Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 51
  1. #1

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845

    Army Navy game...wow that game is special to our country!

    If the conferences go to 20 with 4 divisions of 5...count me in for wanting Army and Navy in the ACC.

    Great institutions, great academics and one heck of a football tradition.

    I just think that would be awesome for the ACC and awesome for those institutions, but maybe that is just me.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Location
    Blacksburg
    Posts
    4,404
    It's not just you. Me too!
    Last edited by laphroaig; Sat Dec 14 2013 at 03:49 PM.

  3. #3
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    I'm seeing two teams less athletic than Wake Forest.
    You can bring them in to fill out to twenty, but I don't see them ever above .500 in-conference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stech View Post
    If the conferences go to 20 with 4 divisions of 5...count me in for wanting Army and Navy in the ACC.

    Great institutions, great academics and one heck of a football tradition.

    I just think that would be awesome for the ACC and awesome for those institutions, but maybe that is just me.
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    January 29, 2000
    Posts
    2,895

    I have respect for the schools, but disagree.

    Those guys are playing by a whole set of extra rules that the rest of the schools' players don't have to do. Just the physical fitness requirements, one of which is a run of at least a mile in a certain amount of time, would guarantee that they don't have a "normal" (normal meaning "freakishly large") offensive line.

    They just aren't built to compete, nor should they be.

  5. #5
    No, neither Army nor Navy has a place in the ACC. Not unless, as noted, the conference gets really, really big. Which I don't want to happen.

    I respect the hell out of both schools and their young servicepeople. I respect their football players, and what they have to do in their daily lives. That doesn't mean their football is even at an old Big East level. And, as noted above, it shouldn't be. They have more important things to do.

    I've been to an Army-Navy game. The football sucks. The audience, while largely made up of servicepeople that I respect greatly, are not a good college football audience. They don't have that college football "thing" that makes college football great. There's not the same level of continuity as football fans: like I said, they're a little too busy with more important things. There's no coordinated (and NOBODY TAUGHT US!!!) kickoff stomp/hand motion, there's no automatic give-and-response with tens of thousands of people involved, nothing. Which is fine, because Army and Navy (again) have more important things to do. But that means the football, in person, sucks.

    Don't get me wrong (and already, someone has written an angry post without reading this far): going to the game was GREAT. It was cold, it was miserable, my friends and I were in the horrible lower section of FedEx, our view sucked, the football sucked, the crowd didn't have a good handle on how to act at a college football game, and it was still something that I will remember forever. Because it was Army-Navy, dammit, and it was great to be there.

    But the truth is that Army-Navy is one of those things that isn't necessarily pleasant at the time to be at. It's one of those things you want to have done. Yes, there were several thrilling, awesome "Wow!" moments with the marching of the Corps of Cadets and the Brigade of Midshipmen, the teams singing their songs at the end of the game in front of their respective Corps/Brigade, etc., and I'm glad to have done it. But it's a very different beast from going to an SEC game, to the Cocktail Party, to Bedlam, to the Civil War, to the Red River Shootou... errrr... Rivalry.

    IT'S NOT COLLEGE FOOTBALL. It is an exercise in patriotism, and it is wonderful as such. But treating Army and Navy as college football is like treating the Marine Corps Ball as a dining experience. The food probably sucks because everyone's going to be under-the-table tanked in a few hours, and it's about putting on the fancy mess dress uni and impressing the ladies. Which is, I have to expect and respect, something that any Marine would gladly smile and say "Yup!" to if they're being honest.

    Wanting to bring Army and/or Navy into the ACC is mixing your focus. The focus is having a sports conference with great sports, excellent academics, that makes a lot of money for the conference members. Army and Navy do not contribute to #1 on that list, and that's #1 for a reason.

    Listening to JD Howell and CC on the podcasted interview they do every week, they justifiably complain a bit about how the All ACC Team is chosen on sloppy criteria. Ditto for the NCAA Bball tournament. Well, here we all are, choosing teams for the ACC on sloppy criteria. We're thinking of picking up Army and Navy because they're, well, Army and Navy.

    They wouldn't contribute to the athletics. That makes them a "no". IMO, that makes them a "no" even if we took on a school like UCF or ECU. Those schools at least have the theoretical potential to become much, much better. Navy right now is an example of a service school hitting near its max potential. That isn't worth taking on board.

  6. #6
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Stech View Post
    If the conferences go to 20 with 4 divisions of 5...count me in for wanting Army and Navy in the ACC.

    Great institutions, great academics and one heck of a football tradition.

    I just think that would be awesome for the ACC and awesome for those institutions, but maybe that is just me.
    I have a great amount of respect for the military academies. My brother graduated from West Point. I watched the Army-Navy game every year. I just think all the other colleges have an advantage over them since the military academy undergrads also have military obligations to deal with.

