|
|
Post by coachjaz on Apr 18, 2008 22:14:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Apr 19, 2008 0:06:57 GMT -6
If Army is going to the Wishbone, I really look forward to watching that beautiful offense get rolling. I fondly recall the days of Barry Switzer's Oklahoma Sooners rolling teams with the Bone.
KB
|
|
|
|
Post by coachweigelt on Apr 19, 2008 0:48:57 GMT -6
Great move!!
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 19, 2008 7:20:17 GMT -6
((Former Army football players and alumni have pleaded for a move back to an option-oriented offense since Todd Berry brought a one-back, passing-friendly system to West Point in 2000.
Bobby Ross installed a pro-style offense in 2004. Brock kept Ross' offense in place for his first season last year.
The non-option offenses have produced only 17 wins in eight years. Army's chief rivals — Navy and Air Force — have embraced option-based offenses that use misdirection and create mismatches to remain competitive against more talented opponents))
Yeah that passing attack really worked well for the outmatched Service Academy didnt it?
Guess they didnt have to look any further to their past and OTHER Service Academies to see what does and doesnt work with this type of grouping of kids. Seems pretty cut and dried.
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 19, 2008 8:05:48 GMT -6
What!? Are they crazy? They have to go 5 wide... They have to go spread... Don't they know you don't need any talent at all to run spread?
Don't they want to get the basketball kids on the field... they have to run spread!
Don't they know the fans want to see the ball in the air? No kid is going to want to play at Army... if they don't run Spread...
I kid...
Thread jack in 3...2...1...
|
|
|
|
Post by amikell on Apr 20, 2008 12:39:39 GMT -6
to be honest, i don't think going old school bone is a great move. defenses are going to be able to pack it in. At least w/ flexbone you have the threat of multiple recievers even if you don't use them. I also personally think flexbone provides better angles for the wingbacks.
going back to the option is a great move. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually are in flexbone more than wishbone.
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 20, 2008 12:50:38 GMT -6
to be honest, i don't think going old school bone is a great move. defenses are going to be able to pack it in. At least w/ flexbone you have the threat of multiple recievers even if you don't use them. I also personally think flexbone provides better angles for the wingbacks. going back to the option is a great move. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually are in flexbone more than wishbone. I can understand your sentiments... But the double tight offenses were successful when teams could load the box. Loading the box is nothing knew... knowing how to block the box has been discussed since the invention of time... Why are we so afraid of a loaded box nowadays? Was watching the Texas Tech Red and Black game... and when the #2's were out there, they didn't look so great... |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Apr 20, 2008 12:54:02 GMT -6
Are they running the Wishbone or the Flexbone?
The media has been referring to the Flexbone as the Wishbone for years now. Even the announcers in the booth at Air Force and Navy games refer to it as the Wishbone here and there.
Either way, I like that they are making the switch to the option offense. Their offense over the past few years has been awful, to say the least. They needed to do something.
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 20, 2008 13:00:27 GMT -6
how about the recognize they need to move down to the 1 AA level so they can give their kids a chance to compete.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 20, 2008 13:44:41 GMT -6
Then why arent Navy and Air Force having the same problems  Funny from 1983-99 and lots of option ball they went 95-94 17-76 Since then throwing the ball around a bunch Their parallels Navy and Air Force meanwhile have been very successful running the ball given the players they have (none) and the summer military camps, etc etc etc |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 20, 2008 14:14:34 GMT -6
Then why arent Navy and Air Force having the same problems Funny from 1983-99 and lots of option ball they went 95-94 17-76 Since then throwing the ball around a bunch Their parallels Navy and Air Force meanwhile have been very successful running the ball given the players they have (none) and the summer military camps, etc etc etc 95 and 94 is hardly being competitive. At most schools you would be fired for a .500 record. I am not saying they have to throw the ball around a bunch either. I am not opposed to the wishbone. lets face it, If you are a major program Army is a tune up game. navy plays a hand picked schedule which makes them competitive. they play several mac teams, army, air force and then play 1 to 2 major schools for money games. they are what, 1 and 39 or so in the last meetings with notre dame. the notre dame game plays for their whole football budget. outside of the todd berry years, they really did not pass the ball much. bobby ross had them run the ball a good portion of the time. when navy wanted paul johnson as the head coach, he told navy he would only take it if, they cleared the football players schedules from 3 to 6 daily. prior to that players where coming and going based on the class schedule. air force plays in a soft football confrense. they were a physical team. Army tried to be in confrence USA for a while. Army could be competitive in say in the MAC confrence I think. . They are however more suited for D1AA with there size limitations. |
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Apr 20, 2008 14:28:19 GMT -6
how about the recognize they need to move down to the 1 AA level so they can give their kids a chance to compete. Why would you go down to 1AA when you can reap the financial benefits of Div 1. Its all about money and pride. Plus they have the financial backing to stay at the Div 1 level. They are out of a conference now so I think they can start scheduling winable games and get back to mediocre. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 20, 2008 14:32:39 GMT -6
how about the recognize they need to move down to the 1 AA level so they can give their kids a chance to compete. Why would you go down to 1AA when you can reap the financial benefits of Div 1. Its all about money and pride. Plus they have the financial backing to stay at the Div 1 level. They are out of a conference now so I think they can start scheduling winable games and get back to mediocre. IMO, I would rather be able to compete, win games and be in the 1AA playoffs then to be a bottom feeder in 1A. I am sure they will get to a bowl game in the next few years cause almost every one gets to a bowl game now. we have special olympics for football. |
