Rutgers Plays Lifetime: 25-7 (+14.17 Units)
To ensure people read my early write-up instead of following me blindly I will not list exactly what side I am on until later in the article, thus attempting to get everyone to read what I have to say so they understand my exact thought process behind the play, and then make an educated decision on their own on whether to play the game or not.
NOTE: I have wagered exactly $0 on Rutgers games so far this season, but as I left Rutgers Stadium after the ridiculous beat-down at the hands of North Carolina I was already foaming at the mouth ready to jump all over the Rutgers/Navy game this upcoming Saturday. I had been anxiously checking Sunday afternoon for the first lines to be released and when I saw Rutgers was installed as a 3.5 point favorite I was astonished. After refreshing a few times to make sure my eyes weren't deceiving me, I quickly confirmed the biggest bet I have ever made on any single game in my 3 year betting history.
To understand my motivation for such a large play one must first hear a short history of the Rutgers football program.
After 100+ years of respectability, the Rutgers football program fell on hard times by the mid-1990's before its steep rise in 2006.
1996: 2-9
1997: 0-11
1998: 5-6
1999: 1-10
2000: 3-8
2001: 2-9 (*Schiano's First Year)
2002: 1-11
2003: 5-7
2004: 4-7
2005: 7-5 (*Lost Insight Bowl to Arizona State 45-40)
2006: 11-2 (*Won Texas Bowl over Kansas State 37-10)
2007: 8-5 (*Won International Bowl over Ball State 52-30)
Although the story has been played out, it is important to recognize the job that Greg Schiano was able to do with a program that was the doormat of college football during most of the 1990's and 2000's. He did it with a bunch of kids that most other top programs did not even consider recruiting, and it is phenomenal how far Rutgers has come in such a short period of time.
However, after their "remarkable" 2006 season, many called Rutgers' 8-5 2007 season disappointing. Expecting an upswing in 2008 despite the loss of Ray Rice, the 0-2 start has been demoralizing for the fans, both the bandwagons and die-hards alike. I am here to make the argument to you that the 2006 and 2007 teams were nowhere near as good as advertised. Was the 2006 team underrated at the start of the year? Yes, very much so, that is why Rutgers was getting 3.5 points at Navy before blowing them out 34-0. But the argument that I want to make is that after the 2006 Louisville game, the Rutgers football team became blatantly overrated, and has since relatively stayed so until its 44-12 loss at home to North Carolina Thursday night.
The bottom line is that the Rutgers football team in 2006 and 2007 was a fringe Top 40 team that during 2 games played above its potential to pull off 2 stunning home upsets against then #3 Louisville and then #2 South Florida. Thats it. Two quality victories in two years. The other 17 came against above-average, average, and below-average programs, and the proof is right in the schedules. However I do want to stop and give Rutgers credit for the fact that when they played a team they clearly outclassed, they frequently beat them handedly and into submission.
2006
at North Carolina (3-9) - (W 21-16)
vs Illinois (2-10) - (W 33-0)
vs Ohio (9-5) - (W 24-7)
vs Howard (FCS) - (W 56-7)
at South Florida (9-4) - (W 22-20)
at Navy (9-4) - (W 34-0)
at Pittsburgh (6-6) - (W 20-10)
vs Connecticut (4-8) - (W 24-13)
vs Louisville (12-1) - (W 28-25)
at Cincinnati (8-5) - (L 30-11)
vs Syracuse (4-8) - (W 38-7)
at West Virginia (11-2) - (L 41-39 - 3 OT)
Texas Bowl: Kansas State (7-6) - (W 37-10)
2007
vs Buffalo (5-7) - (W 38-3)
vs Navy (8-5) - (W 41-24)
vs Norfolk State (FCS) - (W 59-0)
vs Maryland (6-7) - (L 34-24)
vs Cincinnati (10-3) - (L 28-23)
at Syracuse (2-10) - (W 38-10)
vs South Florida (9-4) - (W 30-27)
vs West Virginia (11-2) - (L 31-3)
at Connecticut (9-4) - (L 38-19)
at Army (3-9) - (W 41-6)
vs Pittsburgh (5-7) - (W 20-16)
at Louisville (6-6) - (L 41-38)
International Bowl: Ball State (7-6) - (W 52-30)
So there you go. 19-7 in two seasons thanks to a rather soft schedule. How could we be so stupid about Rutgers in 2008 since after 2007 they lost RB Ray Rice, LT Pedro Sosa, RT Jeremy Zuttah, and DT Eric Foster, the vocal leaders of the team during its 2006 and 2007 seasons. The void left has been felt on the field both emotionally and physically. Losing Sosa, Zuttah, as well as LG Mike Fladell forced Rutgers to shuffle around their Offensive Line in 2008. The result has been that QB Mike Teel has seen more pressure now than in his first 2.5 years combined. Teel has since been exposed, and his NFL dreams all but shattered. With Rice in the backfield and a solid Offensive Line up front, Teel was an above-average QB over the past two seasons, but with the defensive focus now squarely on him, he has faltered and managed a disappointing 1-5 TD-INT ratio in 2008.
