|
How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 8:56 PM
How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
What would it take to get Army Football winning? It is an institutional problem  I look at The Dallas Cowgirls and realize they passed up on Tom Brady six times so they could get Tony Lamo. But Tony is only a part of the problem. I say it's the person in charge of player personnel. My spouse says that person is called "the owner" (whose name I no longer acknowledge.) Regardless, the same can be said for the USMA. Maybe they both need new owners, and yes, I realize who "owns" the USMA but still think it is a good option! So, how many head coaches are we going to go through and how many seasons are we going to lose before Army/USMA/West Point becomes synonymous with a culture of losing? I venture to say it already has.... We need the correct HC, the correct players, but also the correct system, not a quick fix, but a big look at the root causes of the lack of productivity/wins. I refer back to the cowgirls - even Barry what's his name could win with the best players. However, developing players who are decent, perhaps not the best, framing them in an environment conducive to winning takes something extra. The USMA has got to provide some kind of incentive to get the best players they can and create the environment to help them win. Winning has to be a priority and what it takes is not on USMA's priority list. While football is not the mission of West Point, losing is not it's objective either. Football is a facet of the institution and a big part of it's face. How serious can you take an obese doctor telling you to lose weight? Seriously, if an institution like the USMA can't produce winners on the football field, how can they produce leaders off of it? Winning at the Naval Academy has been good for their business, on and off the field. The wins bring in more publicity,more players, more fans, more money, more toys, more influence,etc. The wins distract from the business of war. The big players (and I don't mean those on the football field either) need to realize that a successful organization is multifaceted and winning on the football field is one of those facets. We have got to start by doing what ever is necessary to get the best damn players out there. Smart players. How do you get the guys who are smart who can also play football to come to the Academy? And how can you get the correct HC if you aren't willing to give them what they need to get and keep the right players? I thought Bobby Ross had a number of suggestions and recommendations, did he not? What about the "big commission in the sky" who met to determine the best course for Army Football? What were their suggestions? Was it the DOD who squelched those opportunities? Or was it Navy whining and using all of their muscle complaining about the ASO? Or poor pitiful members of this board who said it was unfair to treat football players special, as in giving them extra rations because they just worked their butts off for eight hours was "special?" If so, we can not get the correct coach until they are given the authority to do what it takes,even if that means developing a tougher skin and telling the DoD to "suck it." Seriously, Army needs to just do what it takes and get the job done. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 7:27 AM
As I've said before,take the same liberties Navy & AF do.
admit ahtletes who physically aren't right for many specialties but too many WP alumni get sanctimonious when discussing admission standards, reminding us of the stated USMA mission. Navy & AF have similar mission statements but look the other way when it comes to football. As indeed, do even elite Ivy League schools. Harvard's President testified in open court several years ago in an affirmative action case that they routinely admit top athletes who otherwise wouldn't be accepted. If they can do it, and Navy & AF do it, why not USMA? That's something, Harvard has a greater commitment to winning than does WP. Disgraceful. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 7:44 AM
Re: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
boniou wrote:We have got to start by doing what ever is necessary to get the best damn players out there. Smart players. How do you get the guys who are smart who can also play football to come to the Academy? I don't know but you could ask some of the guys that Todd Berry recruited to come to Army what convinced them...... Maybe someone with better computer skills than I have can link the 2003 Army football roster w/Ht and Wt. stats......
Last edited 11/24/2012 8:37 AM by barrynGA
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 12:47 PM
Re: As I've said before,take the same liberties Navy & AF
Plain,
We already do accept athletes that otherwise would not be accepted- it's called USMAPS.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 12:49 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
Todd Berry was 5-35 at Army--I'm not really sure what you'd want to prove with the heights and weights of a team that went 0-13.
plain, I'm interested to hear what Navy is doing that's out of line with Army's standards. Yes, Navy has some bigger players than you'll find on Army's roster, but we've discussed in other threads that those players have to get down to Navy/Marine Corps weight standards after their playing days are over if they want to be commissioned in time. The same rules apply to heavyweight wrestlers or throwers on the track and field team.
"Well that's just like, um, your opinion man."
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 1:06 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
plain writes letters to his cable company when he sees a navy ad on TV. i don't think you really want his "insight."
Your OPINION is driven by the fact that he's bigger, stronger, more mobile and has a stronger arm???? Jeez that must be ALL it takes to be a great QB under the Phatphelix system.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 1:21 PM
David Robinson sure served his country in the NBA. Joe...
