Sunday Questions

[swburke]

In lieu of today's showing or lack of against AFA, here are some questions I have:

1. How the HELL did we win two games - Buffalo and Ball St have to feel really bad?
2. Is Army really a better job than Ga Southern?? GSU is now FBS in the Sun Belt.
3. Does Monken wish he had stayed at GSU?
4. How long will it take Monken to get anywhere close to .500? Don't see the studs waiting in the wings - so next year for sure is another year like the last15.
5. Since 1996 is there a worse FBS program?? I am sure there is, just can't name them.
6. Should Monken play younger players the rest of the season?- including someone other than Angel or AJ at QB. Huge difference at QB between Army and the other SA.
7. Is there a more boring team to watch?? I have seen all 8 games so far and not much to get excited about.

Sorry but some frustration - I know we are not going to compete with the FBS guys every week or even every year, but it is getting hard to hang on and pay for season tickets and A Club every year. If I want to have a picnic and look at leaves, I can find another place.

I just watched Navy give ND all they wanted and actually lead in the 4Q. AFA dominated us - not as close as the score indicated. We are just not going to win with two Plebes in the OL. Maybe Monken wants to show how bad it is, so he gets lots of credit if he can turn it around. I would be surprised if we win again this year - Fordham is a good FCS team - better than Yale. I am sure there will be a big crowd at Yankee Stadium to see us play UCONN.

 

[ashokan]

Injuries certainly hurt since first part of season.

I think Monken fully knew what he was getting into, and wasn't feeling that great about taking over. From what I read he takes the job as a personal mission to save Army football. Heck he even looks like a USMA grad. He knows Army ball has been bad for a long time, and that a few gimmicks won't fix anything. He knew he was jumping into the ring of fire (cues Johnny Cash song).

I don't think he regrets taking the job. That's a dead end and Monken has focus. He's very clear about what he sees in front of him. He didn't go into season expecting stardust and unicorns. I think personally he likes Army players more than GS players. He's just a bit stumped about how to coach them up. I think he knows he needs more to work with.

Once again Monken spoke of how hard players tried:

"They want to win. They're battling. They're trying. They care," Monken said of his struggling Black Knights. "There's a lot of kids in that locker room that are crushed."

Once again he lamented inability to do basic things:

"We didn't block," Monken said. "We can state the obvious, our running game stunk because we couldn't block. You have to line up and there is a guy across from you and you are responsible for blocking him. You need to block him and sustain that block and not let him make the play. We aren't doing that."

Notice coach used word "stunk". He knows the tean stinks and so do most people paying attention. Seven games into the season the coach is saying Army is playing hard but can't still can't block. I like the realism and honesty.

Yes Army is boring to watch and that starts with the QBs. Steelman would lose the ball too often but he was a playmaker who could break away at any time. Army needs a QB desperately.

Obviously Army needs better recruiting. Army ball needs to seem fun again. I've found it it too morbid for awhile. Navy and Air Force look like they are having fun when they play. Army players seem kind of "burdened" by expectations and very old traditions they can't really live up to anymore. The other SAs don't have that problem. Monkens crew seems more lively compared to past coaches so there is hope I think.
This post was edited on 11/2 1:44 AM by ashokan

 

[BlackGoldGray]

You forgot question #8 - Why is our play calling so bad and absolutely refuse to utilize our slotbacks {Baggett & Maples}?

 

[jerseyboy63]

Throwing a pass to Ryan Alexander just shows that staff has no good ideas left and are completely lost on play calling. That call shows that they had just thrown in the towel. I think Alexander got about as many touches as Baggett

 

[goodknight65]

Originally posted by swburke:

In lieu of today's showing or lack of against AFA, here are some questions I have:

1. How the HELL did we win two games - Buffalo and Ball St have to feel really bad?
2. Is Army really a better job than Ga Southern?? GSU is now FBS in the Sun Belt.
3. Does Monken wish he had stayed at GSU?
4. How long will it take Monken to get anywhere close to .500? Don't see the studs waiting in the wings - so next year for sure is another year like the last15.
5. Since 1996 is there a worse FBS program?? I am sure there is, just can't name them.
6. Should Monken play younger players the rest of the season?- including someone other than Angel or AJ at QB. Huge difference at QB between Army and the other SA.
7. Is there a more boring team to watch?? I have seen all 8 games so far and not much to get excited about.

Sorry but some frustration - I know we are not going to compete with the FBS guys every week or even every year, but it is getting hard to hang on and pay for season tickets and A Club every year. If I want to have a picnic and look at leaves, I can find another place.