So why the bad start in 2008? Well if that wasn't enough for you to understand lets factor in the quality opponents category into the discussion once again. During 2006 and 2007 Rutgers registered a 2-4 record against clear Top 25 opponents. Against Top 40 competition Rutgers registered approximately a 6-5 record, thus right where they should be regarded. But what is interesting is that of the other 2 losses, each of those opponents should be regarded in the Top 60. So what have we learned? In 2006 and 2007, Rutgers was a Top 40 football program that did not register a loss against a program they "outclassed" or in other words a program in the bottom half of college football. Taking this idea to 2008 we see #21 Fresno State, who played #10 Wisconsin to a 13-10 battle, and North Carolina, who looks on the verge of cracking the Top 25 itself, as two Top 40 caliber teams, and in other words quality opponents. For a Rutgers program that has lost the players it has from 2007 to 2008, players not only known for their prowess on the field but also for their leadership, it now becomes clear at least one reason why Rutgers lost its first two games by a combined score of 68-19.
Now add to it the fact that 6 new assistant coaches have joined the 2008 Rutgers staff, including 2 new coaches in the secondary. See coming into the 2008 season, Rutgers featured CB Jason McCourty, CB Devin McCourty, and SS Courtney Greene (a 1st day NFL prospect), players with a combined 7 years of starting experience. Meanwhile, FS Joe Lefeged, FS Zaire Kitchen, and S Glen Lee, have been normal fixtures in the defense over the past two years. So it seemed as though the secondary was poised for another good year. But for whatever reason, the secondary alone has been responsible for 6 blown assignments, and 38 points in 2 games. Is it the coaches? Is it the players finding difficulty in the new schemes? Whatever it is, it is mostly mental, and is unacceptable by this point in the season. Luckily for Rutgers, Navy is not exactly Texas Tech by any stretch of the imagination.
So there you go, another reason for the 0-2 start.
Now it seems about time to get to the Navy game itself. I made the point earlier about all 7 of Rutgers' losses from 2006-2007 coming against Top 60 competition for a reason. The bottom line is that over the past few years, when Rutgers plays an opponent they outclass, where they are the bigger, faster, stronger team, they normally win and win handedly. If you look at 2006 and 2007 for a reference, notice how Rutgers has done against middle-tier non-BCS opponents, teams that they should outclass:
2006
vs Ohio (9-5) - (W 24-7)
at Navy (9-4) - (W 34-0)
2007
vs Buffalo (5-7) - (W 38-3)
vs Navy (8-5) - (W 41-24)
at Army (3-9) - (W 41-6)
International Bowl: Ball State (7-6) - (W 52-30)
There you go. 6-0, with an average victory margin of 27, as well as 2 blowout wins over a Navy team that went 17-9 over a 2 year stretch. It is important to note that these are Navy teams that should not be compared with the 2008 1-2 Navy team. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that this is a 2008 Rutgers team that should not be compared completely with the 2006 and 2007 Rutgers teams. But nonetheless, the trend is there, when Rutgers outclasses an opponent, it normally shows on the scoreboard.