Bellino too, etc., etc. And the AF released Chad Hennings to play for Dallas, having just realized that at 6-5, 270 he didn't fit in the cockpits of fighters. They actually said that.
Prepsters still have to meet entrance requirements. What Harvard's President admitted under oath was that they admit ahtletes who don't, and not just for football. He testified that if the Crimson hockey coach needs a goalie, at least one standout HS goalie will be admitted, period.
My point was some of our posters have expectations of the USMA Admissions Office that clearly aren't held by Navy and AF grads. They just want to win, baby.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 1:46 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
told you
Your OPINION is driven by the fact that he's bigger, stronger, more mobile and has a stronger arm???? Jeez that must be ALL it takes to be a great QB under the Phatphelix system.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 3:00 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
04USNA0302 wrote: Todd Berry was 5-35 at Army--I'm not really sure what you'd want to prove with the heights and weights of a team that went 0-13.
Lots of really big guys on that team. What TB/BR and their staffs did with them is another story. My point is that you can recruit big guys and guys that can play, contrary to a lot of stuff I read on this site..... There was a hell of a lot of talent on those rosters that that was p***ed away due to coaching dogma.... Army Football hasn't known what it is doing for some time now, I'll go as far as to say that they have been downright inept.... I've said before and I will say it again. I think that the recruiting classes that TB brought in and left for BR were made up of the best raw talent that Army has had in the modern era of Army Football and we wasted it!!!! Now we hear the whine that we can't get big guys or that we are afraid that they will not look good in Cadet uniforms. I don't recall that any of those guys during that time frame didn't look good in Cadet uniforms, that's why they have tailors at WP. As far as I know most of them graduated as well..... Your Paul Johnson with those players would have gone undefeated for two years.....
Last edited 11/24/2012 3:10 PM by barrynGA
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 3:47 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them.
"Well that's just like, um, your opinion man."
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 4:27 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
04USNA0302 wrote: Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them. +1 Ellerson and Sadaat have both said their not against recruiting big guys. It's just they want big guys who can move. The lack of size on the defensive line is a result of the recruiting class/prep school attrition under Brock & Ellerson from 2007-2010. The team has paid the price the last two years. Army is playing their second tier recruits as starters on the defensive line. I've seen who the program has offered the last three years and those who played at prep the last four years. As the writer who covers most of the recruiting on this site and Go Mids.com I can assure you that its not Ellerson game plan to field the smallest DL in division I. His Cal Poly DL was bigger than the DL line he's had to play the last two years. Some guys on this board repeat the same Ellerson quote as if its some sort of Biblical verse that is set in stone. This year they had five DL recruits over 260. It will take some time to develop but one or two of these guys could develop. This year's prep team line has some nice prospects and they have offered a number of DL recruits over 265 this year. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 4:40 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
04USNA0302 wrote: Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them. Wrong! |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 4:45 PM
Re: David Robinson sure served his country in the NBA. Joe...
plain wrote: Bellino too, etc., etc. And the AF released Chad Hennings to play for Dallas, having just realized that at 6-5, 270 he didn't fit in the cockpits of fighters. They actually said that.
Prepsters still have to meet entrance requirements. What Harvard's President admitted under oath was that they admit ahtletes who don't, and not just for football. He testified that if the Crimson hockey coach needs a goalie, at least one standout HS goalie will be admitted, period.
My point was some of our posters have expectations of the USMA Admissions Office that clearly aren't held by Navy and AF grads. They just want to win, baby. Plain, Chad Hennings would kick your ass if he could find you. He did a full 5 yrs or whatever and served in combat during Vietnam or Desert Storm. He got no special treatment to my knowledge. You lose all credibility when you shoot from the hip and don't know what you're talking about. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 4:48 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
jimbearnj wrote:
04USNA0302 wrote: Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them. +1 Ellerson and Sadaat have both said their not against recruiting big guys. It's just they want big guys who can move. The lack of size on the defensive line is a result of the recruiting class/prep school attrition under Brock & Ellerson from 2007-2010. The team has paid the price the last two years. Army is playing their second tier recruits as starters on the defensive line.