I just watched Navy give ND all they wanted and actually lead in the 4Q. AFA dominated us - not as close as the score indicated. We are just not going to win with two Plebes in the OL. Maybe Monken wants to show how bad it is, so he gets lots of credit if he can turn it around. I would be surprised if we win again this year - Fordham is a good FCS team - better than Yale. I am sure there will be a big crowd at Yankee Stadium to see us play UCONN.

1. We played better games against both Buffalo and Ball State and probably against Yale and WF as well, especially on offense. The defense was better yesterday, but the offense has fallen on hard times.
2. Army is a more prestigious job than GSU because of its national prominence. On the other hand, it's a lot easier to recruit for GSU.
3. Ask Monken. I think he'd say no.
4. The schedule will be a lot tougher next year than this; so .500 is unlikely even if Monken comes up with some great recruits to fill the gaps left by departing seniors, which are a lot.
5. Are you looking at overall record since 1996? There are certainly a few teams worse than Army both this year and the previous 4 years. UMass comes to mind immediately, as does Georgia State. Sagarin rating might be considered useful to answer this one.
6. Monken is already playing a lot of younger players: As you noted, two plebes started on the OL yesterday (no senior started on the OL), and the guy who missed the tackle on the 54 yard TD, England, is a direct report plebe who started as well. Freshmen starting on an OL is a relatively rare thing in college football. The Navy starters and reserves on the OL are almost all Juniors and Seniors with one Sophomore seeing a little time at tackle. AFA started 2 seniors, 2 juniors and a sophomore. There are no quarterbacks other remaining than AS and AJ unless Monken wants to convert one back like White or Long. Monken playing the yearling SB Joe Walker in a couple of critical situations cost us at least one game and possibly two. Giachinta and Kemper are getting enough playing time to learn the game at FB. He has used the plebe John Voit quite a bit on the DL, and the two starting ILBs are yearlings and the backup when King went down was a plebe.
7. I thought the Buffalo game was exciting, and the Wake Forest game was interesting as well. If you're a fan of good defense even yesterday was OK, but the offense was not much fun to watch at all. It was virtually non-existent.

The above responses to your questions, notwithstanding, I can relate to your frustration after watching yesterday's game.

 

[ashokan]

"You forgot question #8 - Why is our play calling so bad and absolutely refuse to utilize our slotbacks {Baggett & Maples}"


Monken is out of the Navy option mold. The QB and FB will do most of the running. Pitches, misdirections etc will be minimized (cuts down on turnovers). Navy HBs generally only get 350-500 yards a season. No 1000 yd rushers off of pitches etc.

 

[WP76]

Not to belabor the obvious, but we had no chance in yesterday's game because our OL was simply awful. Option teams simply have to keep defenses honest by making yards between the tackles in order to open up the pitch/keep on the edges. When our RBs kept getting stuffed (time after painful time) in the middle, expecting to make yards outside became a pipe dream.

Our defense played well enough to win IMO for most of the game. However, like any defense ours got "gassed" because they were on the field 80 plus percent of the time. AF plays that went for two or three yards in the first half were going for a consistent 15 or so late in the game because our defenders were arm and leg weary. That's not a knock on our defensive players' conditioning; they were just on the field way too long.

I've heard many coaches say that a football team takes on the personality/identity of its offensive line. If that's true, it tells me all I need to know as to why were are where we are right now.

 

[Bulletproof09]

Originally posted by ashokan:

"You forgot question #8 - Why is our play calling so bad and absolutely refuse to utilize our slotbacks {Baggett & Maples}"


Monken is out of the Navy option mold. The QB and FB will do most of the running. Pitches, misdirections etc will be minimized (cuts down on turnovers). Navy HBs generally only get 350-500 yards a season. No 1000 yd rushers off of pitches etc.

Don't say that your going to be hung!!!!! Cthu

 

[goarmyfan]

You call for another QB other than AS nor AJ !
Let me ask you just what did AJ due that was so bad. He has played 3 min here 2min there and he has played well. The only game that he had any playing time he played the first half and played very well with 3 TD's and was replaced for the 2nd half and we lost,
We need to give AJ playing time how can a QB be developed without play time?
Against AF he had 3 plays and 2 first downs.

 

[Bulletproof09]

Originally posted by goarmyfan:

You call for another QB other than AS nor AJ !
Let me ask you just what did AJ due that was so bad. He has played 3 min here 2min there and he has played well. The only game that he had any playing time he played the first half and played very well with 3 TD's and was replaced for the 2nd half and we lost,
We need to give AJ playing time how can a QB be developed without play time?
Against AF he had 3 plays and 2 first downs.

He didn't do nothing that's an excuse!

 

[Big_DNY]

"5. Since 1996 is there a worse FBS program?? I am sure there is, just can't name them."

