All apologies to loyal Birddog readers today. Monday is when I’m supposed to post my OMG awesome game breakdown, but it’s going to be a little late this week. I usually prepare it on Sunday, but a small bit of family drama kept that from happening yesterday. No worries, though; after a diligent neighborhood sign-posting campaign, we did in fact find the owner of the big black German Shepherd that wandered into our backyard on Saturday afternoon. With this being a quasi-bye week, there shouldn’t be a problem with the weekly routine if I slide a day or two.

Maybe it’s for the best, anyway. It isn’t like any of you are interested in breaking down the game right now. No, the topic on everyone’s mind is quarterbacks, and it’d probably be a waste of time to address anything else. You guys wouldn’t pay any attention to it. So let’s look at some things that have been said so far:

“I would have to say its now time to give the kid the start. He not only brought the crowd to its feet but also gave the D some newfound spirit and life and led what may have been the most impressive comeback in many years.”

“I don’t have as much fear of mistakes when he is in… I know ones gut is not always correct, but I have to say that I now have a ‘Good, Dobbs is in.’ reaction when I see him play.”

“In college ball, where each player has a four year window and lineups change year to year, how much time do you spend trying to coach out potential before you go in another direction? Jarod is not a long term investment. 1 more year and he is done, gone. How fair is it to the rest of the program. He should be dominating by now. It’s not as if he is surounded by untalented players. He should be making better decisions. Fakes and Playaction should be more sharp. And under no circumstances should a defensive player crawl on hands and knees right in front of his eyes for five feet and record a sack without the option quarterback on the number 1 rushing offense in the country take one step to avoid the sack. It would not hurt at this point to give Ricky the ball and show us what he can do in a real game as the Navy QB.”

“Who looks more confident?
Who looks and runs stronger?
Whos pitches looked better?
Who looked in control?”

“I still don’t understand why Ricky can’t start and show us what he can do. …It comes down to who you think is the better QB. To me, it seems that Ricky has better instincts and is more “crisp.” Even though Jarod has been doing well, I would not second guess a Dobbs start if only to assess what we have. If he doesn’t do well against a defense with fresh legs and Jarod comes in in the second quarter and tears it up, I would consider the issue resolved and Jarod should get all the starts. It just seems that you are totally sold that Jarod is the better QB and 100% against giving Dobbs a start.”

Don’t bother sifting through the haiku thread. You won’t find those comments. Those things were said last year; swap out Jarod and Ricky with Kaipo and Jarod:

https://thebirddog.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/game-week-duke/

https://thebirddog.wordpress.com/2007/09/24/navy-outlasts-duke/

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

It sure does. And that’s just what was written here back in the infancy of this blog. It was the same elsewhere, and it had been that way since Kaipo took over for Brian Hampton the year before. “He gives the team a spark! He comes from a good high school program! He just knows how to win! He’s a better passer than Kaipo! What more do we need to see? If only Jarod would just get his chance.” Etcetera, etcetera. All the same platitudes you see now. People saw what happened when Jarod came in late in games, ran a package of plays specifically designed for him, and led the team on improbable comebacks. What happened in practice didn’t matter; Jarod was making it happen at game time. If you didn’t see it, then you were just being too loyal!

My point here is not that Jarod Bryant should be starting at quarterback instead of Ricky Dobbs. Indeed, the offense under Bryant this year has struggled far more than it ever did under Kaipo in ’06 and ’07, although people apparently thought that the offense was a real bucket of suck at the time. Hell, I was Jarod Bryant’s biggest critic then, just as I was earlier this year. Jarod struggled against Notre Dame too, especially in the counter option (which I’m sure the A-backs will tell you). There’s no doubt that Ricky has tools we’re all excited to see (don’t quote that out of context please), and if he starts, then great. I don’t have a problem with that, and frankly I had to bite my tongue to keep from calling for it after the Air Force game.

My problem isn’t with the idea that Ricky is a better option right now. My problem is with the arguments that people are using to support this conclusion. Maybe Ricky is the better choice than Jarod, maybe not. But some people are seeing what they want to see, which only serves to pile unreasonable expectations on Ricky. 

It’s hard, but try to separate yourself from the emotion of such a crazy game and look at what actually happened. Saying “if Ricky starts, we win the game” is, frankly, crap. Dobbs came in at the end of the third quarter against Notre Dame’s first-teamers and promptly started going three & out just like Jarod did. Once Notre Dame put in their backups, then Ricky was able to put a drive together. But even that wasn’t really a drive; it was a 4-yard run, a pass to Tyree, a 15 yard penalty, and a pitch to Shun. That’s it. And all against a second string defense playing prevent. That, plus the pass to Tyree on the next posession, does not erase what happened when Dobbs was facing the same conditions Jarod did. Just like we aren’t able to go an entire game against a competent defense running the special packages called for Jarod last year, the Mids aren’t going to win by throwing for 300 yards and running nothing but quarterback keepers with Ricky in there. You may not want to hear it, but practice matters. 

