Category: army-navy

Opposite Day

On By MikeIn army-navy, navy football5 Comments

The recurring theme for Navy football in 2007 has been the dominance of the offense coupled with the struggles of the defense and special teams. In the one-game season that is the Army-Navy game, however, the opposite was true. Navy’s defense turned in its best performance of the year, and perhaps the best performance in the Paul Johnson era, as Navy thumped Army 38-3. As you’ve no doubt heard, the win is Navy’s 6th in a row over Army, the first time in the 108-year old series that one team has been able to string that many victories together. That Navy won by 35 is no surprise, given the recent history of the rivalry. How they won, though, was.

Do you remember the 2005 Army-Navy Game? The Mids got off to a slow start in that game, too. Army actually took a 3-0 lead into the 2nd quarter, having kicked a field goal with 26 seconds left at the end of the 1st. On the next drive, though, Reggie Campbell took a pitch from Lamar Owens at midfield and blasted past the entire Army defense on the way to the end zone. The speed difference was so obvious between the two teams on that play that, despite the slow start, I knew that there was no way Army was going to win. The speed difference was amplified on the first play of the 4th quarter, as Adam Ballard– a fullback, remember– outran Army’s defensive backs on a 67-yard touchdown run of his own. On Saturday, as I watched Zerbin Singleton pull away from the Army secondary on his 38-yard touchdown run, I had the same feeling that I did in 2005. It’s an article of faith for Army fans that their players are just like Navy’s, and that if they ran the option they’d be just as good. It isn’t true. Navy is better, and it isn’t just the offense. Winning the game by 35 points, even when the offense had its least productive day of the season, tells us something.

During practice last week, Buddy Green had a message for his players. Play well against Army, he said, and people will forget the rest of the season. The defense responded. Navy  gave up a scant 217 yards of offense and forced two fumbles. The stat of the day was Army converting only 1 of 12 3rd-down opportunities. Of Navy’s 38 points, 24 were set up by the defense or special teams. Reggie had a 98-yard kickoff return. Shun White ran in a toss sweep for a TD after Michael Walsh forced a fumble that was recovered by Irv Spencer inside the Army 10 yard line. A blocked punt in the 4th quarter gave Navy the ball inside the Army 10 again, and set up Jarod Bryant’s 1-yard TD plunge. And Joey Bullen kicked a career-long 51-yard field goal to end the first half, which was set up by a brilliant punt return, again by Reggie Campbell. It was a tremendous performance from the defense and special teams. It feels really good to be able to say that, too, after the criticism (however justified) that those units have received all year.

I’m trying to decide where this defensive performance ranks among others during Buddy Green’s tenure as defensive coordinator. I really think it’s #1. There have been other memorable games for the defense; shutting out Tulsa in 2004, the big plays in the Emerald Bowl, the Stanford & Temple games last year, putting the clamps on Rice a couple of times… But I think this one was better. First, it’s the biggest game of the year. Yes, Army’s offense isn’t good, but it’s still the Army-Navy Game. This is still the one that matters the most. Second, unlike most of those other games, the offense didn’t have a great day. It was the defense that carried the team. The only other game among those I listed where you can say that is the 14-13 win over Rice in 2004. But this was done on the big stage, in the most important game. That’s what sets it apart for me.

So what was it with the offense anyway? Did they just have a bad day, or has John Mumford solved the puzzle of PJ’s offense? I watched the game again yesterday trying to figure out what Army did, and I really couldn’t see anything unusual schematically. Army did do two things that really slowed the running game down. They shed blocks as well as any team we’ve faced this year. They also had their safeties overcommit to the run. I mean really commit. Jordan Murray had 16 tackles. Usually, seeing that would be an invitation for PJ to throw it over their heads. But with the weather being what it was– cold and windy– and the defense playing as well as they were, I think Coach Johnson just decided not to bother with it. PJ said after the game that the weather wasn’t very conducive to passing, and Kaipo only had 5 attempts on the day. Only one of those attempts was a real home run swing. As lights-out as the defense was, I think PJ figured the only way that Army would get into the game was if they generated some turnovers. Throwing the ball on a windy day like that would have made turnovers a real possibility, so he just played things close to the vest. The good news is that Navy walked out of there with a dominating win, and didn’t have to put anything special on film to do it.

