After a dismal performance against Temple, Navy's 31-6 win over UAB was a real palate-cleanser. The defense was uncharacteristically porous against the Owls, but on Saturday they turned in arguably their best performance of the season considering the opposition. For the offense, it was unusual, but enough. Through three quarters, Navy had scored only ten points, but the offense exploded for 14 in the fourth. The defense added a touchdown of their own for good measure. The Mids were able to generate a pair of long scoring plays, which is fortunate because they didn't really sustain drives; 35 percent of their total plays came on one possession. Their 269 rushing yards were the team's third-highest output of the season. Ultimately, a nip-and-tuck contest turned into a rout in the blink of an eye.

It was a feel-good day for everyone in a program that desperately needed one. But was it a sign that Navy has turned a corner? Maybe. I'm not so sure.

Defensively, the Mids weren't looking for a turnaround as much as a return to form. They got one. To hold the American's top passing offense to 206 yards through the air-- and out of the end zone-- was more than impressive. It was UAB's lowest aerial output to date in a game that Jacob Zeno has played in (he missed the Memphis game). One week earlier, Zeno threw for 484 yards and five touchdowns. He threw for 250 yards and two touchdowns against Georgia. It was a brilliant effort from the Mids and the product of a smart game plan. Colin Ramos was deservedly named the American's Defensive Player of the Week after recording 12 tackles and a sack. However, the real lynchpin in the plan was Navy's defensive line.

Before we get into that, let's recall a few things from the preview. First, there was the defense's biggest problem against Temple. It wasn't a matter of how many defenders rushed the quarterback and how many dropped into coverage; the problem was with who did the pass rushing and how they did it. The Mids often dropped seven or eight into coverage in that game, but they tried to simulate pressure by bringing in edge rushers from the second level while dropping linemen into a shallow zone. The quarterback would throw into the "blitz" before another defender could reach that zone. In the preview, I wrote that if the Mids wanted to continue to use simulated pressure against an opponent like that, they would need to do a better job of disguising where the rushers were coming from.

It was important to get pressure somehow because, as I wrote in the preview, the real danger in the UAB offense is the deep ball. A couple of people sent notes disagreeing with me since UAB's bread and butter is a constant barrage of short passes, not the long ball. And that's true in terms of quantity. But it's the threat of the deep ball that makes the offense go. UAB has a better-than-you-think running game to go along with the short and horizontal passing game. They're like an option offense in that they both suck you in, gradually forcing you to inch forward before throwing over the top when you cheat too much. Then you have to back off, which leaves the offense room to operate underneath again. Rinse and repeat.

Indeed, that happened to the Mids early on. The cornerback here was supposed to drop into a deep zone, but he was caught with his eyes in the backfield as the ball went over his head.

Zeno was still a deep ball threat even when the Mids did everything right. Here, the defense was in a two-deep zone. The cornerback, not the safety, was responsible for covering the deep half of the field. However, on this play, the receiver who lined up inside him ran a seam route. With the receiver having immediate inside leverage, the cornerback was basically beaten before the ball was even snapped. Zeno delivered a perfect throw, but the receiver dropped it.

Early on, UAB also was effective running the ball. They ran delayed zone runs where defenders would all commit to their gaps before the running back bounced outside to a different one.

That basically lays out what the defense was dealing with. They had to stop the run and the short passing game in a way that didn’t leave them exposed to the deep ball.

They did this in a few ways. Against the run, they started run blitzing. Here, you can see two defenders coming off the edge. The tackle could only take one of them, and the other got to the running back before he had a chance to bounce outside.

They did this primarily on first and second down, and it sort of killed two birds with one stone. Take a look at this sequence of plays. First, we have a run blitz that stops the runner for a short loss. There was even a holding penalty on the play, so it was followed up by a 2nd and 19. The Mids showed blitz again. When you have seven guys on the line of scrimmage ready to blitz, getting the ball outside quickly on a wide receiver screen makes a lot of sense. That’s what UAB called. The running back motioned out of the backfield so he and one receiver could block the two perimeter defenders in front of the other wide receiver. However, the Mids didn’t blitz. Instead, they only rushed three while four defenders dropped into coverage. They slanted to the boundary since the shorter throw would make it a faster-hitting play against the threat of a blitz. The blocking receiver and running back went upfield to their assignments, but nobody was left behind them to block the defenders who dropped into coverage.

Against Temple, the defense tried to simulate pressure by bringing in rushers from the second level while dropping first-level defenders into coverage. Against UAB, they had everyone start at the first level and changed up who dropped back. Both methods have their uses, but when a quarterback is looking to get rid of the ball quickly, the latter is better for disguising where the rush is coming from.

On third down, the Mids often didn’t bother to simulate pressure. Another thing we mentioned in the preview was how UAB’s third-down passes are often thrown short of the line to gain. The Mids would only rush three, or in this case, two.