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 20, 2008 17:33:27 GMT -6
Then why arent Navy and Air Force having the same problems Funny from 1983-99 and lots of option ball they went 95-94 17-76 Since then throwing the ball around a bunch Their parallels Navy and Air Force meanwhile have been very successful running the ball given the players they have (none) and the summer military camps, etc etc etc 95 and 94 is hardly being competitive. At most schools you would be fired for a .500 record. I am not saying they have to throw the ball around a bunch either. I am not opposed to the wishbone. lets face it, If you are a major program Army is a tune up game. navy plays a hand picked schedule which makes them competitive. they play several mac teams, army, air force and then play 1 to 2 major schools for money games. they are what, 1 and 39 or so in the last meetings with notre dame. the notre dame game plays for their whole football budget. outside of the todd berry years, they really did not pass the ball much. bobby ross had them run the ball a good portion of the time. when navy wanted paul johnson as the head coach, he told navy he would only take it if, they cleared the football players schedules from 3 to 6 daily. prior to that players where coming and going based on the class schedule. air force plays in a soft football confrense. they were a physical team. Army tried to be in confrence USA for a while. Army could be competitive in say in the MAC confrence I think. . They are however more suited for D1AA with there size limitations. With the constraints they have to deal with .500 is pretty awesome. In most peoples minds 95-94 seems light years better than 17-76 considering the constraints. Yeah go try and recuit a kid for a 10 year commitment , one in which he will risk his life over, good luck. Read up on what these kids have to do each summer, then get back to me Most college teams have the kids from 3-6 whats the point? They get to practice instead of before hit and miss, no special extra leg up on others. They cant/wont take bad eggs, kids with bad grades, kids that are too big etc and again kids that promise to forgo the NFL to risk their lives as well as get up for PT every morning at 6:00 or earlier. Dont even get into the hazing etc. Soft WAC? I guess that helped June Jones and Hawaii too right? And how did the WAC do in Bowl games ( Boisie) and out of conference, you may want to check your stats. THe WAC has surprised some people. Armys schedule BTW isnt any HARDER than Navy or AF but compare how each have fared under similar circumstances/different offenses. Pretty obvious. If Army goes MAC, hasnt the MAC done farily well of late? Didnt the MAC do farily well these last few years? They play pretty good ball there these days IMHO. Ball State put up 600 yards on Nebraska last year, oh never mind EVERYONE put up 600 yards on NU last year LOL. An Ok Fit I guess. The Army Navy game is a national treasure, no way should that game go away. I suggest you read ""The Civil War" by John Feinstein before you call Army to drop down. It will give you a true appeciation for Army Navy. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 20, 2008 22:17:00 GMT -6
95 and 94 is hardly being competitive. At most schools you would be fired for a .500 record. I am not saying they have to throw the ball around a bunch either. I am not opposed to the wishbone. lets face it, If you are a major program Army is a tune up game. navy plays a hand picked schedule which makes them competitive. they play several mac teams, army, air force and then play 1 to 2 major schools for money games. they are what, 1 and 39 or so in the last meetings with notre dame. the notre dame game plays for their whole football budget. outside of the todd berry years, they really did not pass the ball much. bobby ross had them run the ball a good portion of the time. when navy wanted paul johnson as the head coach, he told navy he would only take it if, they cleared the football players schedules from 3 to 6 daily. prior to that players where coming and going based on the class schedule. air force plays in a soft football confrense. they were a physical team. Army tried to be in confrence USA for a while. Army could be competitive in say in the MAC confrence I think. . They are however more suited for D1AA with there size limitations. With the constraints they have to deal with .500 is pretty awesome. In most peoples minds 95-94 seems light years better than 17-76 considering the constraints. Yeah go try and recuit a kid for a 10 year commitment , one in which he will risk his life over, good luck. Read up on what these kids have to do each summer, then get back to me Most college teams have the kids from 3-6 whats the point? They get to practice instead of before hit and miss, no special extra leg up on others. They cant/wont take bad eggs, kids with bad grades, kids that are too big etc and again kids that promise to forgo the NFL to risk their lives as well as get up for PT every morning at 6:00 or earlier. Dont even get into the hazing etc. Soft WAC? I guess that helped June Jones and Hawaii too right? And how did the WAC do in Bowl games ( Boisie) and out of conference, you may want to check your stats. THe WAC has surprised some people. Armys schedule BTW isnt any HARDER than Navy or AF but compare how each have fared under similar circumstances/different offenses. Pretty obvious. If Army goes MAC, hasnt the MAC done farily well of late? Didnt the MAC do farily well these last few years? They play pretty good ball there these days IMHO. Ball State put up 600 yards on Nebraska last year, oh never mind EVERYONE put up 600 yards on NU last year LOL. An Ok Fit I guess. The Army Navy game is a national treasure, no way should that game go away. I suggest you read ""The Civil War" by John Feinstein before you call Army to drop down. It will give you a true appeciation for Army Navy. dear dave, It is four years in college then 5 years service time. I think I have a true appreciation since I spent time in the USMC as an artillery officer at paris island. I commanded a platoon of 198s. |
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 21, 2008 6:02:55 GMT -6
Airman,
My mistake, somehow I thought it was 6, maybe the number was reduced in the last 10 years?
