Air Force vs. Army Preview Article

VirginiaCavs

VirginiaCavs

CTG Super Moderator
Staff member
Air Force vs. Army: NCAAF Week 16 Betting Picks and Game Predictions



Air Force Falcons vs. Army Black Knights
Saturday, December 19, 2020 at 3 p.m. ET (CBSSN) at Michie Stadium in West Point, New York



Army, Air Force, and Navy compete each year for the Commander-in-Chief’s Trophy. This trophy is awarded to the team that wins the overall series with the service academies.

Because Army beat Navy and because Air Force beat Navy — the latter in blowout fashion, by the way — the winner of this game will earn the trophy.

Army’s Bad Situation

Last week, Army played its biggest game of the season against classic rival Navy.

Defensively, Army left everything it had on the field in order to produce goal-line stands at the one yard-line and in general in order to shut out Navy.

It will naturally be difficult for the Black Knights to avoid an emotional letdown after they generated an emotional high last weekend.

While Army was busy with Navy, the Falcons had a week off. So they have had extra time to prepare for the Black Knights.

Motivationally, Air Force has an extra advantage because its players and coaches are well aware of the very disrespectful comments made by Army head coach Jeff Monken.

Monken’s rant that Air Force did not want to play Army is classic bulletin board material.

It’s obviously inaccurate to suggest that the Falcons did not want to face the Black Knights. For starters, Monken actually has a losing record against the Falcons. He is 2-4 in his career against them.

Quarterback Situation

The quarterback situation favors Air Force for two reasons: consistency and overall quality.

Army has been employing multiple different quarterbacks. This variety generates inconsistency at the position, which makes the offense as a whole less reliable.

In contrast, the Falcon offense is solidly in the hands of Haaziq Daniels.

As a passer, Daniels is relatively efficient. Whereas Army’s quarterbacks tend to struggle to complete over 40 percent of their passes, Daniels completes 60 percent.

This disparity in ability explains why the Falcons are able to throw the ball at a higher rate than Army. So Air Force has a stronger second dimension to its triple-option offense.

Playmakers

It’s easier for any quarterback to be more productive when he has a 6-6 target to throw to.

Air Force distinguishes itself with the presence of tight end Kyle Patterson, who had received offers from multiple Power 5 programs, including Alabama.

Patterson is the team’s leading wide receiver because he combines that size with great athletic ability.

The other top playmaker for Air Force is Kadin Remsberg. Remsberg is finally healthy after rushing for 1,000 yards last season.

Remsberg is a weapon especially when running outside the tackles. He is strong and tough to bring down but also elusive. He cuts well while using his blockers to navigate open running lanes.

Army does not have the kind of studs that Air Force has in its passing game and in its running back.

Their presence helps explain why the Falcons post a much tougher test for Army than Navy. Air Force is averaging 11.2 more points per game than Navy because the Falcons possess superior team speed on offense, have a consistent and competent quarterback, and have difference-making playmakers.

Army Offense vs. Air Force Defense

For Army, Tyrell Robinson is supposed to be a key playmaker who can accrue a lot of chunk plays.

But the Freshman has vanished against stronger competition and he’s done very little in more intense games like the one against Navy.

With its nationally 15th-ranked run defense, Air Force certainly qualifies as tough competition.

So Robinson’s shortcomings, plus those of the inefficient passing game, force Army to rely too heavily on low-yardage, grinder-type ball-carriers who are most useful only in short-yardage situations.

Army still has some quicker guys who want to get to the outside. But this much less efficient ground game — that ranks 46 spots behind the Falcons in YPC — won’t challenge Air Force’s consistently strong run defense.

The Verdict

Army will have a tougher time sustaining drives with its dearth of playmakers, with its problems at quarterback, and while facing a strong Air Force run defense.

In addition to its match-up edge, Air Force finds itself in a more positive situation that College Football Oddsmakers are not accounting for.

Feel free to bet the Falcons to win SU or to cover the small spread.

Best Bet: Falcons ML at -140 with Heritage
 
I talked a ton bout this game in the discussion thread already so not gonna rehash all that. Just few thoughts on your write up :)

I do think AF ability to throw/hit the big play in passing game might be the difference. I expect army will be able to put together long drives as they known to do as af 3rd down d isn’t great, but both teams play elite red zone d and against offenses the defenses so familiar with I expect many long drives to fizzle out and end in 3 or even turnover on downs!!

in many ways it hard to take much away from either teams stats. AF has only played 5 games and 2 were against very bad teams. Even the navy game isn’t worth considering much imo as navy improved quite a bit as the season progressed, especially on the defensive side. I don’t think if they played today AF would come close to the 40 they hung in week 5 which was af 1st game and navy 2nd I think? Surely don’t think af would be able to rush for 350+ vs navy today. Similarly and for fairness sake I’m also disregarding the Boise game where af gave up a 50 burger. I don’t think that game has any relevance here, obviously army not capable of doing the things boise did in the passing game. All just leads to very little in way of games to judge af!