I would also like to go back over the Rutgers/Navy recent series history and point out each team's record during the given year:
*HOME team in CAPS (*DID NOT PLAY IN 2002)
2007: RUTGERS (8-5) 41 - Navy (8-5) 24
2006: Rutgers (11-2) 34 - NAVY (9-4) 0
2005: RUTGERS (7-5) 31 - Navy (8-4) 21
2004: Rutgers (4-7) 21 - NAVY (10-2) 54
2003: RUTGERS (5-7) 48 - Navy (8-5) 27
2001: RUTGERS (2-9) 23 - Navy (0-10) 17
2000: Rutgers (3-8) 28 - NAVY (1-10) 21
So there you go, Rutgers has won 6 of the past 7 meetings, including 2 of which Navy even finished with a better record.
The point I am trying to make here is that Rutgers is familiar with Navy, and familiar with how to defend and beat Navy. Under Schiano, the Scarlet Knights are 5-1 against the Midshipmen, and the Navy offense has not changed since. He knows exactly how he wants to defend it (he will start 3 DE's), and will not be surprised. Many coaches who are unfamiliar with Navy and the triple-option often have problems being able to effectively get their players adjusted to the scheme in one week's time. But this will be of no problem to Rutgers, as for many Scarlet Knights, this will be the 3rd and 4th time they have witnessed/played against it. After the 34-0 blowout in Annapolis in 2006, Navy HC Paul Johnson threw a few wrinkles into the game plan in 2007 to keep the game close into the 3rd Quarter. But a Rutgers explosion of points quickly brought the game to 41-17 before a late Navy TD. Paul Johnson is now gone to Georgia Tech, while Greg Schiano remains at Rutgers.
While the 2008 Scarlet Knights fell to 0-2, the 2008 Midshipmen have followed their path. If you discount Navy's 41-13 win over FCS Towson, the Midshipmen have dropped both FBS games in 2008; a 35-23 loss at Ball State, and a 41-31 loss at Duke. So as both teams seem to have fallen a step from 2007 to 2008, it seems as though this match-up should run along the same pattern as last years. I understand Navy is at home, and that on a neutral field that would make the point spread around Rutgers -7, but for some reason I do not see Rutgers having all that much trouble with Navy in 2008. When it comes down to it I don't think Navy can cover WR Kenny Britt, WR Tiquan Underwood, WR Tim Brown, and TE Kevin Brock, they do not have the speed or size. I also think the Rutgers Offensive Line will be in for a pleasant surprise with the Navy Defensive Line after having to attempt to block the monsters on the North Carolina front four on Thursday. The veteran-laden Rutgers defense, who seem to have just been making mental mistakes more than anything, has played well in spots and should be ready to stifle Navy's triple-option attack, especially with QB Kaipo-Noa's unsteady health over the 2008 season.
The bottom line is that to me this game looks like a mismatch, just as it was in 2007, 2006, and even somewhat in 2005. There is no detailed analysis needed for this one. I feel as though Rutgers should easily win this game by at least a touchdown, and that is why I felt more than comfortable laying the 3.5 for my biggest single game play ever. I like this line at -4 as well, and all the way up until -6.5.
Feedback is always welcomed, and I'd like to point out I do not think in any way this game is a "lock", nor is any game. As usual, if I am right I am not going to rampage through and call out anyone who comes into my thread and says "you are wrong, Navy wins SU" or anything like that. If I am wrong I am going to just tally up my record and go on with my life as usual (although trust me as a die-hard Rutgers fan I'd be completely distraught if they were actually to fall to 0-3 this year) but I expect the same respect. The bottom line is most of my plays are in the 1-5 Unit range, so the fact that I am actually laying 16.50 Units on a single game makes it a very large play for me that I feel confident in, and I felt I should share it with The Rx community, along with a lengthy write-up that contains as much as my thought process as possible when making this play.
Rutgers 31 - Navy 23
Good luck, and I hope I'm right, and trust me I hate the hook, but based on the fact that I currently can't find it cheaper than -4, I feel good about the fact I bought it when I did.