No, no, no, no, no, no!

Army is the worst program in the nation since 1996. I have not done exhaustive research, but I have delved in pretty well. These numbers are from 1998 on thus omitting our 4-7 record in 1997.

Since 1998
Army 46 Wins 142 Losses - 1 bowl appearance
Florida International 43 Wins 99 Losses and 2 bowl appearance (FIU's first season of football ever was 2002)
Buffalo 47 Wins 131 Losses 2 bowl appearances (Buffalo moved to 1A in 1999)

The next closes established teams are:
Akron 64 wins 100 losses 1 bowl appearance
North Texas 59 wins 119 losses 5 bowls
Louisiana Monroe 70 wins 117 losses 1 bowl

Army has the fewest wins and most losses in that time span. Only FIU has less wins and that is only because they have played 4 fewer years in that time span. UMass and Georgia Southern are brand new to the FBS division - you can't count them. Long term we are clearly and without peer the worst program in the country. Other teams have had weak and very poor years but have all had high points as well. Our high point was one 6 win season that snuck is into a bowl game. The cherry on top of the Army sundae that really punches the point home is our NCAA record 0-13 season under Todd Berry. That is a record that Army holds alone and will be hard to ever break.

 

[NotSoOldGrad]

It's been a rough ride thus far this season. Many times it's been frustrating to watch the offense run up the middle and repeatedly get nowhere. The O-line play throughout the second half of the season has been poor and we've looked bad as result.

If we can execute, which is a BIG if, we still have a couple winnable games left on the schedule in UConn and Fordham. I don't think we'll win either because I have no reason for optimism based on recent play but I know the reality is that those are winnable games.

If we somehow take both and beat Navy (or even just beat Navy at this point) I'm willing to accept that as marginal progress and look forward to next year. If we finish as a 2 win team though I'm going to start questioning Coach Monken's strategy of forcing a square peg in a round hole mighty quickly...

 

[snoopy72]

The one disappointment I have with Monken is forcing the square peg in a round hole as opposed to altering your scheme to the talent you have. Clearly Dixon is the kind of FB that fits the dive first strategy but.......that strategy caused the movement of a 300 lb, inexperienced center into the center position instead of sticking with the OL positions people were accustomed to. It also negated much of the talent of Baggett, Maples, and Giovanelli (proven offensive contributors, two of them were 1000 yard rushers). That scheme (running the 1 and 2 option), with Santiago as the starter, exacerbated his shortcoming which is being afraid to pitch the ball. If you look at the total carries by position the carries by the FB and QB dwarf those of everyone else combined. With an inexperienced offensive line it clearly is not working. We have also diminished Moss, by far our best receiver last year, in the offense. Defense was always going to be an issue but we have seriously diminished to roles of several productive offensive players with negative results, and we have stuck with something that is not working.

Having said all that, the number one offensive problem is the lack of a high quality QB trigger man and there is no near term fix for that. I would start AJ, since he still has another year, and see if he can improve his shortcomings with a little more experience. I do like the more enthusiastic, aggressive attitude of this coaching staff over Ellerson's and am willing to be patient and see what they can recruit.

 

[Bulletproof09]

Originally posted by snoopy72:

The one disappointment I have with Monken is forcing the square peg in a round hole as opposed to altering your scheme to the talent you have. Clearly Dixon is the kind of FB that fits the dive first strategy but.......that strategy caused the movement of a 300 lb, inexperienced center into the center position instead of sticking with the OL positions people were accustomed to. It also negated much of the talent of Baggett, Maples, and Giovanelli (proven offensive contributors, two of them were 1000 yard rushers). That scheme (running the 1 and 2 option), with Santiago as the starter, exacerbated his shortcoming which is being afraid to pitch the ball. If you look at the total carries by position the carries by the FB and QB dwarf those of everyone else combined. With an inexperienced offensive line it clearly is not working. We have also diminished Moss, by far our best receiver last year, in the offense. Defense was always going to be an issue but we have seriously diminished to roles of several productive offensive players with negative results, and we have stuck with something that is not working.

Having said all that, the number one offensive problem is the lack of a high quality QB trigger man and there is no near term fix for that. I would start AJ, since he still has another year, and see if he can improve his shortcomings with a little more experience. I do like the more enthusiastic, aggressive attitude of this coaching staff over Ellerson's and am willing to be patient and see what they can recruit.

Well said! Still highly disappointed, if they can show some kind of improvement with these last few games with mores strategies then what we been seeing, patience would be understanding..... Patients seems to be the make here, could be part of the problem.... Speaking up to bring light to the problems to be fixed early, is something that needs to be done... just my opinion

 

[E2dog82]

"5. Since 1996 is there a worse FBS program?? I am sure there is, just can't name them."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, no, no, no, no, no!