This isn’t meant to take anything away from Ricky. Actually, this is more of a preemptive defense. I say this in the hopes that there are some of you who aren’t already too far gone to be objective, and who might be able to reevaluate a few things. People are treating Ricky like he’s the savior of the offense, which is only going to set him up for failure. Putting Ricky in won’t make the tackles more experienced. It won’t make the perimeter blocking any better. And he won’t magically understand the offense better than he does in practice. When the “change the quarterback” panacea falls through, then what? Fire the coaches? You might think that’s ridiculous, but grumbling about the coaching staff has already begun. Bad game plans! Change the play calling! Yeah, OK.

I expect Ricky to start next Tuesday. Hopefully he’s awesome. If not, then brace for the meltdown.

The first half defense,
it was a sight to behold.
But that’s about it

College football isn’t exactly the land of originality. When you think about it, you have the same storylines playing out each season. Some coaches are on the hot seat, while others are rebuilding. Some teams are lucky, while others are “fighting through adversity.” Some teams get labeled as contenders, while others are labeled as frauds. Last year’s losses become this year’s “revenge.” It’s all quite predictable, actually, which is probably why I find myself gravitating more and more to local coverage of each school rather than reading national newspapers and watching ESPN. More news, less cliche.

Anyway, back to this idea of revenge. I’ve never really understood the concept, at least as far as how it gets applied to college football upsets. Team A beats Team B, so Team B is out for revenge the next year? What, did Team A perpetrate some great injustice by actually trying to win? How dare they! Isn’t winning the whole point of all this hullabaloo? Herm Edwards told me that one time; something about how YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. Herm is wise man, even if he isn’t the most successful coach in the NFL. So maybe if Navy didn’t just beat Notre Dame last year, but also tore down the goalposts, kicked the leprechaun in the face, and had Bill the Goat eat all the grass in one end zone and poop it out in the other… Maybe then vengeance would be called for. Until then, it’s just a team doing what it’s supposed to do. When an underdog wins, it isn’t revenge that the favorite seeks. It’s redemption. Indeed, tomorrow Notre Dame will be looking to redeem themselves after last year’s upset at the hands of Navy.

Navy fans, of course, are looking for an encore. I knew I would see the Mids beat Notre Dame eventually, but a year later it’s still a little surreal. Notre Dame week used to be all about the unending talk of the streak and 1963 and the streak and Roger Staubach and the streak. That’s gone now, but I still find myself annoyed. You know the scene in Apollo 13, where TV news crews want to set up equipment on the Lovells’ lawn? Marilyn Lovell’s reaction is basically, “oh, NOW they care.” That’s sort of Notre Dame week in a nutshell. Local TV crews show up to Navy practice, and national newspapers start writing about Navy and their “wishbone” offense and how unusual it is blah blah blah. Now that there’s no streak to talk about, this kind of stuff sticks out more. But hey, that’s one of the reasons why Navy plays Notre Dame; the national coverage it generates– however trite– is good for the program. So I guess I gotta suck it up.

Moving back to things that are predictable, the natural follow-on story the year after a team ends a long losing streak is how the underdog wants to prove that it wasn’t a fluke. Navy fans won’t want to hear it, but in a lot of ways it was a fluke. Think of the perfect storm of things that came together for a Navy win last year. This was the worst Notre Dame team in ages. Their offense had struggled to move the ball all year, and couldn’t decide on which quarterback to start. Their kicker couldn’t make anything longer than an extra point, stopping the Irish on otherwise reasonable chances to score on three drives. While Notre Dame’s defense was respectable, Navy had its best offensive line in decades and a quarterback that graded out at 97%; he literally was almost perfect. But even that wasn’t enough; the Mids had to score a defensive touchdown, too. And even all of that was only good enough to get the game into overtime. Now, this doesn’t mean that Navy was undeserving, or that they weren’t the better team. It’s just that you need to respect everything that went into that win. The result of the game wasn’t a fluke, but the circumstances that made that result possible were clearly out of the ordinary.

The question, then, is how much those circumstances have changed this year, and it appears to be quite a bit. Notre Dame is a better team than they were in 2007. Despite being shut out last week against Boston College, the Irish offense is still gaining 375 yards per game. That’s more than 130 ypg better than their 119th-ranked offense in 2007. A big reason for the improvement is the development of quarterback Jimmy Clausen. The oft-mocked golden boy of Notre Dame’s 2006 recruiting class struggled in his freshman campaign, splitting time with Evan Sharpley (the starter vs. Navy last year). This year, however, he is clearly a more competent player. Clausen threw for 347 yards against Stanford and 383 against then-ranked North Carolina in a close 29-24 loss. Clausen already has four games with 3 or more passing touchdowns, including the 4OT loss to Pitt two weeks ago. Helping his cause are a pair of emerging young wide receivers, Golden Tate and Michael Floyd, who combine for 10 catches and 160 yards per game. Now, does Notre Dame’s schedule have anything to do with their improvement? Absolutely, at least statistically. But you’d be foolish to dismiss their progress as nothing more than favorable scheduling, especially since the Mids haven’t forced Notre Dame to punt since the last election year– even with the terrible Irish offense in 2007.