A disturbing backstory to the game was the conduct of some Army players on the field. You might have read this article from Bill Wagner where Adam Ballard talks about guys twisting his legs at the bottom of the pile. Other than seeing Adam get up angrily after a few tackles, that was hard to see on TV. What wasn’t hard to see, though, was Jeremy Trimble’s hit on Ram Vela after Army’s first play from scrimmage. Do you remember when Virginia tackle Brad Butler took a shot at Boston College DE Mathias Kiwanuka a couple of years ago? It looked like that; a shot at Vela’s knees from behind & to the side, and after the play was over. I have never wished to have my computer fixed as much as I do right now, just so I could capture the video and show it to you. If you recorded the game, look at the bottom of the screen on Army’s first play. It might be the dirtiest play in the history of the Army-Navy Game. Not that it’s a series known for dirty plays or anything, but that just makes it more shameful. Seriously, watch the tape. This isn’t hyperbole.

But no amount of shadiness was going to put Army over the top on Saturday. In the end, Navy sang their alma mater last, conducted by a seemingly reluctant Reggie Campbell. Hearing the Brigade chant his name, and more or less force him to the conductor’s podium, is a memory that I will never forget from this game. To see the Brigade connect with a player like that, and the team as a whole, is something that would have been almost unimaginable when I was at USNA. It’s a change for the better.

Birddog Game Balls

— Reggie Campbell: Duh. But really, how much are we going to miss Reggie? What a special player. He is now second only to Napoleon McCallum among Navy’s all-time leaders in all-purpose yardage. Think about that for a second.

— Michael Walsh: No player has improved more over the course of the season than Michael Walsh. He had yet another solid game against Army, with 8 tackles (2 for a loss) and a forced fumble that would set up a touchdown. Walsh has become Navy’s best defensive lineman. He’s only a junior, too.

— Joey Bullen: Death. Taxes. Huge Joey Bullen field goals in big games. It’s science.

PJ Is Annoyed

On By MikeIn army-navy, navy football, Paul Johnson8 Comments

I told you about Stan Brock’s comments regarding Paul Johnson’s offense, and how I think that they provide a little extra motivation this week (not that you need much additional motivation for Army-Navy). Other than running the option, the other hot topic in Army football is scheduling. Both Brock and AD Kevin Anderson have said repeatedly that they need to change their scheduling to mirror Navy’s, to the point where it’s starting to sound like they think the schedule is the only reason why Navy’s been any better than Army over the last 5 years. Apparently, PJ is sick of hearing about it:

Johnson sounds off on scheduling

Army’s football scheduling is a hot topic these days.

Army athletic director Kevin Anderson has said he would like to model Army’s schedule after Navy’s.

Here’s Navy coach Paul Johnson’s take on scheduling:

“I don’t know what’s the difference in our schedules is now,” Johnson said. “Can somebody point it out to me? What’s the difference? We played Rutgers, Pitt, Wake Forest,
Notre Dame and Duke. Which five BCS schools did they play?

I replied “Boston College, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, and Rutgers…

Johnson says, “And?”

“They played four. We played five. They played teams in the MAC. We played teams in the MAC. They played Air Force. We played Air Force.
They played Rhode Island. We played Delaware. So what’s the difference?

The difference maybe isn’t in the schedule but in the systems and coaching.

You got that right.

In other news, don’t miss Bill Wagner’s update on Kaipo’s health on his blog. Also, while the Poinsettia Bowl is locked up this year, Navy still doesn’t have a deal in place for a bowl game next year. There are a few things in the works, though, as Christian Swezey tells us that the proposed D.C. bowl game is still a possibility. It could use a better name, though.

Army Week

On By MikeIn army-navy, navy football6 Comments

It’s that time of year! It is time for the game of games. Time for the last bastion of true amateurism in major college football. Time for the greatest rivalry of them all.  It’s time for the Army-Navy Game.