Army is the worst program in the nation since 1996. I have not done exhaustive research, but I have delved in pretty well. These numbers are from 1998 on thus omitting our 4-7 record in 1997.

Since 1998
Army 46 Wins 142 Losses - 1 bowl appearance
Florida International 43 Wins 99 Losses and 2 bowl appearance (FIU's first season of football ever was 2002)
Buffalo 47 Wins 131 Losses 2 bowl appearances (Buffalo moved to 1A in 1999)

The next closes established teams are:
Akron 64 wins 100 losses 1 bowl appearance
North Texas 59 wins 119 losses 5 bowls
Louisiana Monroe 70 wins 117 losses 1 bowl

Army has the fewest wins and most losses in that time span. Only FIU has less wins and that is only because they have played 4 fewer years in that time span. UMass and Georgia Southern are brand new to the FBS division - you can't count them. Long term we are clearly and without peer the worst program in the country. Other teams have had weak and very poor years but have all had high points as well. Our high point was one 6 win season that snuck is into a bowl game. The cherry on top of the Army sundae that really punches the point home is our NCAA record 0-13 season under Todd Berry. That is a record that Army holds alone and will be hard to ever break.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I question the thoroughness of your research Big_DNY. How could you possibly overlook perennial MAC cellar dweller Eastern Michigan?

From the start of 1997 thru 9 games in 2014, EMU has 52 wins against 154 losses. 10 of those 154 wins are against FCS teams. (They are 10-5 against FCS teams overall during that time). EMU had an 0-12 season in 2009, likely would have been 0-13 if they had played 13 games. Plus they are 1 - 4 against Army.

Other struggling programs to note:

New Mexico State-- 59 wins, 152 losses, 1997 thru 2014, including 0-12 in 2005. 1-1 against Army.

Idaho-- 63 wins, 146 losses, including 5 seasons winning only one game. No games vs Army.




This post was edited on 11/3 8:31 PM by E2dog82


This post was edited on 11/3 8:33 PM by E2dog82

This post was edited on 11/3 9:19 PM by E2dog82

 

[ashokan]

"The one disappointment I have with Monken is forcing the square peg in a round hole as opposed to altering your scheme to the talent you have."


If Army had less wins than years past I could see the point but Army has only been winning a couple games a year no matter what the system. Every year Army loses games to teams it should beat. Baggett had 1000+ yards and 8 TDs last year and still the team lost to 0-11 Hawaii. This year it seems its the defense that caused the bad losses. Army had 43 points vs Yale and still lost. Team gave up 41 to Rice and 39 to Kent St. Army isn't Oregon and can't score 40 points to win games. The only lost game realistically in reach offensively was Wake.

In 2010 Army averaged 251 yards per game rushing during winning season. This year its 294 a game. In 2012 it was 370 a game (#1 in nation) and Army only won two games. Maximizing certain stats isn't really a way forward and I think Monken knows that. The whole landscape needs changing. A pitch is often the result of failure to have the dive or to turn the edge. A pitch goes backwards and the goods teams stop it or send it to the sideline. A pitch isn't really meant to be a "go to" play these days. What makes it work is having teams focused on interior most of the time.



Good quote from Monk in paper after being asked if the job is more difficult than he thought it was going to be:


"I knew it was going to be tough.I didn't come here with any delusional ideas that it was going to be easy and I was just going to be able to wave a magic wand and it will all get better. This is a program that is going to take A LOT of things, building a culture and an attitude and improving the guys we got in the room and getting them to play the very best that they can play and working really hard to continue to bring players here that we think can make a difference for us in the future. That's all part of every program. This experience that I had at Navy with Paul Johson is eerily similar. Coming in here, I probably thought it was going to be déjà vu and it's 2002 all over again. You build it right from the ground up so we are going to continue to do that. We got to maintain our determination and our effort and I'm certainly going to do that and try to be an example for our players to do that."

Air Force Quotes

 

[BillGil]

As discouraging as it all is, I really do beleive its a better job than GS, and he doesnt want to go back. He's paid more, free house! the exposure is 20x greater, he gets back slapped by P Dawkins, Caslen, Odierno and Dempsey (vs who at GS?) and hes won a lot at Navy so probably thinks its possible here. I think he 's far from given up but we'll have to check back at this time next year.

 

[Bulletproof09]

Originally posted by BillGil:

As discouraging as it all is, I really do beleive its a better job than GS, and he doesnt want to go back. He's paid more, free house! the exposure is 20x greater, he gets back slapped by P Dawkins, Caslen, Odierno and Dempsey (vs who at GS?) and hes won a lot at Navy so probably thinks its possible here. I think he 's far from given up but we'll have to check back at this time next year.