On the Navy side, all eyes are on the quarterbacks. Senior Jarod Bryant will be getting the start, having sufficiently recovered from the shoulder injury he suffered against SMU. Bryant’s start is not without controversy, as sophomore Ricky Dobbs has directed the Navy offense to victories against SMU and Temple. But no matter who Coach Niumatalolo chose to start, that guy would have some pretty big shoes to fill. Kaipo’s near-perfect game against Notre Dame last year was the key ingredient in Navy’s victory. This year, Navy’s offense will be under even more pressure to keep pace. The coaches believe that Bryant, who Niumat said had a “winning grade” against Pitt and was on his way to a great game against SMU, has the best shot at replicating something close to Kaipo’s performance. No pressure! Then again, quarterback might not be the biggest position change for Navy.

Last year, one of the more celebrated game-planning wrinkles that Paul Johnson incorporated was the use of the tight formation against Notre Dame. It was easy to see the formation, but not everyone understood what exactly the Mids were doing differently out of it. We’ve talked a lot this year about the role of the tackles on triple option plays. On most plays, the tackle tries to run inside of the QB’s give key and block a middle linebacker (Notre Dame lined up with a 5-man front) to keep him from inside-out pursuit. The wide receiver and the A-back block the corner and safety, with each player’s assignment depending on how deep the cornerback lines up. In the tight formation against Notre Dame last year, Paul Johnson changed those blocking assignments:

I apologize if the arrows get confusing, but you can see how different the blocking was. The tackle and the wide receiver basically trade assignments. The wide receiver blocks the linebacker. The tackle releases outside the QB’s read and runs all the way downfield to block the run support safety. The twist in the scheme helped the Mids get to the outside and allowed Reggie Campbell and Shun White combine for 118 yards. Of course, with Jon Tenuta taking over the defense, it’s very possible that Notre Dame will line up differently against Navy this time around. But with the tackles figuring so prominently in Paul Johnson’s game plan last year, one wonders if Ivin Jasper will be able to make similar adjustments given the inconsistency at the position this year. But that’s why they play the game.

It’s weird having the sense that Notre Dame is just a game like any other now. It isn’t, of course; but it’s a lot closer to it with that abominable losing streak no longer hanging over the program. This year the media circus is concentrating less on the streak and more on Charlie Weis assuming playcalling duties. That, and what his fate might be if he loses to Navy again. Hopefully that adds a little pressure to the Domers this year. Because, like always against Notre Dame, Navy can use whatever help it can get.

When I wrote up my impressions of the Temple game, I focused primarily on the defense. With the offense being kept out of the end zone for most of the day, that probably seemed odd. Don’t worry, I didn’t forget about the offense. To really understand what was happening on that side of the ball, I felt like we had to get into the weeds a little bit. Here’s every drive in regulation from last week.

FIRST DRIVE

1. Unbalanced line. Triple option, give to Kettani, gain of 8.
2. Designed handoff to Kettani, fumble. Timeout.
3. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 29. 1st down.
4. Triple option, Kaipo keeps, gain of 9.
5. Designed handoff to Kevin Campbell, gain of 5. 1st down.
6. Triple option, give to Kettani, gain of 4.
7. Toss sweep to Shun White, no gain.
8. Trips formation. Pass to Finnerty, gain of 5.
9. Unbalanced line. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 7, 1st down.
10. Triple option, pitch to Shun White, gain of 9.
11. QB keeper, gain of 1, TD.

The game started out well enough. That’s your typical Navy drive right there; 11 plays, 79 yards. But notice that almost the entire drive, and every triple option play, was run out of the “heavy” formation. We’ve seen a lot of this formation all year. Another formation we’ve seen a lot of is the “tight” formation, where the wide receivers are lined up closer to the tackles. Both of those formations are designed to help block the middle linebacker. In the tight formation, it’s the wide receiver who blocks him. In the unbalanced “heavy” formation we saw here, it’s the extra tackle. So what does that tell us?

It tells us that as critical as Kaipo’s injury has been, losing Andrew McGinn for the season has had almost as much of an impact. In the base spread formation it’s usually the playside tackle’s responsibility to keep the middle linebacker occupied. But the tackle position has been a revolving door for the Mids this season, and getting to that MLB has been a problem. It affects Coach Jasper’s play calling; he felt he had to help the tackles out right from the beginning of this game. Every triple option play was run to the heavy side of the formation. The only plays run to the weak side of the formation were designed handoffs/keepers.