army has played many more games with 10 under their belts but again a very weak schedule. 3 against non div 1 teams, then another 2 vs la Monroe and mtsu when they were awful! Just not a lot of good data points imo. It is unusual for army to have to play this game the week after playing navy, in fact I couldn’t find any reference points for any the military schools having to play b2b weeks vs one another! So certainly fair to question what impact that will have but I have a very hard time allowing any type a letdown angle to come into play with these squads as the service academies don’t know words like letdown!! They know words like pride, effort, giving their all, being the best they can be, insert military slogans I don’t know here!! You get the point!! Lol.

ultimately eye test wise I do think af is the better team but not by a lot. Agree with the passing ability could be what separates them. Both defenses are strong and obviously well versed stopping the option! Red zone will be huge!! Gun to my head I lean af as well but dog/under is typically where I prefer to be here. Under 38 the best play on this game imo, they have went under 6 straight with only one game eclipsing this current total!
 
I assume both teams will be very stingy in the red zone so I do think the winner will be determined by which team can hit a cheapy/big play or 2. Think af the more likely to do that so agree with your side. I just love the under more :)
 
Frank Costanza said:
When's the last time Army has had to play the next week after playing Navy? Never?

When you've just played your Super Bowl how can you avoid a some sort of letdown, even a service academy?
Click to expand...

if it has ever happened it been a long time, I couldn’t find a instance where any of them had to play the other 2 b2b.
 
Why don’t marines have a fb team? I’ve always wondered about that? They to busy being trained to be crazy?!? Lol
 
Motivationally, Air Force has an extra advantage because its players and coaches are well aware of the very disrespectful comments made by Army head coach Jeff Monken.

Monken’s rant that Air Force did not want to play Army is classic bulletin board material.

It’s obviously inaccurate to suggest that the Falcons did not want to face the Black Knights. For starters, Monken actually has a losing record against the Falcons. He is 2-4 in his career against them.
Click to expand...

I was not aware of this.

So I went back to read the Monken comments and then looked at the schedule. Air Force was supposed to play Army the week after the Boise game. And if I recall, Air Force did lose their QB to injury in that game. Maybe it was concussion, I'd have to look. Monken mentioned AF not wanting to play because of potential injury.

Now I also want to look back at what that line was for the 11/7 game.
 
Frank Costanza said:
When's the last time Army has had to play the next week after playing Navy? Never?

When you've just played your Super Bowl how can you avoid a some sort of letdown, even a service academy?
Click to expand...

It is going to be difficult mentally, and physically.

One thing to remember, this game will determine the winner of the Commander In Chief Trophy. Beating Navy literally means nothing if they lose this game because the CIC is on the line.
 
Some of that line could be due to QB Daniels. I am not sure what his injury was. Against All Enemies recap of that game said he returned to the sideline with helmet, but did not reenter. I listened to Calhoun's press conference from that week. A couple interesting things I gathered from it. AF wasn't playing it's best football at the time. He was asked twice about the importance of the CIC game and trophy and he declined to directly answer the weight of this game instead answering more in a way of having to get their fundamentals better. It came across odd. I know how big this game is for Air Force, like it is for all 3 academies, the way he choose to answer was odd. They interviewed a player later and he said it was his #1 career goal because AF has it when he was a freshman and lost it and they haven't had it back. He is a senior so last chance. Back to Daniels, Calhoun said in a Tuesday presser that they would know more after Wednesday. We never got the update on Daniels because they announced they had to postpone soon after.

So that original line of 7, a few things. It could have something to do with Daniels status in doubt. Maybe 3 points, but service academy QBs...it's not like the backup was bad vs Boise. Army has played like 6 or 7 QBs this year. I'm not sure a ton of that line would be due to QB question, but maybe some. The other part is that like I said AF was not playing good ball at the time and the line would've reflected that.

Since then, they do have a healthy Daniels. And AF played well vs NMex and Utah St...which they were absolutely expected to do well.

This line for this week opened at pick'em. So somewhere along the way the odds makers made a big correction on the AF side or the Army side. As far as I know, the only negative on the Army side since then is the emotional aspect of this week's game.

I think it's a tough game. The emotional aspect for Army off Navy is really the only thing you can grab on to try and make a case. I know VC has some points in his write up, I'd give a slight edge to AF offense, but Army D is capable vs them and most Os their size they come across. Army is limited offensively...but they always are. Like I said in the other thread, I do think we see a reemergence of the FB for Army. I believe Navy's evolution on defense to be better than that of Air Force, so I think Army has more success on O here.