Bill you best believe I will be front an centered on this one next year, and won't skip a beat!

 

[Big_DNY]

Eastern Michigan did indeed avoid my scrutiny when I was looking for the worst college football program in the FBS system. That pathetically inept program certainly does seem to give Army a run for the "worst college program in America since 1996" title. Army's record against FCS teams is also less than stellar. Just off the top of my head I can remember losses to Marshall, Holy Cross, Citadel, Stony Brook, and Yale (ok - that Marshall team was LOADED!). I think if I meet up with an Eastern Michigan fan and a debate breaks out about which of the two teams is indeed the worst I think I would be hard pressed to not concede a draw and conclude that both programs really really suck.
This post was edited on 11/4 11:09 AM by Big_DNY

 

[BrentDavis]

The losses to The Citadel were in 1991 and 1992, well outside of the time frame you've been considering.

That 1992 team finished #1 in the regular season I-AA poll and lost to eventual National Champ Youngstown State in the I-AA quarterfinals.

 

[Big_DNY]

91 and 92! Where does the time go? Feels like only yesterday.

 

[centuryman]

Army is a better job than georgia southern for 2 reasons. First, depending on what sources you read, Monken is making somewhere around 800-900k this year, and at Ga southern he would have made about 250k. So making triple your salary is usually enough to feel good about a job change.

Second, coaches want to coach at higher levels. they all do. Its part of their DNA. Its why you see a guy like bowden coach until he is 90. Or spurrier hanging on. Or the great ND state coach taking a 1-a job at wymoning. And, with that being said, Army is on TV, plays in yankee stadium, plays a few games on CBS (the actual CBS, not CBS 2 or CBS 3 or CBS sports), and has one of the best rivalries in college.

So, yeah, its a better job. Army is porbably not a better team than Ga Southern, but its a better job.

As I have said before, i don't think any of us can truly grasp the pure lack of athletic D1 talent that is on our roster. I mean, seriously, there are maybe 3-4 guys that would make alabama's travel roster. Maybe

 

[Bulletproof09]

Originally posted by centuryman:
Army is a better job than georgia southern for 2 reasons. First, depending on what sources you read, Monken is making somewhere around 800-900k this year, and at Ga southern he would have made about 250k. So making triple your salary is usually enough to feel good about a job change.

Second, coaches want to coach at higher levels. they all do. Its part of their DNA. Its why you see a guy like bowden coach until he is 90. Or spurrier hanging on. Or the great ND state coach taking a 1-a job at wymoning. And, with that being said, Army is on TV, plays in yankee stadium, plays a few games on CBS (the actual CBS, not CBS 2 or CBS 3 or CBS sports), and has one of the best rivalries in college.

So, yeah, its a better job. Army is porbably not a better team than Ga Southern, but its a better job.

As I have said before, i don't think any of us can truly grasp the pure lack of athletic D1 talent that is on our roster. I mean, seriously, there are maybe 3-4 guys that would make alabama's travel roster. Maybe

Well on the conference Monken said we don't have no talent on the team, UConn is more athletic then we are! So you know what that mean, we going lose this game too…..

 

[corywilk]

Well you may be right that are team would not fill many spots on the number 1 team in the country.However, I would bet they would have even less of there players graduate from west point! My son's Alabama was west point and nothing makes our family prouder then him wearing black and gold!

 

[BillGil]

centuryman - where have you been? I make that point constantly and get skewered and called an idiot for it. We have 3 guys that can play anywhere in Div 1 football and Yale and Stony Brook have 4 each.

 

[goarmyfan]

He did'ent do nothing ?

What does that mean ?

 

[goodknight65]

Originally posted by BillGil:
centuryman - where have you been? I make that point constantly and get skewered and called an idiot for it. We have 3 guys that can play anywhere in Div 1 football and Yale and Stony Brook have 4 each.

BillGill,

I took you on for saying we don't have anyone capable of playing at D1 level, which is BS. For one, D1 includes both FCS and FBS; so Yale and Stony Brook have a lot more players than 4 capable of playing at that level and so does Army. If you're going to make those kinds of assertions, use the correct terminology. If you mean FBS, say FBS not D1.

D1 football is legally stratified into FBS and FCS, but there is also a defacto disparity between all the schools in the Power 5 conferences and the rest of the FBS. We, and almost every other lower tier dFBS program can't compete with the Power 5 for talent. Buffalo and UMass have to settle for leftovers just like we do, and I would argue that more than 3 of our players could compete at that level.