There really is nothing like it. Every school has its rivalry games, and those fans all think theirs is the best. But are they any different than every other rivalry? We hate you, you hate us, blah blah blah. Let’s be real here. You have these state schools with 30,000 students. How many of them never set foot in the football stadium? How many don’t really care about the “big game?” At Army and Navy, it’s different. Every one of the 4,000 students at each school is at the game. And the moment those 8,000 students take their first step onto the grounds of West Point or Annapolis, they let out their first of countless “Beat Army” or “Beat Navy” yells. At some schools, you can go all 4 (or 5 or 6) years without having anything to do with their rivalry if you wanted to. That’s impossible to do at Army or Navy. Hell, not only is Navy’s fight song all about beating Army, but we yell “Beat Army!” at the end of our alma mater. Beating Army is at the heart of the Naval Academy experience. If that doesn’t take the cake, I don’t know what would. There was a lot of talk before the Notre Dame game, as there is every year, about how some players say that they want to beat Notre Dame even more than they want to beat Army. I don’t doubt it, at least at the time they say it. I wouldn’t be surprised if Army’s players felt the same way before their game in South Bend last year. But after the Army-Navy game, when the teams line up for each school’s alma mater, ask the same question– especially to the team who sings first. There won’t be any doubt then.

Army week has supposedly been put on hold at USNA as this mideast peace conference takes place. I guess we don’t want to set off an international incident by doing a wildman on some Palestinian diplomat. West Point doesn’t have the fetters of world peace with which to be burdened, however. Their antics are apparently in full swing as a Youtube slideshow shows that they have either stolen Bill or put together a pretty good hoax. Assuming it’s a hoax, I have to tip my cap to the Woops. That’s a level of creativity that we’ve never seen from Hell on the Hudson before, considering that their typical spirit spot consists of some random Army unit gathered around a sign and yelling, “We’re the X platoon in some company in some random part of the country! Go Army! Beat Navy! Hooah!” Hey, the submarine force might be nerds with their animated goats-from-under-the-sea cartoon every year, but at least they’re creative nerds.

(My personal favorite goat-napping came in 1995. The Pentagon told the two schools to back off on the mascot capers in 1991 after a Navy raid to take Army’s mules resulted in two people going to the hospital. Army cadets ignored the order and stole Bill 4 years later. Bill was unguarded because of the mascot-stealing cease-fire, and the Navy SID at the time, Tom Bates, made a great comment about the heist: “We knew Army cadets were involved because they cut through two fences to get to the goats, when 15 feet away there was an unlocked gate.” Priceless.)

Anyway, back to business. As important as that whole peace thing is, I hope it doesn’t hinder football practice. Israel and the rest of the Middle East will still be a powder keg no matter what comes of this conference. But the Army-Navy game? Those are bragging rights that last forever. Priorities, people. And the first priority for Navy is getting Kaipo-Noa Kaheaku-Enhada back on the field. PJ said after practice last Wednesday that Kaipo should be back and ready to go versus Army. Kaipo has a lot of rust to knock off. By the time he takes the field on Saturday, it will have been three weeks since he played. He also missed a week of practice. He’ll need to be at 100% for Paul Johnson to be able to unleash the kind of game that I think he wants to. You might have seen this quote from Army head coach Stan Brock:

“I don’t think a 100-percent triple option is the answer,” Brock said. “If it was, Navy would be national champions because there’s nobody that runs it better than Navy, nobody. …

“There’s a lot of positive things that are part of that offense and some other things, you have to be able to do when the situation arrives,” Brock said. “You have to be a well-rounded offense.”

At first, it seems like Brock is trying to be complimentary. And he is, in a way. He says that Navy is well-coached. Fine… but it isn’t his point. What he’s really saying is that Paul Johnson’s offense has limitations. That it can’t win at the highest level. That it holds Navy back. Bad move, Stan. The last time we heard something like this it was from UConn coach Randy Edsall, who made a few comments after the 2002 game that hinted that maybe he had “solved” PJ’s offense. When the two went against each other 4 years later, Navy piled on 605 yards of offense in a 41-17 win. I don’t think anything motivates Paul Johnson more than when someone gives his offense a backhanded compliment. Brock might as well have told a yo momma joke.