The line problems are also having an effect on some of Niumat’s decision-making, as we’ll see later on.

SECOND DRIVE

1. Unbalanced line. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 1.
2. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 5.
3. Designed handoff to Campbell, gain of 4. 1st down. Timeout.
4. Triple option, pitch to Finnerty. Gain of 13, 1st down.
5. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 7.
6. Midline option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 5, 1st down. End of quarter.
7. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 2.
8. Triple option, give to Kettani. Loss of 1. Clipping penalty, 15 yards. 2nd & 23.
9. Trips formation. Midline option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 6.
10. Base spread formation. Swing pass to Kettani, loss of 7. 4th down.
11. Punt.

This was another typical grind-it-out Navy drive that was motoring along just fine until the 15-yard penalty.

THIRD DRIVE

1. Unbalanced line. Midline option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 1.
2. Triple option, pitch to Shun, loss fo 3. The DE Kaipo was reading didn’t take the fullback; he squatted. Kaipo kept the ball. Both the DE and the LB that was Kaipo’s pitch key went after the quarterback. Kaipo pitched to Shun. Shun had a full head of steam and probably could have outran the inside-out pursuit to the corner, but the WR and slotback mixed up their blocking assignments. Both players went after the run support safety, leaving the cornerback unblocked with a clean shot at Shun. Cory Finnerty saw him coming, but it was too late.
3. Trips formation. Triple option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 1. This was a missed read by Kaipo. The same DE he read on the last play squatted again, and was waiting for the QB to come outside. It forced Kaipo back in, where he had nowhere to run.
4. Punt

FOURTH DRIVE

1. Unbalanced line once again. Midline option, give to Kettani. Gain of 8.
2. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 3. 1st down.
3. Midline option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 6.
4. Triple option, give to Kettani. Gain of 6, 1st down.
5. Trips formation. Pass to Greg Shinego, gain of 21. 1st down.
6. Kaipo spikes the ball to stop the clock.
7. Base spread formation. Triple option, pitch to Doyle. Gain of 24, 1st down.
8. Kaipo spikes the ball to stop the clock.
9. Trips formation. Midline option, Kaipo keeps. The DT that took the fullback was able to bounce back out and keep Kaipo from running up the middle. Timeout.
10. Blocked field goal.

This was a pretty good drive that just ran out of time, and should have ended in points anyway.

FIFTH DRIVE

1. Base spread formation. Counter option, gain of 13. 1st down. There’s no way that Kaipo was at any better than 60-70% for this game, and this play shows us why. The counter was wide open here. A healthy Kaipo would have kicked in those long strides of his–he had plenty of room–and been gone. He just didn’t have the legs to do so in this game.
2. Play-action pass to Tyree Barnes, incomplete.
3. Triple option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 5. You’ll note that the playside tackle went outside of the give key instead of inside like he’s usually supposed to. That’s another blocking adjustment to help the tackle get to the MLB.
4. Trips formation. Designed give to Kettani, gain of 4.
5. Punt.

Having crossed the Navy 40, I was surprised that Niumat didn’t choose to go for it here. After Temple scored a way-too-easy touchdown to open the half, I thought that Niumat wanted to answer immediately. Instead, he opted for the punt. A lot of you have commented about Ivin and Niumat being conservative this year, in part because they haven’t gone for it on 4th down as often. Some, including Niumat himself once or twice, have said that it’s because the defense is improved. They are a little better, but I don’t think that’s the reason. I think Niumat’s a little less trigger-happy on 4th down because he isn’t as confident in the offensive line. We see how Coach Jasper is having to compensate for the loss of McGinn, and we know the offense has been stuffed in short-yardage situations earlier this year (esp. against Ball State and Duke). While I don’t think we should use the 2007 season as our baseline for how often we should go for it on 4th down (those were some pretty unusual circumstances), I do think that this was one situation we would’ve gone for it any other year, too.

The line’s struggles, and the coaches’ subsequent reluctance to go for it on 4th down, might be affecting other elements of the game plan, too. The offense moved the ball on this drive, with 3 rushes for 22 yards. But the incomplete pass meant that averaging 4.5 yards on the next two carries wasn’t enough. Perhaps the reluctance to go for it on 4th & short has also led to a reluctance to throw the ball.

SIXTH DRIVE

1. Base spread formation. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 2.
2. Counter option, Kaipo keeps. Gain of 12, 1st down. Like the last counter option play, a healthy Kaipo would go the distance here. You can really see him try to kick it in gear on this run, but he just can’t do it and comes out of the game.
3. Dobbs in. Unbalanced line. Midline option, Ricky keeps. No gain. This was a missed read by Ricky.
4. Midline option, give to Kettani. Gain of 2. Another missed read. The quarterback keeps on the midline most of the time, which is probably why Ricky kept the ball on the first play. He probably assumed that the DT would play him again on the second play. He didn’t.
5. “Tackle” screen to Tyree Barnes. Gain of 7. Was Tyree even an eligible receiver on that play? I need to get check my rule book.
6. Punt.

Another 4th & 1, but I doubt too many of you wanted to go for it here.

SEVENTH DRIVE

1. Base spread formation. Triple option, give to Kettani. Gain of 7. Ricky makes the right read here.
2. Triple option, Dobbs keeps. Gain of 4, 1st down. This was a missed read, but it’s a read that Kaipo was having trouble with too. The DE turned his shoulders like he was taking the fullback, but instead stepped into the QB’s path. Hard running by Ricky gets the 1st down.
3. Play-action pass, intercepted. Overthrown ball to a well-covered Shun White. Play was kind of doomed from the beginning.

EIGHTH DRIVE

1. Base spread formation. Triple option, give to Kettani. Gain of 8. Ricky makes the right read. He was helped a little by the tackle, who chipped the DE and knocked him away from the fullback.
2. Triple option, pitch to Shun White. Gain of 9, 1st down.
3. Unbalanced line. Play-action, Dobbs scrambles, fumbles out of bounds. Gain of 7.
4. Base spread formation. Counter option, pitch to Shinego, no gain. Right read by Ricky. Blocking was a little rough (A-back & playside tackle both missed blocks).
5. Trips formation. QB draw, gain of 7. 1st down.
6. Unbalanced line. Triple option, give to Kettani. Gain of 6.
7. Midline option, give to Kettani. Gain of 3. Missed read by Ricky, although it worked out with the blitzing linebacker.
8. Midline option, give to Campbell. Gain of 1and a 1st down by the grace of God. Missed read by Ricky.
9. Tight formation. Play-action off the toss sweep. Pass to Kettani in the flat, gain of 15. 1st down. Pretty impressive play by Ricky, throwing off of his back foot with a defender in his face.
10. Drop-back pass, Dobbs to Thiel, touchdown. Nice wheel-post combination routes on the left side.

A good drive under Ricky, although he really seems to struggle with the midline option.

NINTH DRIVE

1. Tight formation. Play-action off the toss sweep, pass complete to Tyree Barnes. Gain of 27, 1st down. If that play looks familiar, it’s the exact same play PJ called at the beginning of the Pitt game last year (that I pointed out in the Pitt preview).
2. Trips formation. Midline option, Ricky keeps, no gain. Another missed read on the midline.
3. Base spread formation. Drop-back pass, complete to Bobby Doyle. Gain of 16, 1st down.
4. Trips formation. Triple option, Dobbs keeps. Gain of 8. Good read by Ricky. A more experienced QB would have faked a pitch there, but that will come with time.
5. QB draw, gain of 5, 1st down.
6. Tight formation. Toss sweep to Shun White, gain of 2.
7. Unbalanced line. Midline option, Dobbs keeps. Gain of 2. This was sort of a midline, I should say. It was a midline designed for Ricky to keep; Kettani would cut the DT if he played the quarterback. The playside tackle couldn’t sustain his block, and it forced Ricky to go in the other direction.
8. Designed handoff to Kettani, gain of 3. Timeout.
9. Trips formation. Fullback option, pitch to Kettani, touchdown. Some have described Ricky’s effort on this play as herculean. I think comparisons to Atlas are more appropriate, considering the size of the DT he was carrying. This was a rare missed block by Anthony Gaskins, who whiffed on the guy that ended up on Ricky’s back. The backside guard pulled to block the DE, while the playside tackle went for the middle linebacker. Fortunately, the linebacker that was supposed to be Ricky’s pitch key got caught up in the mayhem around the quarterback, and Kettani had a path to the end zone. Great play by Ricky to get the pitch off after showing some impressive strength in not going down.

When I first watched the game I kept trying to figure out what Temple was doing to slow the Mids down. But they didn’t really do anything. They had one defensive end that did a pretty good job mixing up what reads he was giving to the quarterback. Other than that, it was a series of Navy mistakes that slowed them down. A penalty here, a missed block there, a missed field goal, incomplete pass, hamstring that just wasn’t ready to go… Nothing groundbreaking, but when strung together they ground the offense to a halt. As we’ve seen many times before, it wasn’t as bad as it looked. But as we see here, it doesn’t have to be to make it a long day.

It’s Election Day. While you scurry off to cast votes for yet another set of politicians promising the world, you know you really want to get to your computer to vote on the real hard-hitting issues of our time. And by that, I mean whatever’s in the Birddog Tuesday Poll.

Last week, the news broke about the Army-Navy Game’s contract renewal with CBS, with the game being moved to the second weekend in December as part of the new agreement. So for the poll question, I asked if you thought it was a good idea. The results are a little surprising to me, as they were pretty much split evenly between those who approve and disapprove of the switch. With Army-Navy being the only game in town again, I figured more of you would be in favor of the move. But it’s clear that a lot of you still have some concerns, whether with the academic calendar or the crunched timeline between Army-Navy and a potential bowl game. Hopefully our fears will be allayed as we learn more.

This week we get to celebrate the Eaglebank Bowl. Having secured our bid to the game, now we watch how things play out in the ACC to determine our opponent. A few weeks into the season it didn’t seem very likely that the conference would have nine bowl-eligible teams, but things have changed quite a bit. Maryland, Georgia Tech, Miami, and UNC all have at least six wins. Florida State is 6-2, but they need one more win to be eligible because they played two I-AA teams. Wake Forest, Boston College, Virginia, and Virginia Tech are also only one win away. That’s nine teams right there. Even Clemson and Duke only need two wins apiece, with both sitting at 4-4. That means the entire conference is pretty much on the table except for N.C. State (sorry GoalieLax). So this week’s question is: who do you want to play?

I won’t reveal my answer yet so as not to sway any votes, but here’s my top 5 for who I DON’T want to play, in order:

1. Wake Forest: Nobody wants a rematch.
2. Duke: Slightly better than Wake Forest because we lost to them the first time around and would get a chance to redeem ourselves. But seriously, nobody wants a rematch.
3. Georgia Tech: Some people desperately want to play Paul Johnson. I don’t understand those people.
4. Boston College: Bowl rematches from two years ago are only slightly better than regular season rematches.
5. Maryland: This is the dream scenario for the game’s organizers and would be a great matchup under different circumstances. If we do play them– unlikely, with the Terps sitting atop the Atlantic division right now– I won’t complain. But having played Maryland a few seasons ago and getting them again in 2010, I think it would be more fun to play someone we otherwise wouldn’t see.

I know a lot of you will disagree about Georgia Tech and Maryland, but that’s why there’s a comments section. Some choices aren’t very realistic, since the teams that travel well will be scooped up by bowls higher in the pecking order. But cast aside the cold fetters of reality for a moment and just vote for your dream scenario.

Unreal.

A week ago, I wrote about the origins of Navy’s offense in the run and shoot. There was no better demonstration of that than the fourth quarter of Saturday’s game. Ricky Dobbs completed 5 of 6 passes for 87 yards and a touchdown in the final period to lead Navy to an improbable 33-27 overtime victory over Temple. Eric Kettani ran for 118 yards and a touchdown, while Temple was led by a career performance from quarterback Adam DiMichele with 340 passing yards and 3 TDs. The win was Navy’s sixth of the season, clinching a berth for the Mids in the Eaglebank Bowl.

Of course, that doesn’t even come close to telling the story of this game. My father is a Redskins fan. The Skins beat the Broncos 42-10 in Super Bowl XXII, and we recorded the game. At least we thought we did. When we went back to look at the tape, the only thing that showed up was the second quarter. My father wasn’t upset: “That was all that mattered anyway.” That’s because Washington overcame a 10-0 first quarter deficit and scored 5 touchdowns in the second. I get the same kind of feeling when watching the fourth quarter of the Temple game. The Owls took a 27-7 lead when running back Kee-ayre Griffin scored with 13:41 to play. After that, it was all Navy, with an assist from Temple coach Al Golden. Ricky Dobbs led two scoring drives in eight minutes, and the Mids pulled within a touchdown with 2:52 to play. After Navy failed to convert on its quasi-onside pooch kick, Temple got the ball with a chance to run out the clock. After converting on 3rd & 5 with less than two minutes left, it appeared that they’d be able to do just that. But rather than take a knee and punt the ball back to Navy with about 10 seconds left and forcing them to go 80-90 yards, Golden decided to keep running the ball. On 3rd & 11, Kee-ayre Griffin fumbled the ball, and Navy’s fastest linebacker, Clint Sovie, recovered and ran 42 yards for a touchdown.

It was a tough break for Golden. It’s easy to rip him for his decision to keep running the ball, and it probably was the wrong decision. But it’s a decision coaches make all the time. Towards the end of the Air Force game, Ken Niumatalolo was faced with a similar situation. Facing 4th & 1 with 57 seconds left to play, Coach Niumat chose to go for it rather than punting or attempting a long field goal. Eric Kettani got the yard he needed, and Navy ran out the clock. When asked about the decision after the game, Niumat said that he didn’t want to put the defense back on the field; he wanted to end the game right there. For him, it worked. For Golden, not so much. Yes, there’s a huge difference between 10 seconds and 50 seconds, so the situations aren’t exactly the same. But the underlying attitude is. If the other team doesn’t get the ball, they can’t score. So let’s try to get a first down and not put the game in their hands. If I was coaching Temple, I probably would’ve taken a knee. But I can still sympathize. Unfortnately for Golden, Navy’s defense has perfected the art of stinking until the end of a game, where they make a huge play that makes all the difference. For all the trite commentary you hear every week about how Navy players never quit, Saturday proved that there’s some truth behind the cliche.

But let’s not let Al Golden off the hook too much. Far more inexcusable, in my opinion, was his decision in overtime to go for it on 4th & goal from the one. Remember when Marty Mornhinweg was head coach of the Detroit Lions and chose to kick off in overtime against Chicago? This was just as bad. I’m not sure if Golden had no respect for Navy’s defense or no faith in his own, but not taking the sure points in overtime is a monumental blunder. You might think that it’s a moot point since Navy scored a touchdown on its possession, but knowing that he only needed a field goal to win affected Ivin Jasper’s playcalling; he could afford to keep things conservative. If Coach Jasper was playing for a TD instead of a field goal, maybe he would’ve thrown a pass or something else that might have been a little more risky. Fourth & goal from the one, open pass play that just didn’t get executed well… *SHUDDER* It brings on flashbacks of the ’95 Army game.

Of course, Navy was fortunate to have been in a position where Al Golden’s decision-making in crucial situations was even a factor. For three quarters, the Mids were horrible. It was really, really depressing to watch the Army-Air Force game and see how well two service academy defenses could play, only to change channels afterwards to watch Temple throw the ball all over the place. Coach Niumat, wearing a microphone on the sideline, said it best: “Come on guys, you’re better than that! These guys haven’t scored on anybody!” And he’s right. Temple’s offense is bad. Hell, they were bad on Saturday too if you only count first and second down. In regulation, Temple was 8 of 14 on third down conversions (not including DiMichele’s fumble in the second quarter after he picked up a first down). The average distance Temple needed on those third downs was 8 yards. The average distance they got? 13 yards! Somehow, the defense has regressed. Against Duke, Rutgers, and Wake Forest, even when the Mids weren’t able to stop the passing game they at least had someone near the ball. That’s just not the case anymore. On 3rd & long, the middle of the field has been ripe for the picking. There has to be an answer.

On the bright side for the defense, the line had their second straight good game. This time it was Matt Nechak who stood out, making six tackles (including two for a loss), a sack, and also being generally disruptive. Nechak was also the victim of the worst non-call for holding that I’ve seen in a really long time. Ross Pospisil and Corey Johnson also combined for 21 tackles and 2 forced fumbles, helping the Mids do a pretty good job against the run with the exception of a drive or two.

I have lots to say about the offense, but I’m going to make that a separate post. It’s a bye week, so it’s not like we don’t have the time. I will say that I don’t think it was as bad as I originally thought, but there are still some significant issues.

But like I said after the Air Force game, an ugly win is still a win. And it was a pretty important win too. With uncertainty about Kaipo’s health and the defense struggling, plus Notre Dame, a midweek game on the road at an improved Northern Illinois team, and a legitimate Army defense left on the schedule, gaining bowl eligibility was no guarantee had the Mids not pulled a rabbit out of their hat. That’s one more team goal accomplished. The big winner in all this is CBS College Sports, who couldn’t have picked a more perfect game to have Niumat carry a microphone. When Wired: Navy Football airs, I’m pretty sure it’s going to be entertaining.

I am standing by
for expert analysis
from navyblue12.

This isn’t how things were supposed to be this year for the Temple Owls.

As Temple followers see things, they have all the pieces they need for a football renaissance falling into place. No longer do the Owls languish in the Big East, nor do they fight the uncertainty of being independent. No, Temple football is in its second season as a member of the MAC, a conference that they feel gives them a better chance to win. And why not? The competition isn’t as difficult as what they faced in the Big East. Philadelphia offers a big-city experience that’s unique in the conference. The team plays at Lincoln Financial Field, a facility that is not on campus, but is still the finest in the MAC. They have advantages now. To maximize these recruiting advantages, Temple went out and hired a young, energetic head coach in Virginia defensive coordinator Al Golden.

Depending on how much stock you put into recruiting rankings, Golden’s efforts on the recruiting trail have paid off. This is his third campaign with Temple, and after two years of bringing in some of the MAC’s most impressive (supposedly) recruiting classes, this is when it was all supposed to start paying off. Temple was 1-11 in their last year as an independent, but last year’s team went 4-4 in the MAC. Twenty-one starters return from that team, and the roster includes 26 juniors and 20 seniors. The time to realize their great potential has arrived!!!

…or not. Things haven’t turned out quite as expected. After going on the road and beating Army to start the season, Temple lost four straight. Now sitting at 3-5, the Owls have little room for error if they want to fight their way back to at least .500. How did it come to this? Having the country’s 118th-ranked offense sure doesn’t help. The Owls average only 251 yards per game of total offense. They have failed to gain 200 total yards in three games this year. Part of Temple’s offensive misery can be attributed to the loss of starting quarterback Adam DiMichele. After missing the last 5 games of 2007 due to injury, the hard-luck story for DiMichele has spilled into 2008. DiMichele had one of the finest performances of his career against Buffalo, throwing for 285 yards and 3 touchdowns while adding another 51 yards on the ground. But the senior didn’t have a chance to follow up that performance; on the first series of Temple’s next game, DiMichele was sacked by Penn State DE Aaron Maybin and suffered a shoulder injury that sidelined him for the next three weeks. Redshirt freshman Chester Stewart struggled to replace him, throwing seven interceptions in four games.