Poe turned down an offer from Western Kentucky to play for us, Schurr turned down an offer from AFA to come to Army, Aukerman turned down an offer from Indiana, Dixon turned down an offer from Washington State, Ryan Alexander turned down an offer from New Mexico State, Baggett turned down an offer from Central Michigan, Addison Holstein had an offer from Stanford, and the list goes on. To assert that none of those guys could make it on any FCS team is balderdash.

 

[aleclee]

Originally posted by Big_DNY:

Army is the worst program in the nation since 1996.

With the brief and fleeting exception of the JY years (and even JY had a losing record against 1A schools), Army has been a horrid program for most of our lives. We have a whopping SIX winning seasons over the past 40 years. I've provided a link to a piece I wrote up last year but this graph offers a good synopsis:



Analysis of Army's Lost Decades

 

[jerseyboy63]

Holstein's offer was as a walk on and so were others on that list you named

 

[goodknight65]

AlecLee,

Just what institutional shortcomings would you expect the administration to fix without totally compromising the mission? I think that LTG Caslen has taken a look at everything recommended by all the blue ribbon committees going back to the Todd Berry era, and has implemented all the changes he could do without raising the ire of Congress, the Great American Public and the majority of graduates, most of whom are not as worried about the status of Army football as the folks on this forum.

The bottom line is that every athlete at West Point is being trained to become an Army officer, and the administration can't change that. They can't waive a whole lot of mandatory requirements we have for the rest of the corps just for Army football; so the incoming plebes have to complete Beast Barracks and the rest have to complete their mandatory summer training. They can't unilaterally change the service commitment for graduates, and they can't change the nature of the commitment to some career option that sounds better to mothers of recruits. The Army as a whole has always had a harder time recruiting than the Navy or the Air Force, and that same advantage exists when recruiting athletes. That's a given.

Caslen has increased the number of summer classes available to reduce the academic load during the season, but he can't very well start opening degree programs in Sports Management like most of the players at GSU take. Football players have to take all the same core math and science courses and earn a degree in a reasonably rigorous academic discipline, and they have to do it in four years. If you look at most FBS programs, you see a lot of 5th year seniors. That means they can take a program of study that's probably not as rigorous as ours to start with and spread it out over 5 years to lighten the load each year. Redshirting is not a viable option at the SAs with the exception of an occasional medical redshirt.

Another advantage that civilian schools have over West Point is the ability to accept undergraduate transfer students with full credit for coursework completed as well as graduate students who have completed an undergraduate degree before exhausting their eligibility. We might get a transfer student about once every 5 years, and they have to start from scratch. Even highly demanding academic schools like the Ivy League and Stanford bring in JUCOs and transfers from other schools as long as they meet the minimum standards of their schools.

The only institutions we can compete on a reasonably equal basis with are Navy and Air Force, and there we are competing with their career opportunities versus ours. Navy kicks AF butt in recruiting every year about the same as they kick ours, but AF still wins their fair share of CiC trophies. Navy has come a close as possible to optimizing on their talent, but its only good enough for a 4-5 record so far this season. They may give a few big programs a scare, but they don't beat them on a regular basis either. They usually get healthy scheduling teams like Georgia State or Texas State along with their annual FCS game. They are better than us at this point, but hardly ready to join a Power 5 conference. AFA knocked off Boise State this year because of 5 INTs and 2 fumble recoveries. They lost to Wyoming and Utah State, neither of which gets much mention on sports program discussions either, and AFA has never won an MWC championship. Navy may get to an AAC championship game at some point, but I wouldn't bet on it.

 

[centuryman]

An "offer" is an actual full scholarship.

Other things considered 'offers" that are not "offers" is walk on status, a letter in the mail, being recruited (but not being offered), etc....

All that being said, i'd love to know who the players are on our starting 22 that could play legit D1 football. Cause they aren't showing anything to us on a saturday.

As I have said before, and will say again, I don't think any of us truly grasp how little talent we have on our roster, courtesy of terrible horrendous recruiting and recruiting strategy by ellerson. This program has less combined talent, in my opinion, than any D1 program in the country, most D-1aa's, and many D2's. We are that bad.

And, for the person who is proud of their son playing for army-----me too. I played there, too, although short lived (1 year). If my son or daughter could play for army, I'd bore the hell out of my friends talking about the games. But that doesn't mean it is legit D1

 

[goodknight65]

Originally posted by centuryman:
An "offer" is an actual full scholarship.

Other things considered 'offers" that are not "offers" is walk on status, a letter in the mail, being recruited (but not being offered), etc....

