W2W4 - Navy

[JasonB]

I suspect that this is going to be an incredibly frustrating game to watch.

Navy has a very, very good run defense. They swarm to the ball. RL really likes to establish the ability to run, especially between the tackles, and it is going to be difficult sledding. If there was ever a game to come out throwing the ball, this is it. The side to side stuff won't work, however, because of the swarming nature of the defense - SMU is going to have to run some misdirection plays to catch them overpursuing in the wrong direction, and we are going to have to throw the deep ball.

This is going to lend itself to some boom-or-bust offensive series. If I am the Navy DC, I am pretty confident that my front 7 can handle the run. I play 2 deep to take the long pass away down the sidelines and force the SMU slot receiver and TE to beat me over the middle. I might even play 1 deep and just double on Rice's side and force the second receiver to beat me as well. But mostly, force SMU to connect with the slot and TE over the middle and drive down the field, then tighten things up in the redzone where you know SMU can't run and hasn't been able to finish in the redzone.

I can easily see this developing into a game where SMU is constantly behind the chains because of incompletions and short yardage runs, where TM has to make throws to keep drives alive constantly. I think we can do it, but it is imperative that a second WR, the TE, and the slot have big games. We need two of Maryland, Daniels, Goffney, Corrales, Kerley, and Dixon to have big games, because we can't afford to get behind the chains, throw desperation heaves to a double covered Rice, and go 3 and out a bunch.

Defensively, we showed a ton of looks against UCF to try and hold their running game in check. We came out of the base 4-2-5 and ran some 3-4, some 3-3, some 4-4, a little bit of everything. It is notable that Newman played more and played better in that game than he has all season long. Heck, I think we could even see basically a 5 man front at times, with DL, TN, and EC as the 3 linemen up front and Paul and Wiley played as OLBs, and the DEs rotating there. It is tricky because some parts of you want to play a standard defense and stick with it so that everyone fully understands their responsibilities. However, at the same time, once Navy finds a scab, they will pick on it over and over again, so playing multiple defenses makes it harder to find scabs. It is going to be really interesting to see the approach that Symons goes with.

IMHO, it is really important to get the defense playing physically from the start. So, I like teams playing with 4 linemen at the beginning to make them engage and get used to the cut blocking. Get everyone up to speed with the speed and physicality from the start. I wouldn't be surprised to see us play a 4-3 to start with, and then one of the safeties comes down to make it a 4-4 if things aren't going well. And then they throw in the 5 player front from time to time on top of it.

The key to stopping the option is stopping the FB dive first. I really like Chatman and DL here, and it is great the TN played better last week, and that it seems like we are getting Wright back. Jimmy Phillips has stepped up his physicality inside the last couple of weeks. What we need more of is the Slade/Reid position. We need them to play physically consistently so that we can shut down the dive.

After the dive, then you need your DE to take the QB. Wiley and Paul have really played the run pretty well this season, and I expect them to thrive in this game. It will be interesting if we play with some double NT and actually shift Levelston out to end a little in this game. But I think 3 and 9 have done really well against the run. Aho and Jones both have bodies that have allowed them to play the run well. I like those players and the ability to hold their own on the edge. Smith and Samuels are more lean with a quick twitch - it might burn them a couple of times, but what is more important is that they will cause negative plays. The SMU defense as a whole actually has a run defense that might bode really well for us against Navy - we tend to be boom or bust - we either play the run really well or we give up a long run. Against Navy, it is important to cause some negative and 0 yard plays and get them behind the chains. A 5 yard average where you give up 3 0 yard carries and then a 20 is way better than 4 carries for 5 yards each, if that makes sense. And our defense is set up to do that.

For the pitch, you need your LBs. This is why we can't play the 4-2-5 - two inside LBs can't get outside to stop the pitch and you get killed on it over and over again. I expect a lot of 4 LB sets (one of them probably a safety pulled up), where the OLB takes the pitch. SMU has gotten killed on the jet sweep recently because of safeties taking bad angles and then players not swarming to the ball. That needs to change this week. The LBs need to wrap up on the pitch, and they need cover from the safeties in order to prevent a broken tackle from going the distance.

I hate playing Navy. Too many weird things can happen. Last year, Levelston, Williams and Chatman were awesome inside, and it kept them from establishing the dive. There are a lot of things that could go wrong here if TM is a little bit off, if secondary receivers don't step up, and if our LBs aren't physical.

Even with the negative vibes coming into this game, for some reason I have a good feeling about it. Levelston was amazing last year against Navy and it sparked his amazing play for the rest of the year. I can see that happening with him this year, and even with someone like Wright. For all the frustration of the UCF game, the first half defense was awesome, and Navy doesn't have the QB or WR threats that UCF have.

I'm going to run against a lot of the predictions out there and go with a 26-14 win for SMU. SMU settles for 4 field goals, but for the most part finds a way to contain and control the Navy offense. A low scoring game as SMU slows down tempo a little to give the defense a rest after getting an early lead and coasts to an unexpectedly easy victory.