Greatest Rivalry in College Football

#252
#252
I just think that the characterization of Navy as joke of a program is a little harsh though. Due to their entrance requirements and physical requirements of the Navy, they are effectively forced to field teams with 1-AA talent levels, yet they are managing to compete.
 
#253
#253
GAVol said:
I just think that the characterization of Navy as joke of a program is a little harsh though.
Click to expand...
I think you're probably right about that. I simply have an issue with a game that is more about John McCain giving pep talks and cadets marching than it is football being mentioned in the same breath as OU-Texas and Alabama-Auburn.
 
#255
#255
Who cares if it's bad football? It matters everything to the people who play in it and the (probably) millions of people who care about it; I doubt they care whether the rest of us are watching or not.

Contrast it to FSU-Miami. The national spotlight drifted away from that game because the quality of the football went down, and now even the participants don't care about it as much. The national spotlight left Army-Navy decades ago, and yet their teams and fans care about the game as much as they ever did. That's what a rivalry game is. They don't need ESPN and the vacant gaze of millions to make the game special.
 
#257
#257
The greatest rivalry is whichever one you care about most.

I hate lists like this.
 
#261
#261
I rarely watched the Army vs Navy game. There always seems to be a better game on between ranked opponents.
 
#262
#262
TennNC said:
I respectfully disagree with your focus group of 1.

Again, nobody's debating the level of football in this game. We're not comparing the quality of football to UTexas-OU or TOSU-UM or UT-Bama or ECU-MTSU. We're debating the level of the rivalry. Name another rivalry where the teams could lose every other game, win this one, and be happy.

You might not care about the game, and that's fine. But there's a very strong argument that the rivalry between the two institutions, manifested in the game aired on national television every single year and broadcast all over the world, is the greatest.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim to be a focus group, although 1 person's opinion carries at least as much weight as the pretend tournament on page 2. Army-Navy lacks a couple of ingredients to make it one of the top rivalries. The quality of football isn't the highest level, and they don't play for anything larger than the game itself. Those two things are just as important in making a rivalry great (in the humble opinion of my focus group of one) as close games and geographic proximity.
 
#263
#263
Vercingetorix said:
Who cares if it's bad football? It matters everything to the people who play in it and the (probably) millions of people who care about it; I doubt they care whether the rest of us are watching or not.

Contrast it to FSU-Miami. The national spotlight drifted away from that game because the quality of the football went down, and now even the participants don't care about it as much. The national spotlight left Army-Navy decades ago, and yet their teams and fans care about the game as much as they ever did. That's what a rivalry game is. They don't need ESPN and the vacant gaze of millions to make the game special.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, V. But to quote the great philosopher H.I. McDonough, on this issue in this forum, "There's what's right and there's what's right, and never the twain shall meet."
 
#264
#264
i think the army/navy game is important, if only for the national attention it brings to the table for our armed forces.

in reading hat's posts, though a bit harsh, his main point, which i would agree with, is that it doesn't mean anything in regards to the football season as a whole, and the football isn't really all that great, and it hasn't for a long, long time.

that said, i don't think there's anything to dispute that it is a huge rivalry game for those two schools/academys. and taking in to context what the kids on those teams will be doing after football, and understanding that will far out weigh anything they could ever hope to do on the feild, then yes, it does mean something.

just not to college football, as a it pertains to rankings and championships.

in that respect it's set apart from any other rivalry in college football and is worth noting, because when that game is played, you go into it, as players, fans etc....knowing there's nothing else on the table except pride.

so in the end, it just depends on what's more important to you. for those two teams, generally speaking, it's simply being able to say "beat army" or "beat navy".

for all the other games mentioned in comparison, the outcome has more emphasis on future goals pertaining to the season as a whole.

in that respect, the army/navy game isn't comparable, which is why it's unique.
 
#266
#266
volfanbill said:
navy won, to take the series lead at 50-49. In addition, Navy became the first service academy to record four straight wins over another service academy. They also took home the highly coveted Commander in Chief's Trophy with the win. Trust me, Army-Navy is HUGE.
Click to expand...
this is not true. Every graduating class that has won 4 in a row, from either side has seen major combat over the course of a typical 20 year military career. In fact, Army won 4 straight in the 90s and those classes are now seeing major combat.
 
#267
#267
hatvol96 said:
Hussein and the Republican Guard=The military equivalent of Duke.
Click to expand...
If that's the case, everyone else in the world is the military equivalent of Duke. We might not play the best football on earth, but we do kill opposing soldiers and break expensive stuff better than everyone else.
 
#268
#268
BigPapaVol said:
If that's the case, everyone else in the world is the military equivalent of Duke. We might not play the best football on earth, but we do kill opposing soldiers and break expensive stuff better than everyone else.
Click to expand...
:lolabove:
 
#272
#272
BigPapaVol said:
I'll assure you that they're not two units of the same team. Our gutted and nearly invalid intelligence organizations have far more input into the deployment of our forces than do those affiliated with the Pentagon. About that, there is no argument.
Click to expand...
No, there's not.
 
#273
#273
MontereyVol said:
Not too shabby, however dont believe the news about Libya being anywhere near an ally. Egypt is actually alot closer.

No way we do anything to Saudi, although your right about them
Click to expand...
I trust Egypt exactly as far as I can throw the entire country.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top