Again, tough game. You knew that Army was the better team vs Navy...just maybe Navy could find a way maybe because of the circumstances of the game. They didn't. Here, not sure really who the better team is. Road chalk for AF is still weird to me and hard to justify.
 
s--k said:
Some of that line could be due to QB Daniels. I am not sure what his injury was. Against All Enemies recap of that game said he returned to the sideline with helmet, but did not reenter. I listened to Calhoun's press conference from that week. A couple interesting things I gathered from it. AF wasn't playing it's best football at the time. He was asked twice about the importance of the CIC game and trophy and he declined to directly answer the weight of this game instead answering more in a way of having to get their fundamentals better. It came across odd. I know how big this game is for Air Force, like it is for all 3 academies, the way he choose to answer was odd. They interviewed a player later and he said it was his #1 career goal because AF has it when he was a freshman and lost it and they haven't had it back. He is a senior so last chance. Back to Daniels, Calhoun said in a Tuesday presser that they would know more after Wednesday. We never got the update on Daniels because they announced they had to postpone soon after.

So that original line of 7, a few things. It could have something to do with Daniels status in doubt. Maybe 3 points, but service academy QBs...it's not like the backup was bad vs Boise. Army has played like 6 or 7 QBs this year. I'm not sure a ton of that line would be due to QB question, but maybe some. The other part is that like I said AF was not playing good ball at the time and the line would've reflected that.

Since then, they do have a healthy Daniels. And AF played well vs NMex and Utah St...which they were absolutely expected to do well.

This line for this week opened at pick'em. So somewhere along the way the odds makers made a big correction on the AF side or the Army side. As far as I know, the only negative on the Army side since then is the emotional aspect of this week's game.

I think it's a tough game. The emotional aspect for Army off Navy is really the only thing you can grab on to try and make a case. I know VC has some points in his write up, I'd give a slight edge to AF offense, but Army D is capable vs them and most Os their size they come across. Army is limited offensively...but they always are. Like I said in the other thread, I do think we see a reemergence of the FB for Army. I believe Navy's evolution on defense to be better than that of Air Force, so I think Army has more success on O here.

Again, tough game. You knew that Army was the better team vs Navy...just maybe Navy could find a way maybe because of the circumstances of the game. They didn't. Here, not sure really who the better team is. Road chalk for AF is still weird to me and hard to justify.
Click to expand...

every good point made for both sides just makes me think more and more the under the strongest play. As I’ve mentioned I think army having more offensive success doesn’t exactly mean more points as much as long drives that may end in 3 or nothing! I do think army will have the top edge and probably a 1st down edge. I’m starting to sound like a broken record but red zone and who can hit a big play or 2 that scores before they get into the red zone will be the key to determining the winner. I think af more likely to hit the big one early but if army is able to control top maybe they can wear af down and get a big play late!!
 
2daBank said:
every good point made for both sides just makes me think more and more the under the strongest play. As I’ve mentioned I think army having more offensive success doesn’t exactly mean more points as much as long drives that may end in 3 or nothing! I do think army will have the top edge and probably a 1st down edge. I’m starting to sound like a broken record but red zone and who can hit a big play or 2 that scores before they get into the red zone will be the key to determining the winner. I think af more likely to hit the big one early but if army is able to control top maybe they can wear af down and get a big play late!!
Click to expand...

I agree. Offensive success for Army doesn't necessarily mean points, it means yards. I could see the winner with a 20 something next to their name. Could see both teams in the low 20s. 24-20 is still a pretty low scoring game in this era ,but would go over this total.
 
Army scored 15 last week and basically didn't do shit on offense. 2 was the safety, but still. If they can get the same number of point production out of their O that is 13 points. When do team totals come out?
 
This total is now 37.5?

That is the same as the Navy game.

If Army - Navy played again this week the total would be lower, but even just going into the Army - Navy game with the total 37/38 we all knew eveything pointed to the under and how low it was. AF figures to score more than Navy ever would've, but they put up the same total?
 
I'm seeing some AF-3 now. Wow, a 10 point difference from the original matchup.
 
s--k said:
I agree. Offensive success for Army doesn't necessarily mean points, it means yards. I could see the winner with a 20 something next to their name. Could see both teams in the low 20s. 24-20 is still a pretty low scoring game in this era ,but would go over this total.
Click to expand...

i really think 20 the magic number to get the win. Hell it could be 17 as it been the last few. 44 would be the highest total points these 2 have hit in years. Just don’t see it unless both red zone defenses fall off what they done all season!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Blowoutgm's Week 0 & 1 plays!
Replies
8
Views
700
blowoutgm
B
G-Man
****G-Man's College Week 6. Oct 5th-7th*****
Replies
7
Views
575
G-Man
G-Man
Timh
CFB Week 7
Replies
12
Views
798
Timh
Timh
Br@ssknux
Week 8 Writeups and Hopefully Feedback
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Timh
Timh
Tito
CFB - Week 3
Replies
0
Views
185
Tito
Tito
Back
Top