16.50* - Rutgers (-3.5) NAVY (16.50/15.00)
To ensure people read my early write-up instead of following me blindly I will not list exactly what side I am on until later in the article, thus attempting to get everyone to read what I have to say so they understand my exact thought process behind the play, and then make an educated decision on their own on whether to play the game or not.
NOTE: I have wagered exactly $0 on Rutgers games so far this season, but as I left Rutgers Stadium after the ridiculous beat-down at the hands of North Carolina I was already foaming at the mouth ready to jump all over the Rutgers/Navy game this upcoming Saturday. I had been anxiously checking Sunday afternoon for the first lines to be released and when I saw Rutgers was installed as a 3.5 point favorite I was astonished. After refreshing a few times to make sure my eyes weren't deceiving me, I quickly confirmed the biggest bet I have ever made on any single game in my 3 year betting history.
To understand my motivation for such a large play one must first hear a short history of the Rutgers football program.
After 100+ years of respectability, the Rutgers football program fell on hard times by the mid-1990's before its steep rise in 2006.
1996: 2-9
1997: 0-11
1998: 5-6
1999: 1-10
2000: 3-8
2001: 2-9 (*Schiano's First Year)
2002: 1-11
2003: 5-7
2004: 4-7
2005: 7-5 (*Lost Insight Bowl to Arizona State 45-40)
2006: 11-2 (*Won Texas Bowl over Kansas State 37-10)
2007: 8-5 (*Won International Bowl over Ball State 52-30)
Although the story has been played out, it is important to recognize the job that Greg Schiano was able to do with a program that was the doormat of college football during most of the 1990's and 2000's. He did it with a bunch of kids that most other top programs did not even consider recruiting, and it is phenomenal how far Rutgers has come in such a short period of time.
However, after their "remarkable" 2006 season, many called Rutgers' 8-5 2007 season disappointing. Expecting an upswing in 2008 despite the loss of Ray Rice, the 0-2 start has been demoralizing for the fans, both the bandwagons and die-hards alike. I am here to make the argument to you that the 2006 and 2007 teams were nowhere near as good as advertised. Was the 2006 team underrated at the start of the year? Yes, very much so, that is why Rutgers was getting 3.5 points at Navy before blowing them out 34-0. But the argument that I want to make is that after the 2006 Louisville game, the Rutgers football team became blatantly overrated, and has since relatively stayed so until its 44-12 loss at home to North Carolina Thursday night.
The bottom line is that the Rutgers football team in 2006 and 2007 was a fringe Top 40 team that during 2 games played above its potential to pull off 2 stunning home upsets against then #3 Louisville and then #2 South Florida. Thats it. Two quality victories in two years. The other 17 came against above-average, average, and below-average programs, and the proof is right in the schedules. However I do want to stop and give Rutgers credit for the fact that when they played a team they clearly outclassed, they frequently beat them handedly and into submission.
2006
at North Carolina (3-9) - (W 21-16)
vs Illinois (2-10) - (W 33-0)
vs Ohio (9-5) - (W 24-7)
vs Howard (FCS) - (W 56-7)
at South Florida (9-4) - (W 22-20)
at Navy (9-4) - (W 34-0)
at Pittsburgh (6-6) - (W 20-10)
vs Connecticut (4-8) - (W 24-13)
vs Louisville (12-1) - (W 28-25)
at Cincinnati (8-5) - (L 30-11)
vs Syracuse (4-8) - (W 38-7)
at West Virginia (11-2) - (L 41-39 - 3 OT)
Texas Bowl: Kansas State (7-6) - (W 37-10)
2007
vs Buffalo (5-7) - (W 38-3)
vs Navy (8-5) - (W 41-24)
vs Norfolk State (FCS) - (W 59-0)
vs Maryland (6-7) - (L 34-24)
vs Cincinnati (10-3) - (L 28-23)
at Syracuse (2-10) - (W 38-10)
vs South Florida (9-4) - (W 30-27)
vs West Virginia (11-2) - (L 31-3)
at Connecticut (9-4) - (L 38-19)
at Army (3-9) - (W 41-6)
vs Pittsburgh (5-7) - (W 20-16)
at Louisville (6-6) - (L 41-38)
International Bowl: Ball State (7-6) - (W 52-30)
So there you go. 19-7 in two seasons thanks to a rather soft schedule. How could we be so stupid about Rutgers in 2008 since after 2007 they lost RB Ray Rice, LT Pedro Sosa, RT Jeremy Zuttah, and DT Eric Foster, the vocal leaders of the team during its 2006 and 2007 seasons. The void left has been felt on the field both emotionally and physically. Losing Sosa, Zuttah, as well as LG Mike Fladell forced Rutgers to shuffle around their Offensive Line in 2008. The result has been that QB Mike Teel has seen more pressure now than in his first 2.5 years combined. Teel has since been exposed, and his NFL dreams all but shattered. With Rice in the backfield and a solid Offensive Line up front, Teel was an above-average QB over the past two seasons, but with the defensive focus now squarely on him, he has faltered and managed a disappointing 1-5 TD-INT ratio in 2008.