I've seen who the program has offered the last three years and those who played at prep the last four years. As the writer who covers most of the recruiting on this site and Go Mids.com I can assure you that its not Ellerson game plan to field the smallest DL in division I. His Cal Poly DL was bigger than the DL line he's had to play the last two years. Some guys on this board repeat the same Ellerson quote as if its some sort of Biblical verse that is set in stone. This year they had five DL recruits over 260. It will take some time to develop but one or two of these guys could develop. This year's prep team line has some nice prospects and they have offered a number of DL recruits over 265 this year. But Jimbear, why do the guys who came in at 260 or so end up at 240? |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 4:52 PM
Re: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
To get the Army football team winning again, which is an institutional problem, is to have standards. The level of an acceptable winning season is not clearly defined. Just read some post here (win the C.I.C. ) an you will see cloudy standards of acceptability. Look at Tennessee thats a football program (goodbye Dooley) that doesn't allow or accept losing. Now, we all know that if the public, NY press, fans and alumni, hammered the powers to be, Army would win at all cost. However, as Rabble stated Army makes just enough to cover their expenses to continue the misery.
Yes, Bobby Ross did make a few suggestions and recommendations only to state "this is the hardest job he ever had", basically he was frustrated with the red tape.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 5:13 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
04USNA0302 wrote: Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them. BR came into town, made SB his OLine Coach. The same OLine that was doing nothing under TB started ripping Ds allowing TR and CJ to run wild.
Mumford took some of the same guys TB left and built a respectable D, one that I wish we had this year.
BnGA is right, he is a smart guy. Keep The Faith and Keep On Swinging
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 5:17 PM
Re: As I've said before,take the same liberties Navy & AF
plain wrote:admit ahtletes who physically aren't right for many specialties but too many WP alumni get sanctimonious when discussing admission standards... Already done. Linemen from TB & BR eras were too big for armor, aviation, etc. In fact there were humerous instances of linemen wiggling into a tank at Ft. Knox one summer... Keep The Faith and Keep On Swinging
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 5:19 PM
RE: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
barrynGA wrote:
04USNA0302 wrote: Big guys =/= guys who can play
If they could play, they would not have gone 0-13 regardless of who was coaching them.
Wrong! Please explain. Having a bunch of big kids (or good athletes) doesn't necessarily mean you've got a bunch of good football players. Sure, a big kid who's a good player has an advantage over a small kid who's a good player, but Navy and others have shown that you're better off looking for small kids who can play rather than big kids who can't.
"Well that's just like, um, your opinion man."
Last edited 11/24/2012 5:19 PM by 04USNA0302
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 5:29 PM
Re: David Robinson sure served his country in the NBA. Joe...
armyfan wrote:
plain wrote: Bellino too, etc., etc. And the AF released Chad Hennings to play for Dallas, having just realized that at 6-5, 270 he didn't fit in the cockpits of fighters. They actually said that.
Prepsters still have to meet entrance requirements. What Harvard's President admitted under oath was that they admit ahtletes who don't, and not just for football. He testified that if the Crimson hockey coach needs a goalie, at least one standout HS goalie will be admitted, period.
My point was some of our posters have expectations of the USMA Admissions Office that clearly aren't held by Navy and AF grads. They just want to win, baby. Plain, Chad Hennings would kick your ass if he could find you. He did a full 5 yrs or whatever and served in combat during Vietnam or Desert Storm. He got no special treatment to my knowledge. You lose all credibility when you shoot from the hip and don't know what you're talking about. Not that facts matter to plain, but Bellino graduated in 1961 and served his 4 year commitment before he ever practiced or played with a professional football team. He was drafted by both AFL and NFL teams in 1961 but served out his full commitment before he ever joined an AFL team. He also retired as a Captain after 28 years in the Navy Reserves. Sorry, but you're completely misguided if you're trying to use Bellino as an example of Navy skirting the rules. Hennings did bounce out of the AF before his pilot commitment was up, but that was partly due to the AF (and military in general) going through a big reduction in force after the Gulf War.
"Well that's just like, um, your opinion man."
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2012 5:35 PM
Re: How to make Army a winning program - it isn't pretty
If the administration is comfortable with the program the way it is at the moment and it is paying the bills for all the sports it now runs, no coach will make much of a difference no matter who it is.
With the rapid turnover of the brass every few years, there is no consistency of thought and no short term Supe will stick his neck out on his closing tour of duty in the Army and radically change much to do things that apparently need changing to compete in the FBS world of today.
As a result, little will change in the short term and probably in the long term too.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
Army Insiders