Motivational hoopla aside, Army probably feels as if this is the best shot they’ve had to knock off Navy in a few years. Kaipo might not be at 100%, and the Black Knights’ defense played a pretty decent game against him last year. Kaipo did have a bit of a deer-in-the-headlights look about him in the 2006 game, but in case his crowd-pumping at the Notre Dame game didn’t tell you, that isn’t really an issue this year. That doesn’t mean he’ll be sharp after sitting for so long, though. And to top it all off, the much maligned Army offense is coming off of its best performance of the season.

Army is 115th in the country in total offense, averaging a meager 280 yards per game. Against Tulsa, though, the Black Knights came alive to the tune of 491 yards and 39 points. Quarterback Carson Williams was 26 of 38 through the air for 328 yards and 3 touchdowns. The primary beneficiary of Williams’ performance was wide receiver Jeremy Trimble, who caught 11 of those passes for 167 yards and two touchdowns. Even the Army running game managed to almost double its usual output, churning out 163 yards. One look at that performance and Army fans have to be wondering where the hell that offense had been all year.

I’m not sure what the answer is. I have a guess, though. The strength of Army’s team this year is its defense. Their strategy has been to play conservatively on offense and limit mistakes, using their defense to keep games close and hoping to pull out close ones in the 4th quarter. It worked in a few games. That’s how Army beat Rhode Island and Tulane, and they played tough contests with Akron and Wake Forest. They also managed to hang with Georgia Tech for a half, and defense & special teams were what won the Temple game. But for the most part, Army’s offense was so conservative that they ended up with a bunch of 3 & outs that kept their defense on the field too long. They would get tired, and the game would slip away. After a 3-3 start, Army’s defense has worn down and given up at least 30 points in each game of the Black Knights’ current 5-game losing streak.

When Tulsa rolled into Michie Stadium two Saturdays ago, I think Stan Brock felt he had to try something different. With his defense reeling and the #1 offense in I-A coming to town, Brock probably didn’t feel like he could stop the Golden Hurricane. My guess is that he figured his best bet would be to turn the offense loose and try to outscore them. And it worked better than just about anyone could have hoped. Army’s usual offensive game consists of passes to the flats and running between the tackles, with stud fullback Mike Viti leading the way. Against Tulsa, Army came out with a completely different look. They stretched the field, both vertically and sideline-to-sideline. Trimble was able to finally use his speed on something other than a kickoff return, bringing in a 57-yard reception and a 35-yard TD catch. Army’s running game was a lot more horizontal, as the offensive line did a good job with zone blocking on “stretch” plays.

Army defensive coordinator John Mumford has gone with a 4-4 scheme against Navy each year since he was promoted to the position in 2004. In 2004 and 2005, it resulted in 42 points apiece for the Mids. Last year Army played much better, but Kaipo also had his worst game since taking over as starting quarterback. The Woops went after the then-sophomore in much the same way that Rutgers did earlier in the year. But Kaipo is not the same quarterback he was that day. It will be interesting to see if Mumford takes the same approach. My guess is that he will, and I think he will pay for it.

So what does it all mean? Navy shouldn’t have much of a problem moving the ball, but Army does have a legitimate I-A defense. If Kaipo is shaky after his time off, Army is good enough to capitalize and force turnovers. Execution is the key to the game for the Navy offense. As for Army, it really all comes down to how Stan Brock sees this game. Navy is second only to Tulsa in total offense among Army’s opponents this year. Does Brock recognize this and choose to open up his own offense the way he did against Tulsa? Will Jeremy Trimble be cut loose in the Navy secondary? If so, it could be a very interesting game. On the other hand, if Brock has confidence in his defense after the way they performed last year, and if he really feels that Navy’s offense isn’t “well-rounded” enough to be a threat, then we might see the same conservative game out of the Army offense that we’ve seen all year. And if that happens, then Navy will have the first 6-game winning streak in the history of the Army-Navy series.

Here’s hoping it happens. Beat Army!