So why the bad start in 2008? Well if that wasn't enough for you to understand lets factor in the quality opponents category into the discussion once again. During 2006 and 2007 Rutgers registered a 2-4 record against clear Top 25 opponents. Against Top 40 competition Rutgers registered approximately a 6-5 record, thus right where they should be regarded. But what is interesting is that of the other 2 losses, each of those opponents should be regarded in the Top 60. So what have we learned? In 2006 and 2007, Rutgers was a Top 40 football program that did not register a loss against a program they "outclassed" or in other words a program in the bottom half of college football. Taking this idea to 2008 we see #21 Fresno State, who played #10 Wisconsin to a 13-10 battle, and North Carolina, who looks on the verge of cracking the Top 25 itself, as two Top 40 caliber teams, and in other words quality opponents. For a Rutgers program that has lost the players it has from 2007 to 2008, players not only known for their prowess on the field but also for their leadership, it now becomes clear at least one reason why Rutgers lost its first two games by a combined score of 68-19.
Now add to it the fact that 6 new assistant coaches have joined the 2008 Rutgers staff, including 2 new coaches in the secondary. See coming into the 2008 season, Rutgers featured CB Jason McCourty, CB Devin McCourty, and SS Courtney Greene (a 1st day NFL prospect), players with a combined 7 years of starting experience. Meanwhile, FS Joe Lefeged, FS Zaire Kitchen, and S Glen Lee, have been normal fixtures in the defense over the past two years. So it seemed as though the secondary was poised for another good year. But for whatever reason, the secondary alone has been responsible for 6 blown assignments, and 38 points in 2 games. Is it the coaches? Is it the players finding difficulty in the new schemes? Whatever it is, it is mostly mental, and is unacceptable by this point in the season. Luckily for Rutgers, Navy is not exactly Texas Tech by any stretch of the imagination.
So there you go, another reason for the 0-2 start.
Now it seems about time to get to the Navy game itself. I made the point earlier about all 7 of Rutgers' losses from 2006-2007 coming against Top 60 competition for a reason. The bottom line is that over the past few years, when Rutgers plays an opponent they outclass, where they are the bigger, faster, stronger team, they normally win and win handedly. If you look at 2006 and 2007 for a reference, notice how Rutgers has done against middle-tier non-BCS opponents, teams that they should outclass:
2006
vs Ohio (9-5) - (W 24-7)
at Navy (9-4) - (W 34-0)
2007
vs Buffalo (5-7) - (W 38-3)
vs Navy (8-5) - (W 41-24)
at Army (3-9) - (W 41-6)
International Bowl: Ball State (7-6) - (W 52-30)
There you go. 6-0, with an average victory margin of 27, as well as 2 blowout wins over a Navy team that went 17-9 over a 2 year stretch. It is important to note that these are Navy teams that should not be compared with the 2008 1-2 Navy team. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that this is a 2008 Rutgers team that should not be compared completely with the 2006 and 2007 Rutgers teams. But nonetheless, the trend is there, when Rutgers outclasses an opponent, it normally shows on the scoreboard.