But that plan wasn’t foolproof. What if UAB decided to throw deep on third down? That’s what happened here. The Mids only rushed four on 3rd & 4, dropping a lineman as a spy. UAB also used a little bit of tempo, catching the Navy defense while they were still checking for their signals at the snap (something that happened more than once). Zeno then delivered another perfect throw 25 yards downfield.

It’s a lower-percentage throw, but it became UAB’s best option.

It was in this situation that Navy’s defensive line took over. Navy didn’t need to blitz to get pressure on third down because the defensive ends were just bull-rushing their way past the tackles.

This allowed Navy to have their cake and eat it too. Usually, it’s a tradeoff between coverage and pressure. Thanks to the defensive line, Navy didn’t have to compromise.

The defensive ends made an impact in the running game too. On this play, both of them got into the backfield to force the running back where he didn’t want to go.

The pessimist would argue that UAB’s offensive line has been riddled with injuries this season, and they wouldn’t be wrong. However, the DL did more than just blast their way past the offensive line. On this play, Donald Berniard was on a stunt when he recognized the screen and kept running outside to alter the receiver’s path. That allowed Justin Reed to come all the way from the other side of the formation to make the stop.

That was just play recognition and hustle.

There were several standout defensive performances in this game. An offense like UAB's puts pressure on a defense to make tackles in space. Mbiti Williams had nine tackles. Five Mids registered a tackle for loss. Rayuan Lane's interception put him in the record books. But to me, it was the Navy defensive line that made the biggest difference.

For the Navy offense, this game was sort of a mixed bag. They only had one drive that lasted more than five plays, but what a drive it was: a 20-play marathon that ended in the end zone and consumed almost 13 minutes. The big play finally returned, with Xavier Arline connecting on a 45-yard bomb to Regis Velez in the first quarter, then putting the game away with a 50-yard touchdown run in the fourth quarter. On the other hand, there were also missed opportunities. Navy had first and goal from the eight-yard line but came away with zero points after a fourth-down interception. Brandon Chatman gave up a fumble after his 22-yard catch-and-run got Navy to midfield in the second quarter. Dashaun Peele returned an interception 42 yards to the UAB 31, but the Mids had to settle for a field goal.

On balance, though, there was more good than bad, something Navy hasn't been able to say about their offense over the last month. But it's important to highlight what was good and what was bad if you want to understand what, if anything, this game means in the big picture.

First, let's consider what the Mids were facing. Defensively, UAB lined up very similarly to Temple. They used a four-man front with the linebackers stacked behind them, shifting to compensate depending on how balanced Navy's formation was. They would occasionally use an EZ stunt, but that's about as far as they went with option stunts. It was a fairly straightforward option defense.

Yet the Mids still had difficulty running their straightforward base plays. All the same problems that existed every other week were still there.

They tried to run outside zone, but the playside tackle couldn't block the middle linebacker, allowing the MLB to string out the play. Arline pitched, but the wide receiver's leverage wasn't set up for a pitch.

They ran a midline trap, but again, the tackle couldn't block the middle linebacker.

They ran a halfback sweep, but couldn't get leverage on the perimeter.

They ran shotgun midline but couldn't get past the edge defender.

They ran shotgun triple but didn't block the safety.

They ran a toss sweep, but couldn't block the safety.

They ran a pin and pull, but the tight end didn't have a good blocking angle for a linebacker running downhill.

They also ran the triple. On this play, Arline made the right initial read, but he couldn't pitch the ball because the cornerback got into the backfield to interfere with the pitch relationship.

The first time Navy ran the triple, Alex Tecza broke loose for a 36-yard run. There were two interesting parts to this play. First, it was a missed read. UAB used an EZ stunt, and Tecza ran right into the linebacker. But fortunately for the Mids, they changed their blocking scheme. The tackle released outside, presumably to get a better perimeter block than the slots had been getting. The slotback released inside the tackle to block the middle linebacker. But because he released inside, he just happened to be in the right place at the right time to block the stunting OLB instead. Anton Hall landed a vicious block, giving Tecza a lane to run through after he fought through the MLB's arm tackle.

Of course, that was followed by four plays where the Mids failed to cross the goal line.

The next time the Mids tried to run the triple with that same blocking scheme, it didn't work. The MLB clogged up the running lane before the slotback could get to him.

The Mids did run one successful jet sweep. You've probably noticed that the offense has done more shifting before the snap this year. Against UAB, Navy often lined up under center before shifting to a shotgun formation and vice versa. They did the same on this play. However, when they shifted to the under center formation, the fullback wasn't behind the quarterback; he was lined up to the right. Because this happened after the shift, the defense probably didn't have time to realize that subtle difference. The fullback's alignment to the play side made him a more effective lead blocker.

Just about anything that Navy had shown in past games, UAB was able to shut down. Almost all of Navy's yardage came on plays the Mids introduced in this game. UAB didn't prepare for them.