Loose Change

On By MikeIn air farce, army-navy, bowls, conference talk, football, going pro, lacrosse, naval academy, navy basketball, navy football, navy lacrosse, patriot league, Paul Johnson, recruiting, usnaLeave a comment

Lots of chatter popping up in the last couple of days:

  • In the “ignorance is bliss” category, we have PJ’s Monday presser. Talk about a list of things you wish you didn’t know… Kaipo’s in a neck brace, none of the punters are consistent, the secondary’s all hurt, and Greg Thrasher is in PJ’s doghouse. Yeesh. I guess there’s a silver lining in that Rashawn King is recovering well from his shoulder injury, but anyone who didn’t like PJ’s media day optimism can feel better knowing that it’s back to business as usual.
  • Navy will once again be an NCAA lacrosse tournament quarterfinal host this year. The ability to host events like these were a big reason why Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium made the switch to FieldTurf, so it’s nice to see that move pay off. It’ll be nicer if it’s a Navy home game this year.
  • The unending football conference affiliation talk resumed as Chet talked to Ron Snyder about the difficulties of finding bowl games as an independent. Conference membership means a lot more than bowl game access, though. I still don’t think that this will happen anytime soon, if at all.
  • Navy’s been sold out of Army-Navy tickets for a while. Now Army is too. If you want tickets, looks like you’ll be headed to Stubhub or eBay.
  • Scout.com’s Temple site previews Navy (subscription required). For those without a subscription, it’s very complimentary, saying that Navy “might be the second-toughest team on the schedule.” In case you’re wondering, Temple plays Penn State this year.
  • Some Air Force Academy grad wants to play pro baseball. I don’t really care that much as long as this doesn’t become a habit; the Air Force will do what it thinks is best for itself. But will people PLEASE stop comparing every scrub that wants to turn pro to David Robinson? By the time Robinson played his first game in San Antonio, he had already been an Olympic medalist, a Naismith Award winner, a Wooden Award winner, on the cover of Sports Illustrated, and led Navy to the Elite Eight in the NCAA tournament. That is a far, far cry from being one of thousands of players struggling to find a place in minor league baseball. Robinson is one of the best players in the history of his sport. Karl Bolt is not. It makes a difference when the Navy or Air Force is considering an athlete’s fate.
  • Bill Wagner offers a look at college recruiting, including Billy Lange’s approach.
  • ESPN.com talks Patriot League basketball as part of their “Shoot Around” series.

I’m Not Crazy

On By MikeIn army-navy, bowls, football, lacrosse, navy football13 Comments

OK, maybe I really did hear Chet say something about playing Maryland again in 2010. The Examiner talks about that, plus Army-Navy and an update on a Baltimore bowl game, here. Clearly, Navy football is a centerpiece of Baltimore’s future plans.

I might be sane, but the same can’t be said for everyone on the internet. This is why drinking and blogging don’t mix, kids. Don’t let it happen to you. (The A-minus in academics is a nice touch.)

Speaking of Independence…

On By MikeIn army-navy, conference talk, football, navy football, Paul Johnson7 Comments

Remember in the second Austin Powers movie, when Austin goes back in time and lands in the middle of a party at his apartment? There’s a woman there who was sent by Dr. Evil to kill him. She ends up getting stabbed. And shot. And hit with a bazooka. And dropped out of a window. Each time something happens to her, though, she keeps talking. “You can’t win, Powers!” Irritated, Austin Powers finally exclaims, “Why won’t you die?!”

That line pretty much sums up my feelings whenever I see a story about Navy joining a conference for football. I guess people don’t like seeing independents out there; everyone seems to have their own favorite pie-in-the-sky conference realignment master plan. Over the last four or five years I think I’ve read speculation of Navy joining the MAC, Conference USA, Big East, ACC (lol), and, after a mystery meeting at BWI, forming its own conference of “academic” football schools. The talk never seems to go away; it really is the never-ending story. It’s popped up again this week, courtesy of Mitch Vingle and the Charleston Gazette.

Of all the conference rumors, the ones involving the Big East are the most persistent. I wrote two years ago why I think that joining a conference is a bad idea for Navy. My opinion hasn’t changed, so I won’t rehash all that. But the Big East is a special case. The Big East only has 8 football schools, meaning that their conference schedules are unbalanced. A ninth football-playing member would allow each Big East school to play four home and four away games each year. That means that those athletic directors would only need to find three out-of-conference home games to fill each year to get to seven, which everyone wants in a 12-game season. So while other conference rumors come and go, Big East talk sticks around.

