me that they have trouble finding B backs. I would think that they would be easier to find than A backs and QB's. Navy never seems to run out of those.
0 x

ArmyFan1995
New Recruit
Posts: 387
Joined: December 2016
x 10
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by ArmyFan1995 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:13 am

I don't think Navy is one-dimensional ... Abey and Lewis can both run the option but Abey has been hurt and they moved him to WR and Lewis, although he can throw, has been turnover prone.

Navy has the talent but their season, so far, falls on the coaches ... they've become obsessed with having Malcolm Perry play QB. He may have insane lighting speed but he cannot run the true triple option as they intend it to be run. And he's been hurt at least 2x this year + had to come back in on Saturday after getting knocked out by a spear AFTER Lewis hurt his knee / ankle.

As for the coaches ... Jasper said he prepared for 2 weeks only for an odd front from Air Force as that's what they have always done and when Air Force came out in an even front it took them totally by surprise. For a guy like Jasper that is shocking to me.

http://www.capitalgazette.com/sports/na ... story.html

Abey ran the option pretty well, move him back to QB, keep Lewis as the backup, move Perry to SB ... and I have no idea who their 3rd string option is if either Abey or Lewis goes down
0 x


User avatar
ARMORMAN
New Recruit
Posts: 133
Joined: December 2016
x 2
x 24
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by ARMORMAN » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:05 am

I love our scheme. It's perfect for our culture. Smash-mouth, on the ground, in-your-face, no-nonsense, no-frills football. It's like a good grunt unit. They are "grounded" in the fundamentals as well. March to the sound of the guns. Then take it to 'em. Cover, move, shoot. Don't get cute, just execute. Perfect for us.

Having said that, I think I understand Jasper's infatuation with a QB-dominated option: He's got a guy who can break it on any play, and when the QB keeps on a called sweep, he's got an extra blocker in the slot. I don't recommend it. Perry's too fragile and the scheme is too predictable. But I understand my enemy.

I could be wrong, somebody chime in here (P&D):
I think we've evolved into more of a "double option", instead of triple. That is, when the B back carries (can we go back to the term "fullback" please!), I think it's basically a play that's called in the huddle. The QB is not "reading" the inside defense. He's committed to handing off to our B back. The "option" only comes if the QB is carrying off-tackle and either keeps or pitches to the slot. If I'm right, then I think further that the motivation for this evolution is to cut down on turnovers. The old "triple option" involved the QB reading the interior defense and then either handing it off to the B back, or keeping it himself. That "mesh", which is what it's called, is very tough to execute perfectly in a split-second. The B back may see enough of a hole to think he should get the ball, so he's grabbing for it. The QB "sees" differently, so he's pulling it. Result: Fumble. Or vice-versa, with same result: Fumble. Remember Steelman and first-down at the squid 12 yard line under 2 minutes when we lost his senior year? He and the fullback fumbled he mesh.

In a "read option" offense, you can option the B back, because he lines up further back and both he and the QB have an extra second or two to "ride" the mesh, and decide if there's a hole there or not.....

In our offense, contrarily, we rarely fumble on the QB/FB mesh, and I think that's because it ain't an option anymore. It's a called play, and we just challenge the MOB to get enough of a push to get us at least 3 yards, even when there's no apparent "hole".
Last edited by ARMORMAN on Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

Constant69
New Recruit
Posts: 2
Joined: October 2018
x 6
Contact:

Has Coach Niumatalolo retired in place?

Post by Constant69 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:18 am

Just an impression. Seems to have lost some fire.
0 x

User avatar
DoubleOvertime99
New Recruit
Posts: 243
Joined: December 2016
x 40
x 19
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by DoubleOvertime99 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:33 am

ARMORMAN wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:05 am
I love our scheme. It's perfect for our culture. Smash-mouth, on the ground, in-your-face, no-nonsense, no-frills football. It's like a good grunt unit. They are "grounded" in the fundamentals as well. March to the sound of the guns. Then take it to 'em. Cover, move, shoot. Don't get cute, just execute. Perfect for us.
+1

When this offense is rolling they literally bludgeon the defense into submission.
0 x

prairie
New Recruit
Posts: 143
Joined: December 2016
x 30
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by prairie » Mon Oct 08, 2018 12:29 pm

ARMORMAN wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:05 am

I think we've evolved into more of a "double option", instead of triple. That is, when the B back carries (can we go back to the term "fullback" please!), I think it's basically a play that's called in the huddle. The QB is not "reading" the inside defense. He's committed to handing off to our B back.
This seems like the right take to me. I don’t know which came first, the abundance of FBs that Army can rotate in or the play calling approach that necessitated the roster (2 LBs converted very successfully into FB’s) but it is clear that Brent Davis likes to establish the FB first and foremost. It makes sense that some plays are just going to be a FB dive by design. Davis runs the FB dive ~45% of the game. Out of 30 some odd FB dives in a game, the trade-off between getting stopped for minimal gain and potential fumble from the mesh would make this the smart approach.
0 x

Armyfan
New Recruit
Posts: 97
Joined: December 2016
x 4
Contact:

Re: Air Force vs Navy

Post by Armyfan » Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:17 pm

Navy also has 3 QB's and that adds up to none.
0 x


Post Reply Previous topicNext topic