All that being said, i'd love to know who the players are on our starting 22 that could play legit D1 football. Cause they aren't showing anything to us on a saturday.

As I have said before, and will say again, I don't think any of us truly grasp how little talent we have on our roster, courtesy of terrible horrendous recruiting and recruiting strategy by ellerson. This program has less combined talent, in my opinion, than any D1 program in the country, most D-1aa's, and many D2's. We are that bad.

And, for the person who is proud of their son playing for army-----me too. I played there, too, although short lived (1 year). If my son or daughter could play for army, I'd bore the hell out of my friends talking about the games. But that doesn't mean it is legit D1

Quite true, and by NCAA definition, the service academies do not offer sports scholarships; so I guess technically we never make an offer either. Nor does the Ivy League. Since I have no actual way of verifying whether any recruit has been offered a full scholarship, I rely on the Rivals and Scout database; so if they say that a recruit has an offer from a school, I have to take their word for it, understanding that they get their information from the recruits themselves.

Once again, I don't know what you mean by legit D1 football. D1 by definition includes both FCS and FBS. Are you limiting this to FBS?

I think some fans on this forum have lower regard for members of the Army team than people who keep track of these things for a living.

We have two running backs who are on the Doak Walker watch list this season, Baggett and Maples.

Baggett was named to the College Sports Madness and Phil Steele's pre-season All Independent first teams, and was on the College Football Performance Awards watch list for running backs. He's also a finalist for the NFF Scholar Athlete award.

Maples was named to Phil Steele's second team All Independent and was on the Maxwell Award watch list.

Dixon was mentioned as a Heisman aspirant and and was named to the College Sports Madness All Independent second team. He was named College Sports Madness Independent Offensive Player of the Week after the Ball State game.

Trenton Turrentine was named to the Earl Campbell watch list.

Shumaker was named to the pre-season College Sports Madness and Phil Steele All Independent teams and was on the Lomardi Trophy watch list.

Rich Glover was named to the pre-season College Sports Madness All Independent second team.

Geoff Bacon was named to the pre-season College Sports Madness All Independent first team and Phil Steele's All Independent third team.

Xavier Moss and Kelvin White were both named to the College Sports Madness All Independent 3d team as were Ugenyi, Jenkins, and King.

Jenkins was named FBS Independent Defensive Player of the Week honors after the Kent State game, and he currently ranks 14th in the FBS in interceptions. The recent article on Jenkins by GBK noted that an NFL observer, when asked if Jenkins had NFL potential, didn't hesitate to say "Yes. He has good size, good speed, and great hands. Very high football IQ, great instincts, loves the game, wants to be great, and works at being great."

Timpf was named FBS Independent Defensive Player of the Week after the Yale game and College Sports Madness Independent Defensive Player of the Week after the Wake Forest game.

Tardieu was recently named to the Ray Guy watch list.

Growchowski was named Independent Special Teams Player of the Week after the Ball State game.

But, according to some on this forum, none of those guys could play on legit D1 teams.

 

[ashokan]

I've never seen anyone say Army didn't have some good players who could play on other teams. But 5 or 6 good players can't make up a football team. If you have a great running offense that can't kick a 23 yard FG or extra points with reliability who cares if a player if one player is All Indpendent?

I'm not really impressed with anything "All Independent". You only have 4 teams that are independent. As one of only four teams (and one of them Navy) Army should have 6 guys on first team instead of a few second and third teamers. Over 50 guys are on Doak Walker list. With 120 D1 programs thats almost half of teams. Not saying the fellas don't derserve it. Just that a good back and no OL or QB isn't going to get a team wins.

Players not being up to D1 doesn't mean they are bums. I actually view them as overachivers. I'm impressed a team like Stanford doesn't beat them 70-0.

Not having enough good D1 players doesn't mean Army isn't a D1 team. Some of the things that make a D1 team are stadium size and attendance. D1 calls for minimum of around 20k as I recall. Just winning only 2 or 3 games doesn't mean a team shouldn't be D1. Somebody has to be in lower range and thats where we are.

I'll add that a lot of D1 players are not particularly nice people. Athletic talent aside, the good ones are very competetive and don't like to lose. They take it personal when another player or team tries to beat them or make them look bad. I really don't see much of that from Army players. I see a lot of players going through the motions - and not particularly elegantly either.

I was reading a 2008 interview with Ronnie McAda. He was emphasizing how his winning team had a good group of close seniors that wanted to win and learned how. You got the sense they liked each other. You don't sense that with recent Army teams. Guys don't block like they are blocking for their friend. There's no mojo. Its all flat like old soda left out after a party. I can't even watch post game interviews becuase its all the same stuff week after week, year after year. I still go to the games and stuff but I've stopped pretending Army has a great team if only the right coach would come along.

