(11-18-2020 08:47 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 05:12 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 04:14 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 11:56 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 11:32 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  Tulane>Navy

Let me elaborate...

Tulane is 5-4 overall while Navy is 3-4. Navy was beaten in their OOC games 55-3 and 40-7. Tulane is 3-0 OOC and while you may say Tulane played an easier OOC schedule Army and USAFA are comparable and Tulane beat Army 38-12. Navy lost to USAFA 40-7(and a week later USAFA lost to San Jose State.) In conference both teams lost to Houston by 16 and 18 points so that is even. However, Navy beat Temple 31-29, Tulane beat them 38-3. Navy beat ECU by 4; Tulane beat ECU by 17. Navy lost to SMU by 14. Tulane lost to SMU by 3 in overtime.

All of this points to Tulane being a better team. The obvious point is Navy beat Tulane 27-24. Yes it matters, but does it overcome all of the above. Does a head-to-head 3 point win mean that much?

It is also worth considering the current Tulane QB who did not play in the Navy game has lead them to scoring more than 30 points in all seven games since. While this sounds like I am saying "if and but" what I am actually doing is explaining why the argument made above fits into place.

(11-17-2020 12:20 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I watched Tulane v. Navy. Congrats to Navy for winning, but I still don't know how they did. Watching the game I thought Tulane was a better team by a good margin. That was a steal for Navy. Had to be unbelievably frustrating for Tulane fans.

It was a tale of two halves. Tulane looked like the better team early, and then Navy looked like the better team by a good margin.
- Navy started a true freshman QB - in hindsight, not the best plan, but that accounted for the first 10+ minutes of gametime
- Not going to apologize that Niumat made the right coaching call and Fritz didn't
- Morris wasn't immediately effective, but...
- The Navy Defense absolutely killed it to keep Navy in the game. INT right before the half. Then four straight three and outs and the safety and it was a whole new 24-16 ballgame. Was that helped by Howard being 1 for 6 in that stretch? Sure, but he was pressured too. AND the Tulane rushing attack that averaged 6 ypc over the game, had 10 yds on 7 carries in that same stretch. Spears averaged 6.6 ypc on the game and 1.6 ypc (8 yds on 5 carries) in those four possessions.

As far as Poseidon's other points...
- Half of Army's 6 wins are vs FCS schools. The three FBS teams they've beaten are a combined 5-11. We have NO idea how Army and AF compare
- context of no contact all fall camp for that BYU beatdown?
- and Air Force, as of the Navy AF game, was looking at a two game season: when the mwc initially cancelled, AF kept the two CiC games. AF did nothing but prepare for Navy for eight weeks. Helped them against us and hurt them against SJSU (who are now 4-0) and Boise.

I know I know, sounds like a lot of woulda-coulda-shoulda from me...(except it's not, because we WON the Tulane game and ARE 3-2 in the AAC standings)

Look I am more inclined to excuse your loss to BYU who looks like a pretty good football team and Navy's preparation or lack there of. USAFA is far less excusable, yes they had time to prepare, but you could just a as easily argue that they were disadvantaged in that it was USAFA's first game and it was Navy's third.

I am rating Tulane better than Navy not saying they are ahead of them in the standings. If we were talking about standings then everyone would have the same answer. We are talking about subjective assertions based on objective observations.
The Tulane Navy game was a razor thin decision decided on a walk off field goal.
Tulane disproportionate margin victory over common opponents and closer loss to SMU in another razor thin game is evidence of something in Tulane's favor couple that with not being blown out and instead winning out of conference add another chit to Tulane's side.

My initial reply included "I might question those who put Tulane ahead of Navy...but whatever." To expand - I really do understand if someone is saying "with the qb change Tulane is a different team now." That's a legitimate position. Whether it's a qb change, or a qb's development, or injuries, or key players returning from injuries, teams change week to week. And Navy is a different team from week three also - we're just so inconsistent week to week I have no idea what that really means.

When I am doing rankings or ratings, I am always going to go by resume not roster. Navy should be #11 by the "walking off the bus" test, this year and every year since we've joined the conference. But I don't like eye tests in this stuff. Another Navy point, don't hold close wins against us - one score wins is kind of what we do, a lot, just by our DNA: minimize your possessions, be efficient on ours, D do enough to trade TDs for FGs a couple times maybe, and then run out the clock.
By mid-November, you are who your record says you are. Navy having the edge in standings AND head-to-head is enough for me.

The title of the thread is rate the AAC not rate the AAC and OOC opponents. I kept it simple. Memphis beat UCF so I put them ahead of UCF. Navy beat Tulane so I put put them ahead of Tulane. My assessment is through this week on league play. JMO.
There will be a final assessment at season end when all is said and done in this continually running thread in this ever evolving Covid season. Therefore I will stick with this weeks evaluation going forth until next week.