I don’t know if this latest chatter is something that the Big East is seriously considering or just the ramblings of a local sportswriter, but it isn’t a new idea. Basically, Army and Navy would split a “membership,” with each team playing four Big East games. This would solve the conference’s scheduling problem. As a fringe benefit, they’d get to slap a Big East logo on the field at the Army-Navy game and add a couple of teams in the Big East’s geographic footprint who at least have name recognition, even if they aren’t powerhouses. That’s all nice, but these rumors always talk about how great it would be for the Big East. Nobody seems to want to talk about it from Army or Navy’s point of view.

While I’m against conference membership in general, I wouldn’t discount this possibility too quickly. It’s important to know what exactly constitutes “membership.” Is it really a membership, or just a scheduling agreement? There’s a huge difference if you’re talking about what good this arrangement would do Army and Navy. There are a couple of things that both schools would have to get out of this deal if it’s going to be taken seriously. As with anything, money is the top priority. If Army and Navy were to have a split Big East membership, does that mean that they’d split a share of the conference’s BCS money, too? People say that Army is in no rush to join another conference after their Conference USA disaster, but if the rumors of their athletic department’s debt are true then BCS money might be enough to change their tune. Bowl game access is also important. Would Army and Navy be eligible for consideration by Big East-affiliated bowl games? Without those two concessions (at the very least), this alignment wouldn’t be worth it to the two service academies.

And there’s the problem; with those two concessions, it wouldn’t be worth it to the Big East. The whole reason that schools want seven home games is for the money. Right now, Big East schools split their BCS take 8 ways. Does the ease of scheduling 7 home games make it worth splitting BCS money 9 ways? I doubt it. As for bowl game access, with the arrangement that they already have with Notre Dame I doubt that Big East ADs are in any rush to add another chance for one of their bowl games to pick someone else.

Navy isn’t in the financial dire straits that Army allegedly is, but it’s still prudent to listen when money-making opportunities present themselves. If this “membership” is just a scheduling arrangement, though, then forget it. There’s no reason to obligate ourselves to Big East scheduling whims when we could just go out and get home & home series individually. Even a bona fide split “membership” probably isn’t worth it. Navy showed last year that it was plenty capable of grabbing Big East bowl bids on its own, and the Big East won’t offer enough money to make it worth being relegated to “half-member” status. Money is valuable, but not as much as self-determination. It isn’t like it’s some great privilege just to have any association with the Big East.

One last thing to remember is that it’s important to consider the long-term effects. Navy right now could probably be competitive in the Big East. There is one reason for that: Paul Johnson. Once Coach Johnson is gone, then what? Playing in the Big East might sound appealing to some people now, but it isn’t something that we want to be stuck with in the long term.

I actually have a soft spot for the Big East. Schools like Pittsburgh and Syracuse were on Navy schedules for generations, and there would be a nostalgic appeal to seeing those schools as regulars on Navy schedules once again. Nostalgia isn’t enough, though. Nobody has presented a convincing argument for why Navy should sign up for any kind of Big East “membership.” Until someone does, it’s best to let the idea fade away in a Charleston newspaper. Having four fewer games to schedule isn’t reason enough.

What Makes a Rivalry?

On By MikeIn army-navy, football, navy football3 Comments

The folks over at Rivals are killing time during the summer by talking about college football rivalries. Army-Navy gets a mention, predictably, in their poll of what rivalry has “fallen” the farthest. The correct answer is Pitt-Penn State, which isn’t even listed on the poll. I mean, they don’t play anymore. Pretty hard to fall any farther than that.

Now, I understand what the poll is asking and why Army-Navy would be on there. Everyone knows that the game isn’t the epicenter of the national championship picture anymore, so I have no problem with that. I get annoyed, though, when I hear people talking about how not having BCS implications somehow diminishes the rivalry. Nothing could be further from the truth. While media talking heads and college football fans pay lip service to the history and tradition of Army-Navy, fewer and fewer of them rank the game among their “best” rivalries. Is a rivalry only as good as the teams who play in it? Or is there more to it?