Army needs better players. To do that Army has to be more exciting and fun - give recuiters something to entice players. Its nice to have tradition and higher callings etc. But football should just be played like a game - just like lacrosse is. Army lacrosse games are fun. Army football on the other hand is a bit morbid. Losing at Army football has almost been made into a virtue to be embraced. The old "Army stinks but they will get shot at" thing. There are guys playing for Miami that grew up getting shot at. I'm weary of all the "Duty, Honor, Country" stuff that leaks over into football. People already get that stuff. To keep inflating it becomes an excuse for losing and a burdern on players. I never saw a kid such a mess like Steelman was after his last Army/Navy games. People lose relatives in accidents and don't cry like that. Army needs to lighten up. Navy isn't morbid that way because they don't have to live with all the culture stuff Army is smothered by.

This post was edited on 11/6 8:31 PM by ashokan

 

[aleclee]

Originally posted by goodknight65:

Just what institutional shortcomings would you expect the administration to fix without totally compromising the mission?

The only institutions we can compete on a reasonably equal basis with are Navy and Air Force,

Did you read my full analysis? At the time of the writeup, we had football player getting up with the swimmers to practice football at an hour where they would never take a snap against real competition. One certain sign of institutional apathy was keeping a coach who, despite years of evidence to the contrary, insisted he could win with grossly undersized players.

As for "[t]he only institutions we can compete on a reasonably equal basis", we're not even close to actually being competitive and never really have been for any length of time. Over the past 40 years we've won less that 32% of our games against AF and Navy. There are LTCs out there who have not seen Army win a CiC trophy since they graduated. The last class to see a win over Navy as plebes are now senior captains. Can we really say that's all due to Navy and AF's career opportunities?

To be honest, I don't know that I have the answer about how to fix the problem. On the other hand, Congress hasn't put three stars on my shoulders nor have they given me the responsibility and resources to run West Point. Is it really too much to ask of nearly a dozen LTGs that they either have an idea of how to fix the program or bring in someone who can at least figure out how to make us respectable relative to our peer group?

 

[goodknight65]

Originally posted by aleclee:

Originally posted by goodknight65:

Just what institutional shortcomings would you expect the administration to fix without totally compromising the mission?

The only institutions we can compete on a reasonably equal basis with are Navy and Air Force,

Did you read my full analysis? At the time of the writeup, we had football player getting up with the swimmers to practice football at an hour where they would never take a snap against real competition. One certain sign of institutional apathy was keeping a coach who, despite years of evidence to the contrary, insisted he could win with grossly undersized players.

As for "[t]he only institutions we can compete on a reasonably equal basis", we're not even close to actually being competitive and never really have been for any length of time. Over the past 40 years we've won less that 32% of our games against AF and Navy. There are LTCs out there who have not seen Army win a CiC trophy since they graduated. The last class to see a win over Navy as plebes are now senior captains. Can we really say that's all due to Navy and AF's career opportunities?

To be honest, I don't know that I have the answer about how to fix the problem. On the other hand, Congress hasn't put three stars on my shoulders nor have they given me the responsibility and resources to run West Point. Is it really too much to ask of nearly a dozen LTGs that they either have an idea of how to fix the program or bring in someone who can at least figure out how to make us respectable relative to our peer group?

My claim was that Navy and AFA are the only schools we CAN compete with on an equal basis due to the restrictions and obligations that come with being part of a Service Academy. I certainly agree that we have not competed with them equally in recent years.

I don't expect Army to even attempt to compete with the likes of Alabama and Auburn, and we have significant disadvantages competing with all civilian institutions, but I would like to see us hold our own with our fellow SAs. Navy and AFA are hamstrung with most if not all the same challenges that we face, and a lot of the institutional changes that would be required can only be made at DoD level with the approval (tacit or actual) of Congress.

We can't get past the fact that all cadets and midshipmen are provided with an education in return for a 5 year service obligation that carries with it some inherent risks. The American public is more concerned about getting value for their investment than they are with having the SAs field winning teams. Even within our graduates, you find the majority concerned more with maintaining the integrity of WP than they are with winning. That doesn't mean we don't want a winning team, but we are not willing to forego our principles to get one like some schools clearly do.

Not long ago, Troy Calhoun suggested that AF extend the curriculum to 9 semesters in order to allow redshirting. That kind of suggestion won't fly with most folks. Bobby Ross once suggested that football players should be excused from New Cadet Training, but that's another suggestion that won't fly. That wasn't as much of a problem when freshmen weren't allowed to participate on varsity teams, but now that they are, the requirements of plebe year put us at a greater disadvantage.