I would also like to go back over the Rutgers/Navy recent series history and point out each team's record during the given year:
*HOME team in CAPS (*DID NOT PLAY IN 2002)
2007: RUTGERS (8-5) 41 - Navy (8-5) 24
2006: Rutgers (11-2) 34 - NAVY (9-4) 0
2005: RUTGERS (7-5) 31 - Navy (8-4) 21
2004: Rutgers (4-7) 21 - NAVY (10-2) 54
2003: RUTGERS (5-7) 48 - Navy (8-5) 27
2001: RUTGERS (2-9) 23 - Navy (0-10) 17
2000: Rutgers (3-8) 28 - NAVY (1-10) 21
So there you go, Rutgers has won 6 of the past 7 meetings, including 2 of which Navy even finished with a better record.
The point I am trying to make here is that Rutgers is familiar with Navy, and familiar with how to defend and beat Navy. Under Schiano, the Scarlet Knights are 5-1 against the Midshipmen, and the Navy offense has not changed since. He knows exactly how he wants to defend it (he will start 3 DE's), and will not be surprised. Many coaches who are unfamiliar with Navy and the triple-option often have problems being able to effectively get their players adjusted to the scheme in one week's time. But this will be of no problem to Rutgers, as for many Scarlet Knights, this will be the 3rd and 4th time they have witnessed/played against it. After the 34-0 blowout in Annapolis in 2006, Navy HC Paul Johnson threw a few wrinkles into the game plan in 2007 to keep the game close into the 3rd Quarter. But a Rutgers explosion of points quickly brought the game to 41-17 before a late Navy TD. Paul Johnson is now gone to Georgia Tech, while Greg Schiano remains at Rutgers.
While the 2008 Scarlet Knights fell to 0-2, the 2008 Midshipmen have followed their path. If you discount Navy's 41-13 win over FCS Towson, the Midshipmen have dropped both FBS games in 2008; a 35-23 loss at Ball State, and a 41-31 loss at Duke. So as both teams seem to have fallen a step from 2007 to 2008, it seems as though this match-up should run along the same pattern as last years. I understand Navy is at home, and that on a neutral field that would make the point spread around Rutgers -7, but for some reason I do not see Rutgers having all that much trouble with Navy in 2008. When it comes down to it I don't think Navy can cover WR Kenny Britt, WR Tiquan Underwood, WR Tim Brown, and TE Kevin Brock, they do not have the speed or size. I also think the Rutgers Offensive Line will be in for a pleasant surprise with the Navy Defensive Line after having to attempt to block the monsters on the North Carolina front four on Thursday. The veteran-laden Rutgers defense, who seem to have just been making mental mistakes more than anything, has played well in spots and should be ready to stifle Navy's triple-option attack, especially with QB Kaipo-Noa's unsteady health over the 2008 season.
The bottom line is that to me this game looks like a mismatch, just as it was in 2007, 2006, and even somewhat in 2005. There is no detailed analysis needed for this one. I feel as though Rutgers should easily win this game by at least a touchdown, and that is why I felt more than comfortable laying the 3.5 for my biggest single game play ever. I like this line at -4 as well, and all the way up until -6.5.
Feedback is always welcomed, and I'd like to point out I do not think in any way this game is a "lock", nor is any game. As usual, if I am right I am not going to rampage through and call out anyone who comes into my thread and says "you are wrong, Navy wins SU" or anything like that. If I am wrong I am going to just tally up my record and go on with my life as usual (although trust me as a die-hard Rutgers fan I'd be completely distraught if they were actually to fall to 0-3 this year) but I expect the same respect. The bottom line is most of my plays are in the 1-5 Unit range, so the fact that I am actually laying 16.50 Units on a single game makes it a very large play for me that I feel confident in, and I felt I should share it with The Rx community, along with a lengthy write-up that contains as much as my thought process as possible when making this play.
Rutgers 31 - Navy 23
Good luck, and I hope I'm right, and trust me I hate the hook, but based on the fact that I currently can't find it cheaper than -4, I feel good about the fact I bought it when I did.
16.50* - Rutgers (-3.5) NAVY (16.50/15.00)
Last edited:
