The last 5 years, I've taken the under, and it's cashed in each time. I see this year's game has it set at 56 1/2. Kinda high for both teams running the option mostly. Another Under for this game?
-
-
was just about to post the same thing...lol. 8 of the last 10 between these 2 went under this total. 7 of the last 10 went under the posted total. last 3 games for each team have been under this total. navy run d hasn't been bad lately. the only way i see it going over is if army run d stinks and they get blasted. they only gave up 24 to airforce this year tho...and i think that is about as fair of a comparison as you will find. has to be the under if you play it imo. looks sweet...so either it is kind of missed like usual, or the books gonna collect from all of us one last time before bowls...lol.Comment -
The issue here, at least in terms of finding a feel for the over/under, is knowing what state Trent Steelman is at right now. I too ran with the under last year, as I did when Navy matched up with Paul Johnson disciple, Todd Monken, and Georgia Southern last season. I believe it was about 14-7, or so. Familiarity breeds audible anticipation here, regardless what tweeks are put in the flexbone.
The 'if-then' check progression put into the flexbone family can vary greatly, but the quarterback needs to thrive off of adrenaline. Kriss Proctor and Steelman are the ideal candidates to get their respective squads over 4 touchdowns each here in my opinion.
Navy has one of the most experienced and largest offensive lines even seen from a service academy. They also have a lot of unnoticed talent on offense: Josh Howell and Alex Teich, at A-back and B-back respectively, could've taken higher D-1 offers; Proctor has elite long-speed in terms of collegiate QBs.
Army's defense is not working well with Rich Ellerson's double-flex scheme, as the 'off' players are not flowing quickly enough to achieve what Ellerson is expecting from his DTs. This scheme is theoretically ideal in its ability to flow correctly and stop the triple option, but the talent isn't there - even against other academies.
Each teams' defensive efficiency is really, really bad on a per-play defense.
I think that Navy, if they put away such offensive mistakes as made in the Rutgers and San Jose State games, can put up 45-plus quite easily on this Army defense.
If Steelman returns, he, Malcom Brown, Larry Dixon, and athletic-rarity, Jared Hassin, can pose a similar strain on Navy's extremely vanilla 3-3 stack with their reinterpretation of the actual wishbone (at times).
These offenses are not as similar as some would assume. Long story short: I may look to take the over at '56', hoping for an unrestrained, reckless game plan from each team that eschews field position and field goals for the kill shot.Comment -
solid write-up, Shabadoo. was leaning under but you're making me re-evaluate a bit. BOL to you this weekend and thanks for sharing your insight on Army-Navy, sounds as if you really understand these teams and how them match-up schematically. i know one thing: i'll be watching. Army-Navy is must-see every year.Comment -
Was leaning Under a couple of days ago, but, if Steelman plays then Army +7 is the way to go.Comment