First, Navy rolled out a new RPO. This was really just a variation of the inverted veer play that the Mids have used all year. The play has had some success at times, but in recent weeks, Navy has had trouble both reading the play and blocking it. Even when the play was read correctly, the outside linebacker has been getting ahead of blockers and tracking down the ball carrier.

The coaches solved both problems by changing the play to an RPO. Instead of reading the defensive end, the quarterback read the playside linebacker. With the receiver already outside instead of running his way there, nobody can track him down from behind.

The first time the Mids ran it, Arline kept the ball, and it didn't go so well.

However, that play still set up the touchdown pass. The two threats on the RPO are a run and a horizontal pass. Navy faked the RPO and ran the receivers on a wheel-post pattern. The wheel-post mimics the blocking pattern that those receivers would carry out on the RPO. The safety was caught flat-footed, like he was expecting to take on a block. Instead, Velez ran past him.

After that, the safety had to respect the deep threat, which made him less aggressive against the RPO. He backpedaled at the snap, which gave the receiver on the RPO more room to operate.

The other new play Navy unveiled on Saturday was the counter trey option. The quarterback took the snap out of the shotgun. The playside guard and tackle both pulled to the other side of the line. The quarterback read the defensive end behind them. The quarterback would either hand the ball off on a sweep or keep the ball and follow the pulling linemen.

This play put a lot of pressure on the linebackers. On the sweep side, the outside linebacker has to respect the pulling linemen. Because he had to take a second to read the play, blockers could get in front of him. The other linebackers also had to respect the pulling guard and tackle, which prevented a lot of the inside-out pursuit that has plagued the Mids this season.

If the linebackers didn't respect the pulling linemen, or if they respected them too much and left the middle of the field open by over playing them, you got this:

Almost all of Navy's offense came from the RPO, play action off the RPO, or the counter trey option.

So what does that mean? I have a few takeaways.

The first thing worth noting is that all the adjustments we saw in this game were designed to address the problems with perimeter and edge blocking we discussed last week. Changing the blocking scheme in the triple, adjusting the fullback's alignment on the toss, introducing the RPO, freezing the linebackers with the counter trey... Some were more successful than others, but they all revolved around the same idea. That's one more data point to suggest that the problems we outlined last week are indeed the number one issue facing the Mids.

That is a good segue into some criticism I received after the game:

But that isn't what I've said. My argument has never been that the quarterback doesn't matter. My argument has been that the quarterback hasn't been Navy's biggest problem, so changing quarterbacks wasn't solving Navy's biggest problem. If anything, the last two weeks have proven my point. As I said in the Temple debrief, Arline is the most physically capable of the quarterbacks Navy has used this year. He is the most natural runner, and if he isn't the best passer, he's at least in that conversation. But what did Navy get when they put him in last week? They got 144 rushing yards and 18 points against Temple. What did they get when they ran the "normal" plays against UAB? More of the same. What finally changed Navy's fortunes wasn't a new quarterback; it was new plays.

Back in 2018, Navy fans wanted to move Malcolm Perry back to slotback because they blamed him for the offense's problems before he got hurt. Malcolm Perry. The fans were very, very wrong. There's more to football than quarterbacks, guys.

Anyway, back to those new plays. If you hope that these are now the magic plays that will cure Navy's ills, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. You may want to keep a couple of things in mind. One, UAB's defense is genuinely awful. They came to Annapolis with the 124th-ranked run defense, 130th-ranked scoring defense, and 130th-ranked third-down defense. Two, Navy hadn't run these plays before. A terrible defense, seeing things they hadn't prepared for, is bound to give up yards. Every defense the Mids will face the rest of the year is better than UAB's, and now they have film.

My point is not to be all doom and gloom, nor is it to discredit the coaches or players. The coaches are responsible for crafting a game plan to win the next game. The players are tasked with executing that plan. They both did their jobs. Next week, they'll need a new game plan, and what worked against the Blazers may not have the same effect.

There is more to game planning than "just call the good plays." Back in the days of the old blog, I had a reader who would constantly email me about how great crossing patterns were. I suspect he put on a recording of the Aloha Bowl one day and decided he'd found the answer. Why wasn't Navy running more crossing routes? The whole playbook opens up if you can connect on crossing routes! But that's not how playcalling works. Those crossing routes were an adjustment to something the defense was doing. They won't work if you call them against a different defense.

We hear this occasionally whenever the Mids have a good game. When they don't look as good the next week, you'll hear people asking, "What happened to the good plays?" "Why aren't they calling plays like they did against [TEAM]?" It's because they're playing a different team with different players and different coaches running a different defense. Every game has its own unique set of circumstances, and the game plan will reflect that. If you hope that Navy will call the UAB plays the rest of the season, you aren't being serious.

Anyway, enough lecturing from me. This was Navy's best game of the season, and it came at a good time. Wins bring confidence, and confidence brings momentum. A bowl game is still on the table, and a good showing in the home stretch can be a launching pad for next season. Navy still has problems to solve on offense, but games like Saturday offer hope that solutions are out there.