Air Force Football

Houston is playing in a bowl game for the 19th time, going all the way back to 1952, when the program beat Dayton by a score of 26-21. More recently the team has not had much postseason success, losing eight straight bowl games since routing Navy in 1980. In a bowl game for the fourth straight year, the Cougars lost to TCU in last year’s Texas Bowl by a final score of 20-13, moving the team to 7-10-1 in the bowl games overall.

As for the Falcons, they played in this bowl last year against Cal and were on the losing end by a score of 42-36. The loss was the second in a row for the Falcons in bowl appearances, moving the team below .500 at 8-9-1.

These teams met earlier this year for the first time ever, with the Falcons getting a 31-28 win over Houston back on Sept. 13.

5dimes.com oddsmakers currently have the Houston Cougars set as three-point betting odds favorites in this year's Armed Forces Bowl, with the game's over/under posted at 64 total points

Click Here for Air Force vs. Houston Betting Picks
Visit Touthouse.com for more college bowl game predictions

Here are some betting trends to consider for this year's Armed Forces Bowl.

Falcons are 10-2 ATS in their last 12 games following a SU loss of more than 20 points.
Falcons are 12-3 ATS in their last 15 games after allowing more than 450 total yards in their previous game.
Falcons are 4-1 ATS in their last five games as an underdog of 3.5-10.0.
Cougars are 4-9 ATS in their last 13 games after accumulating more than 280 yards passing in their previous game.
Cougars are 2-6 ATS vs. a team with a winning record.
Cougars are 4-12 ATS in their last 16 games overall.

Click Here for Current Armed Forces Bowl Betting Odds

Recruiting ratings don't matter much, just like preseason polls, but a lot of people pay money to see them and the related information. The ratings also can help to show if a coaching staff is moving in the right direction, but that link is tenuous as we will see from some of the points below. 

In any case citing some strange statistics for or against a certain team is a long-standing tradition in college football arguments.

After conducting an analysis of recruiting ratings and comparing them to each team's pre-bowl game rankings, non-BCS schools (particularly those from the Mountain West and Mid Atlantic Conferences) outperformed other schools. 

Teams may outperform their recruiting rankings because they are better judges of talent, they don't get enough credit for selecting student athletes or they are better at coaching players up among other reasons.

The top 20 overachievers and bottom five under performers are noted below, but the full results can be found at Recruiting Vs. Ranking College Football Team Performance

These results where 11 of 20 teams are not in BCS conferences show that the recruiting rating services seem to put too much emphasis on which schools have "offered" a particular recruit when considering that recruit's talent.  There are several reasons (besides talent) for why a recruit may not get offers from major programs:

• Some recruits may decide early and not get attention from other programs.
• Some recruits may stay under the radar, even in this information age.
• Some recruits may have academic or character issues that make them less likely to get scholarship offers, especially when coaches need to consider the NCAA's academic progress report system.
• Some programs don't have the prestige they once had. Recruiting services need to consider this when determining a student athlete's "rating."

That said, the recruiting services can't evaluate a couple thousand recruits to the same degree as most schools.  They have to rely on which schools are giving a recruit a scholarship offer because combined the schools have many more times the number of people evaluating the student athletes.

But the recruiting services need to give more credit to programs that are outside the past few year's top 20.

With that out of the way, there are other possible reasons why some programs overachieved:

• The team might have had one particularly good recruiting class that is relied on more than the others, but counts the same as for other years.  (In the methodology, a junior class counts more than a sophomore or freshman class, but each school's junior class has the same weight in each school's average.)
• The team might have had fewer injuries, transfers or academically ineligible players than others.
• The team may use a unique offensive or defensive system that allows them to compensate for marginal players in some spots.
• The coaches may be much better than average at making adjustments, clock management, etc.
• The coaching staff may be particularly effective in coaching up talent.
• The coaching staff might be a better judge of talent.

Also, keep in mind that a team that consistently has highly rated classes, can't overachieve much because there it can't go much higher.

Top Overachievers

1. Navy
2. Air Force
3. Ball State
4. Cincinnati
5. Boise State
6. Buffalo
7. Utah
8. (tie) Rice
8. (tie) TCU
10. Western Michigan
11. Central Michigan
12. Nevada
13. Brigham Young
14. Georgia Tech
15. Tulsa
16. Northwestern
17. (tie) East Carolina
17. (tie) Florida Atlantic
17. (tie) Wake Forest
20. Northern Illinois

Under-performers (Worst performers first)

While it is naive to believe a team's lack of success can be summed up in just a sentence or two, since it works for the news reporting on the stock market, here goes:

1. Michigan

A new coach with a new system and rumors that many players didn't buy into the system or the coach.

2. Washington

A coach who was seen as a good recruiter, but many felt he couldn't do much with that talent.

3. Texas A&M

Another new head coach, but in this case one who hadn't coached in college for over 10 years.

4. Auburn

A team that brought in a new offensive coordinator to run the spread offense, but when the offense sputtered early the coach was fired part-way into the season.

5. (tie) Washington State

Injuries made another first-year head coach's job difficult.

5. (tie) UCLA

Another new coach trying to turn around a program.  Maybe they had to take a step back to take two steps forward, but time will tell.

Methodology

The ratings (from a couple of popular recruiting web sites) for each year were averaged. Transfers generally aren't included. These could also significantly affect the results, depending on how many players transferred.

Because student athletes are more likely to be key contributors in their later years, the "Recruiting Rating Average" is weighted in favor of older recruiting classes. 4 percent weight is given to the 2008 rating average, 20 percent for 2007, 33 percent for 2006, 33 percent for 2005, and 10% for 2004. These percentages are based on an average of each class's depth chart participation for several teams.

These recruiting rating averages were then rank ordered to assign each team a Recruiting Rating Average so that each team was given a ranking from one to 120.  These rankings were compared to the team's average ranking based on a number of polls and computer results. 

The recruiting ranking average for each team was subtracted from the ranking that the team earned based on the team's games played.  The higher the number, the more the team overachieved.

As the regular season draws to a close, it seems the current head coaches that are off limits for interviews during the regular season are now surfacing for open positions across the country.

Case in point: Troy Calhoun is emerging as a candidate for the Clemson post according to TigerIllustrated.com.

At first blush, most would wonder about an Air Force Academy graduate and current head coach being a fit for Clemson—until you check his resume and do some more digging.

Granted, only coordinators have been reported to be interviewed at this point.  But Coach Calhoun's resume dwarfs any of those known to have interviewed for the Clemson job.

He has experience in the region as offensive coordinator with Wake Forest and has both assistant and coordinator experience in the NFL. Subsequently, he oversaw a two-year reclamation project with his alma mater that was withering quickly under Fisher Deberry: a project that has yielded him a Coach of the Year Award, a 9-4 record in 2007, and his current 8-3 record.

He has done more with less everywhere he has been.

That includes Ohio, Wake Forest, the Houston Texans, and now Air Force.  It begs the question, what could this man do with good (if not great) talent?

Keep in mind, Tommy Bowden's two best recruiting classes were his last two—not the James Davis or CJ Spiller classes.

But does two years with Wake Forest create a tie in terms of recruiting? 

As also reported by TigerIllustrated.com, nearly all of his current assistants at Air Force have ties to the Southeast.  Two graduated and coached at Furman, two are from South Carolina, one is a Charlotte native, and one is from Atlanta.

Billy Napier is currently on the Clemson staff and, while young, he has built a reputation as one of the best young recruiters in the country.

Clay Hendrix, who is the current offensive line coach under Calhoun, coached for 19 years at Furman, during which time he recruited Napier (TigerIllustrated).

It is conjecture at this point, as all of the coaching vacancies are.  But if Calhoun has any interest in seeking another opportunity, is there a better fit for either party?

It doesn't seem so.

Photo by Brian Bahr/Getty Images

There is another part of Air Force's offense that makes them unique to defend: cut blocks. It’s not that the cut blocks are vicious or dirty. It’s just that they take a certain amount of focus to defend to insure that you aren’t left lying on your back as a cadet scurries past you.

When you look up “cut block” in the dictionary, you will find a picture of a 5′10″ white male with a stocky build and decent speed, wearing a blue jersey with a lightning bolt across the chest. Air Forces is so good at using cut blocks that teams need to designate time during the week to teach the proper technique to neutralizing this type of block.

In order to survive a cut block without being upended, you have to first focus only on the blocker. As a defender you tend to look through blockers to see where the ball is going to end up. With Air Force it is crucial that you forget—just for a second—that a ball carrier is running your way, so you can deal with the ankle biter coming your direction.

When the blocker approaches you it will look like he is going to lower his head and block you, but that’s just the type of mistake the cadet is hoping for. In defending the block, the defender has to use his hands. As the block approaches the defender needs to place his hand on the cadet's helmet and shoulder, with knees bent and his inside leg back.

So, if the play is coming from left to right, the defender should have his left foot back. Having your feet correct insures that if a hand isn’t in the totally correct position, the cadet might still miss the defender's legs, and some nasty cadets will roll after they dive at your legs. Having your front leg back will keep the ligaments in your knees tightly in place.

When the defender has his feet, hands, and body in the right position, the defender has to push the cadet’s helmet and shoulder into the ground, while giving up a small amount of ground. Basically the defender absorbs the block, jamming the cadet’s face mask into the ground, and then comes off the block ready to tackle the next 5′10″ 200-lb. cadet flying his direction.

It isn’t that defending the block is difficult, but it takes quite a bit of concentration and practice to do it correctly. Seeing as some of our defenders are young this year, I would expect a few to be lying on their backs on the first couple of series.

It always took me one or two option plays to get used to the speed and look of the cut block, but once you get a feel for it, it becomes easier and easier.

The worst cut block I ever experienced was in Colorado Springs the second time I played them. As Markell mentioned, the safeties have to read the motion and run across the formation to run the “alley,” tackling the “pitch man.”

I was doing just that—watching the ball carrier, mistake number one—and as I approached the ball carrier I saw a flash of blue diving for my knees. Luckily I got my feet off the ground just as the cut block made contact, sending me head over heals. I thought it was an illegal block, but there weren’t any flags on the ground.

I let the referee have it for about three plays after that one, and I think I got a pity call later in the game.

During film on Monday everyone had a good laugh watching me do front flips on the field. The tape was even funnier because of the way I disappeared from sight the moment I was hit.

Moral of the story: Pay attention at all times, keep your eyes in the right spots, and use your hands, not your shoulders, and you’ll be fine.

23 10

New Mexico looked to go ahead 17-0 in a dominant first quarter where New Mexico forced three turnovers, but then Aaron Kirchoff rumbled 96 yards on a fumble return.  This play was one of those game changing plays for a team, and after that it was all Air Force for the rest of the game.

New Mexico actually did a decent job of slowing down Air Force's massive running attack.  The Falcons managed to hold the Falcons to 227 yards which is 90 yards under their per-game average and the Falcons had a 3.3 yards per carry, and limited the big play by allowing a long rush of 14 yards.

New Mexico just rolled over after that 96-yard fumble return for a touchdown.  In the first quarter, New Mexico gained 142 yards in total offense, but only managed 154 yards over the next three quarters.  On the Lobos last seven drives they only averaged 22 yards per possession, but that number is inflated by one drive of 62 yards, and if you take that away the Lobos were getting only 15 yards a possession.

Air Force did the complete opposite after the first quarter, forcing turnovers and shutting down New Mexico Rodney Ferguson to only 40 yards after he gained 67 in the first quarter.  Offensively, the Falcons were decent and not overly spectacular, but when they were given short fields the Falcons took advantage of this and scored points.

This again shows that teams need good quarterback play to be successful in college football. Yes, Air Force only completed one of two passes, but their offense is geared to running the option and quarterback Tim Jefferson ran for 64 yards and manages the pitch on the option.  While New Mexico’s Brad Gruner was so awful in the passing game that coach Rocky Long benched Gruner for Tate Smith, who did not fare much better by going one-for-eight and throwing an interception.

This victory for Air Force made the Falcons bowl eligible for the second straight year under coach Troy Calhoun who is now 15-6 in his two years as Air Force’s coach.

Free Pick: New Mexico @ Air Force o45.0 (-110) Betting Odds - Thursday October 23 ‘08 8:00p
Courtesy of Matt Foust, A professional football handicapper featured on Touthouse.com. If you are betting college football this Saturday and need Winning NCAA Football Picks be sure to Buy Matt Foust’s Expert NCAA Football Picks

The Air Force Falcons will host the New Mexico Lobos tonight at Falcon Stadium in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The two Mountain West foes will do battle coming off of short rest and conference victories. We are going with the over 45 in what will be a ground oriented slug fest.

The Air Force Falcons have one of the best rushing attacks in the nation, averaging 300 yards per game on the ground. Despite their ball control style of play, the Falcons frequently take part in games that get over the total. This season, the over is 4-2 when Air Force has played an FBS school. The game total has been at or over 45 in all of their FBS games with the exception of a 23-3 victory at Wyoming (the Cowboys offense would have difficulty scoring on the Little Sisters of the Poor).

New Mexico, like Air Force, tends to keep things on the ground. They sport a 25.9 point per game average and average 223.1 yards per game on the ground. The over is 5-3 this year in Lobos games, the low totals coming against TCU, BYU, and Wyoming. New Mexico had difficulty moving the ball against the stout defenses of TCU and BYU and they blanked Wyoming 24-0.

Both of these teams feature pretty sound defenses but they are not shut down units. The Falcons triple option attack has been clicking really well this season with freshman quarterback Tim Jefferson running things for Troy Calhoun. New Mexico will have difficulty preparing for what Air Force does given the short rest and the Falcons should be able to move the ball on the ground, especially against an occasionally overly aggressive Lobos front. Look for Air Force to throw in some play action as well as New Mexico has been exploited through the air most of the season (240.8 passing yards per game allowed). Conversely, the Lobos will do some scoring of their own on the Falcons. Lobos’ tailback Rodney Ferguson is the Mountain West’s leading rusher, averaging 108.3 yards per game and 5.0 yards per carry. He will get his share and so will New Mexico as I look for them to at least hit their season average of 26 per game.

Things to consider: The Over is 8-2 in the last 10 games between these two teams. The Over is 4-2 the last five years when the Lobos played as a road dog coming off a game that went over the total. The Over is 7-3 in the Lobos last 10 games as a road dog in the month of October.

Free Pick: Take the Over 45 -110