    Army and Navy should join Notre Dame and BYU as football Independents. I think both schools would struggle in most of the sports the ACC sponsors. Army and Navy would be best served playing Olympic sports in the Patriot League and being football Independents. I think Navy is making a mistake going to the AAC (American). Army tried CUSA (today's AAC) and bailed out because it was tough on their player's academic and military obligations. Navy has better athletes than Army ( their 11 game winning streak proves that) and has shown that they can play with the "big boys" but how would they do playing the "big boys" more than 4 or 5 times a season?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    January 27, 2001
    Posts
    1,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Shut Up Brent View Post
    The football sucks.
    I agree with you that Army and Navy wouldn't be a good fit in the ACC competitively. However, I would have to disagree that "the football sucks", as you mentioned several times. If you mean that there are better players in major conference football, that's true, but then you would also have to conclude that major college football teams suck too since the NFL has accumulated the elite players and any college team is going to pale in comparison to the talent you can see on the field on a Sunday. I happen to prefer college football to the NFL for reasons other than the talent of the players on the field. For similar reasons, I love watching Army and Navy play football (even against other opponents. I love watching the wingbone offenses of which they each currently run a variation. There aren't too many other televised teams that I can watch run those unique and interesting offenses. I particularly love watching those offenses on television because, unlike most offenses that more heavily incorporate passing, I can actually see all of the reads and all of the action taking place. If I watch a Virginia Tech game on television, there are a significant number of reads and amount of action that take place off of the viewing screen (option routes, defensive coverage reactions post-snap, etc). With a wingbone type of offense, I can see much more of the action unfold. I also enjoy watching the blocking schemes used in an option offense. Part of that is understanding what they're trying to accomplish and how they're trying to accomplish it. The one drawback to watching those types of offenses on television is that there aren't many broadcasters that have a strong understanding of option principles (not that they run exclusively option football). Listening to Gary Danielson on CBS trying to dissect option plays can be painful (although sometimes amusing).

    I have been to an Army/Navy game at Lincoln Financial and, while you're right that it's a different crowd than you would get at a Virginia Tech home game, I would say that it's similar to most neutral site games I've been to, such as bowl games or early season games. Home games always have a different feel for a crowd.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    I have a great amount of respect for the military academies. My brother graduated from West Point. I watched the Army-Navy game every year. I just think all the other colleges have an advantage over them since the military academy undergrads also have military obligations to deal with.

    Army and Navy should join Notre Dame and BYU as football Independents. I think both schools would struggle in most of the sports the ACC sponsors. Army and Navy would be best served playing Olympic sports in the Patriot League and being football Independents. I think Navy is making a mistake going to the AAC (American). Army tried CUSA (today's AAC) and bailed out because it was tough on their player's academic and military obligations. Navy has better athletes than Army ( their 11 game winning streak proves that) and has shown that they can play with the "big boys" but how would they do playing the "big boys" more than 4 or 5 times a season?
    Would you put the MWC on par with the ACC or C-USA? I ask that because a lot people seem to think that Army and Navy should remain Independent in football because of their "military requirements." However, I have noticed that Air Force is seldom included in the discussion (maybe even forgotten) and they have the same "military requirements." If Army and Navy should remain Independent, then why should or shouldn't Air Force become an Independent too?

  9. #9
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    Air Force hasn't won a WAC/MWC conference championship since the 1998. Since then, Air Force has not had a 10 win season, or won even a division title. The MWC is closer to CUSA/AAC than it is to the ACC. No MWC programs can put athletes on the field like Clemson or FSU. AirForce is a good competitive and geographic fit for the MWC, and Army and Navy would be good competitive geographic fits for conerences a rung or two below the ACC.


    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    Would you put the MWC on par with the ACC or C-USA? I ask that because a lot people seem to think that Army and Navy should remain Independent in football because of their "military requirements." However, I have noticed that Air Force is seldom included in the discussion (maybe even forgotten) and they have the same "military requirements." If Army and Navy should remain Independent, then why should or shouldn't Air Force become an Independent too?
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by PadrosWindup View Post
    Air Force hasn't won a WAC/MWC conference championship since the 1998. Since then, Air Force has not had a 10 win season, or won even a division title. The MWC is closer to CUSA/AAC than it is to the ACC. No MWC programs can put athletes on the field like Clemson or FSU. AirForce is a good competitive and geographic fit for the MWC, and Army and Navy would be good competitive geographic fits for conerences a rung or two below the ACC.
    The only reason I bring up Air Force is because the fate of all 3 academies will always be connected. If it is decided that Army and Navy will be included with the Power 5 conferences, then Air Force will have to be included too. The Commander-in-Chief Trophy is too important for the schools to allow the competition for it to cross subdivisions. In addition, DoD realizes the value that sports gives the military in terms of free advertising. The DoD will not allow either 1/3 or 2/3 of the branches gain a competitive advantage over the other branches that are affiliated with the school or schools that decided not to join the Power 5 subdivision/division (however it all shakes out). The advertisement I am talking about is not specifically for the academy per se, but for the military branch. For example, the Army's enlisted enrollment went up as a result of its decision to sponsor of the various professional drag racing leagues (i.e. funny cars, pro stock, motorcycles, etc). A similar result occurs anytime Air Force, Army, or Navy appear on national or regional TV for a collegiate sporting event.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •