Originally posted on 07/22/2014:

I will preface a bias in that I am practitioner of the flexbone offense, ableit as a high school coordinator. Such a bias, though, stems from an unwavering commitment to the systematic philosophy in obviating huge talent gaps.

Yes, a 5-star, 6’6’’, 280-lb. player is ostensibly more difficult to play against than the average D-1 player, but Paul Johnson’s heretofore protégés run this system because if the quarterback can read his way out at least 70% of the time, a talent disparity is rendered moot. Defensive linemen do not have to be blocked at all play-side if Navy (or any flexbone team’s) most sublime play is run: triple-midline. Across either a 3 or 4-man surface, if triple-midline is run, one interior lineman may only have to be blocked at all.

Now, this dictates a quarterback reading from a (2i) DT out then to the DE back-to-back. It is not an easy read even for players in their fifth year of this system.

The reason that I’m so excited for a potential upset here is that Keenan Reynolds, through my sad amounts of film study, is probably the best under-center, triple-option quarterback that I’ve seen since Kaipo Enhada.

He gets it. He reps it with confidence. He knows that his immediate coach (Ivin Jasper) will always help him out.

That brings me to Coach Jasper, who in my opinion is premiere in all of flexbone praxis. That may not sound really impressive given the sample size of teams, but it’s quite easy to mess this system up quickly and get behind the count, not sticking to the "if-then"methodology even in long-yardage situations where the offense is supposedly off schedule.

I’ve watched countless hours of tape of Paul Johnson, Ivin Jasper, Jeff Monken, Rich Ellerson, and Mike Houston-run offenses. Jasper is the best mind in this respective dynamic. He knows how to achieve the full utility and economy of a team that focuses its offense on such a strategy. He knows just how to return to running triple/triple-midline when there are cloudy/”squat” reads, athletic mismatches against his personnel, and, most importantly, by adjusting blocking assignments play-to-play with beautifully designed tags between the offensive line (particularly the tackles), A-backs, and wide receivers.

I was curious to see how he would respond with Reynolds in the full swing of things against Notre Dame last season, needing to right the ship after 2012’s abortion against The Irish.

I like to grade out flex-teams based on their ineffective offensive plays, and then watch how their respective play-callers react throughout the remainder of a game. Trey Miller was not the man for the job in 2012, but maybe Reynolds was not either at the time in Dublin. Last year, though, he and Coach Jasper executed a masterful gameplan that saw a “pure” gameplan: under 10 passes; triple >40% called plays; zone dive only called when the Mike linebacker scrapes too hard for the pitch when running an accompanying “blood” aimed at taking the B-back and QB away immediately; zone-option when the defense does not match perimeter blockers; rocket toss only called when #2 in the count blitzes for run support; unbalanced fronts only called to have the defense declare strength when running 8-man or 50 fronts.

Navy was back to their 2007/’09/’10 form against Notre Dame defense last season. And I have every bit of confidence that they can scare the shit out of Chris Ash and Luke Fickell this season. As I said, the purpose, utility, and sheer economics of personnel management, recruiting, gameplanning, and talent equalization is only achieved from the flexbone by adherence in scheming to run the veer (standard triple or triple-midline) EVERY PLAY. The constraint plays off of the triple-option are not to be run willy-nilly; they are purposeful. And Coach Jasper is the best at practicing this philosophy.

I believe Reynolds is the likely the best player to ever helm this attack. And I believe this could be Navy’s best offense line ever.

So, yeah, lots of hoo-haw about the Midshipmen offense.


I know Buddy Green is going to run his extreme take on bend-don’t-break, 3-4 defense against the Buckeye offense. And I know it’s not going to look pretty at all.

All that they need, though, even seen in outlier sets of statistical defensive beat-downs (see: v. Notre Dame (’09, ’13), South Carolina (’11), San Jose State (’13)), is the increased chance of turnover/errant plays incumbent on steady execution against a team like Navy that can easily rattle opposing offenses eager to maintain a tit-for-tat scoring response against such an irritating offense.

For what it’s worth (although I’ve said “best” a few times now), Navy is also fielding perhaps its “best” secondary ever as well. At least on paper. Quarters/man-under to pattern-matching from cloud coverage (all 4 defensive backs at 8-10 yards) is the name of the game for Green’s defense. If the field-side players can stay like this formationally, being able to match tO.S.U. half of the time in space then this approach could hold just enough for the potential upset here.


That’s my opinion on the game.

It comes back to my preface: bias; it will lead me to play Navy moneyline here. I hope to get [+1,500]-plus by game time.

I’m gambling, of course, but this game has all of the makings of one of those “what-the-penetrate, moneyline-parlay-teaser-busting” plays. Couple that with Utah State (+220) or so, and you've got a tasty, tasty parlay.


Thank you for your time.