When people talk Army-Navy, the same themes are repeated every year. Plenty of military pagentry and patriotic fervor to go around, pretty much to the point of cliché. At the risk of sounding ungrateful, I actually get sick of hearing about that stuff. Yes, we know that there will be marching and fly-bys and cannons blasting. Yes, we know that these players will go on to serve in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. The problem is that these things are played up so much that the rivalry’s other merits are almost forgotten. There’s a whole lot more that makes Army-Navy stand out.

To begin with, Army-Navy isn’t just about football. There are a lot of “trendy” rivalries out there, where two teams happen to be good at the same time. Miami-Florida State fits this mold. There really isn’t much history between them, and they might not even be considered rivals in any other sport. But in football, both teams have been in the national championship picture for most of the recent past. Sprinkle in a few exciting games, and apparently that’s enough for most fans to make it a rivalry for the ages. I don’t buy that.

I don’t mean to harp on Florida State and Miami, because I really don’t have anything against that game or its fans. The point I’m trying to make is that it isn’t the rivalry that makes it good. It’s just a game with two powerhouse teams that people want to watch. Other than the fact that it’s an annual contest, is it any different than the Ohio State-Texas series that we had the last couple of years? Not really, from the perspective of the average fan. And that’s the problem. When blogs and message board motormouths and media types make these lists, they aren’t looking at the nature of the rivalry. They’re simply listing games that they’d like to watch because of their national impact. That’s fine, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the rivalry, the relationship between the schools. The best rivalries are games where the passion of the teams and their fans are the same whether they are undefeated or winless. When rivalry bragging rights are more important than a national championship, that’s what makes for a good rivalry.

There aren’t that many games out there that fit the bill. There are several games where it seems like schools are rivals simply because their campuses are close to each other, or because X vs. X State is “supposed” to be a rivalry. That’s all fun, but there are games where the rivalry means a little more. Games like Williams-Amherst, Wabash-DePauw, and Harvard-Yale, where it’s more than just football. The very nature of the schools themselves are what make them rivals. Winning the football game isn’t just a stepping stone on the way to a conference championship. It’s almost proof that your school’s way of life is superior. That, to me, is what makes for a rivalry.

Army-Navy is one of those games. From the indoctrination of incoming freshmen to the yell after the alma mater sung by the oldest grad, the importance of beating your rival is part of the fabric of academy life. Yet there’s something about Army-Navy that sets it apart from even those other storied contests– a national following. The most common misconception from fans and the media about the Army-Navy game is that it lacks national appeal. That’s hogwash. I think that some college football fans forget that there is a world outside of their own blog and ESPN-fueled consciousness. Maybe the hype-lovers looking for the next big matchup overlook Army-Navy, but the TV-watching public hasn’t. Army-Navy has been televised on national network TV every year for more than half a century. Think about that for a second. Both Army and Navy put some lousy football teams on the field for more than a few of those years, yet people still watched. If Michigan and Ohio State were both 2-9 going into their finale, do you think ABC would still be broadcasting it all over the country? If Alabama and Auburn had two wins between them, would anyone care about that game? Hell no. But Army and Navy have both had far too many seasons like those, and the game is still on the air. That doesn’t happen without national appeal. Fourteen cities from Seattle to Miami don’t place a bid to host a game without national appeal. Most people have a rooting interest whether or not they have anything individually to do with the schools themselves. Everyone has an uncle or grandfather that served in some branch of the military represented on the Army-Navy field. That makes people care about who wins, even if they aren’t really college football fans.

Army-Navy is the nation’s rivalry, not just the schools’. That makes the game unique in the world of college football.

eBay Scavenger Hunt, Vol. 2

On By MikeIn army-navy, ebay, navy football, videoLeave a comment

If you’re like me and love collecting old Navy football footage, this item will catch your eye.  This auction is for highlights from the 1954 Army-Navy game, captured on 16mm film. The 27-20 Navy win is widely considered one of the best games in series history. Navy entered the game with the nation’s top-ranked defense. Army entered the game having won 7 in a row and featuring the country’s top offense. Red Blaik vs. Eddie Erdelatz. Don Holleder vs. George Welsh & Ron Beagle. Navy’s “Team Named Desire” went on to shut out Ole Miss in the Sugar Bowl, 21-0. Truly a classic game with some great teams.

There are services that will convert 16mm film to DVD, in case you were wondering.