But let’s not deify DiMichele; Temple hasn’t exactly set the world on fire when he’s started, either. Despite having senior leaders in DiMichele and wide receiver Bruce Francis, the Owls can’t move the ball. The revolving door at running back seems to have stopped on freshman Kee-ayre Griffin, who has taken the bulk of the team’s carries over the last three weeks. Griffin had 22 carries for 85 yards and a TD last week against Ohio; easily the best rushing performance for any Temple RB this year, which should tell you something. The offensive line is anchored by as good a center as Navy will see this season, Alex Derenthal. The rest of the line hasn’t played as well. The Owls start two freshmen and a sophomore up front, and while they are definitely huge– Derenthal is the smallest starter at 298 pounds– they haven’t created many holes to run through. They also give up more than two and a half sacks per game. After a dominant performance last week, Nate, Matt, and Jabaree look like they’ll have some favorable matchups again tomorrow.

Even though Temple’s offense has been terrible, they still have a lot to play for. The best teams in the MAC– Ball State, Central Michigan, a rebounding Northern Illinois, and Western Michigan– are all in the West Division. At 2-3, Temple is still right in the thick of things in the East, trailing division-leading Akron by one game in the loss column. A berth in the MAC title game is still a very realistic goal. If Temple gets there, it’ll be on the back of its defense and special teams. The Owls’ scoring defense is ranked in the top 25 nationally, allowing only 18 points per game. Temple leads the country with 29 yards per kickoff return, and ran one back for a touchdown in the season opener against Army. How good are these units? As bad as their offense has been, the amazing thing is that Temple could easily be 5-3 right now. Buffalo needed a hail mary as time expired to steal a 30-28 win over the Owls. Temple took UConn to overtime, losing 12-9 in a game with questionable officiating that was played in a monsoon. At 3-5, people think “same ol’ Temple.” If they were 5-3, perceptions about this team and this defense would be completely different, and Temple football would be hailed as a cinderella story. What a difference two plays makes.

Temple’s defense is good, but if you asked me if they were better than, say, Wake Forest’s, the answer would be no. However, they did do some interesting things against Navy last year.

Determining who the quarterback reads in the triple option isn’t rocket science. If you & I can figure it out, don’t you think that defensive coaches can? And knowing that, shouldn’t they be able to find a way to confuse the quarterback? Well, they do. On a triple option play, the quarterback’s give key is the first player on the line of scrimmage lined up over or outside the B gap; usually a defensive end. The quarterback’s pitch key is the first player lined up either outside the give key, or within 5 yards behind him; usually a linebacker. Since they’re keys for the quarterback to read, both players go unblocked. So what if a defensive coordinator, knowing that both players wouldn’t be blocked, decided to switch things up? What if he sent the linebacker in to take the fullback, and had the defensive end take the quarterback? That’s called a cross charge, and it’s how Al Golden approached the option last year:

Both the playside and middle linebackers are focused on the fullback. The playside tackle’s assignment is the middle linebacker. If the MLB bites on the dive, then the tackle moves on to the next level to block a safety. The defensive end steps out and plays the quarterback. Kaipo reads the DE and pitches to Shun, who rolls for a 20-yard gain. If you’re thinking to yourself that there’s no way a defensive end would be fast enough to cover Kaipo or an A-back, you’re right. Shun averaged 15 yards per carry and led the team with 122 yards. Kaipo added 102 yards and a touchdown. The Mids ran for 361 yards, 268 of them coming from the quarterback and the slotbacks. With the change of assignments, the cross-charge is one of the more difficult reads for the quarterback to make. It’s what Ball State used to stop Jarod Bryant earlier this year. There’s no guarantee that Temple will do the same thing this year, but if they do then it’s a good time for Kaipo to come back to the starting lineup.

(Maybe the interesting thing is not that Temple used the cross charge, but that they never adjusted away from it.)

One thing about the cross charge is that the defensive end had better be disciplined. It’s hard to go unblocked and not charge into the mesh or take the fullback. But when he does that:

With nobody to take the quarterback, Kaipo runs free. It’s almost exactly like Kaipo’s long run in the Air Force game later in the season.

On what has to be the earlist Senior Day in years, everyone is eagerly anticipating Kaipo’s return. Can he run at full speed? Will he be in good enough shape to finish the game? Who knows. But it’s nice to have the team finally back at something reasonably close to full strength for the first time since the beginning of the Wake Forest game. We’re still waiting to see what they’re capable of.