Regardless if it is 2 years or 5 (5 is what is is today), it doesnt change the "value proposition" of the offer in the minds of 17-18 year old kids. Im talking legit DI recruits, when they consider their interests and needs at that age and add to it a 5 year commitment that puts your life in danger etc? Dont even add in all the other restrictions, Golly they have the tiniest of tiny recruiting pool, not only a tiny pool but a very shallow one too.
Hats off to all the Servie Academy kids playing football, I love watching them play with the cadets up in the stands, the tradition, pagentry. "Civil War" by Feinstein is a great book for any football coach, a great read.
|
|
|
|
Post by flexspread on Apr 21, 2008 6:56:28 GMT -6
Also keep in mind that Army has recently (the last 3 years I think) made it so if you can continue a career professionally you do not have to serve in the active military, you can opt out and instead do guest appearances and recruiting a few times a year for the remaining 5 years of service. I like the fact that the military schools still have football. I've always rooted for the smart kids schools (Vanderbilt, Stanford, etc) that have higher academic standards and in I think that the military schools qualify here. Also, I'll take a military football team that shows intelligence, and discipline over UL-Monroe and other schools on the same level of quality. Put Army in the Sun Belt and they'll win most of their conference games, in the WAC and MAC they'd be a top 4 team. In my opinion they are better than several D-1A programs but nowhere near the top 50. Probably in the 75 range.
|
|
|
|
Post by kylem56 on Apr 21, 2008 8:15:48 GMT -6
I believe I heard on ESPN recently that the Army is going to start allowing players who may be drafted to opt out of their active military committment if they are drafted by a NFL team
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 21, 2008 9:10:47 GMT -6
I believe I heard on ESPN recently that the Army is going to start allowing players who may be drafted to opt out of their active military committment if they are drafted by a NFL team Thats great if you are the 1 kid drafted and make the team, but as we all know vey very few make it to the NFL and certainly very few from the academies. A huge "gamble" if you think you are going to bypass active service to play in the NFL. They certainaly dont get out of all the hazing, summer camps, serving at the upperclassmens whims, time restrictions etc. Not what most 17-18 year old kids are looking for out of their college experience Slim pickings, but you gotta love the kids that make the choice. The kid from my HS team that played at West Point was an OG, about 210 pounds, quick, great attitude and great grades but just above avergage football player. I think he was honorable mention in the City, not state and had only DII and NAIA guys looking at him. He was also in ROTC, so maybe that was part of his plan, I didnt know him very well. |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Apr 21, 2008 9:20:24 GMT -6
I think flexbone fits the service academies very well.
You need tough, discipline, TEAM-first kids to run this offense, and naturally that is the kind of student athlete these schools attract.
I don't know if everyone has the type of kids to run this offense in DI, but the academies sure do.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 21, 2008 9:45:03 GMT -6
I believe I heard on ESPN recently that the Army is going to start allowing players who may be drafted to opt out of their active military committment if they are drafted by a NFL team From what I understand now, they dont opt out completely, they dosome recruiting type functions then when they are done with the NFL ( if they make the team) they go on 6 years of Reserves. As we all know in todays military many of the reserves now go on active duty in harms way. There are a number of guys from our church that have been called up even one who thought he was "completely out". |
|
|
|
Post by flexspread on Apr 21, 2008 9:52:37 GMT -6
If they opt out they do need to help recruit and speak at various functions but that is all. They are allowed to pursue an athletic career without inseason interruptions and in the off season they do a set number of these recruiting and moral activities. This is not the same as being a reserve.
|
|
mrigg
Junior Member
Posts: 457
|
Post by mrigg on Apr 21, 2008 10:36:30 GMT -6
The true wishbone or the flexbone? It will be cool to see how some younger kids react when they see it on TV. It’s a new revolutionary idea in football. Heck whats new is old again. Any one ever play a single wing team and a gun option team in the same year? Either way the Army/Navy game should be pretty cool this year... for me anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 21, 2008 10:43:25 GMT -6
If they opt out they do need to help recruit and speak at various functions but that is all. They are allowed to pursue an athletic career without inseason interruptions and in the off season they do a set number of these recruiting and moral activities. This is not the same as being a reserve. Coach, I think you may be in error on this one according to the Dallas Morning News: Service option Army is offering its top athletes a side door to professional sports. West Point has implemented an alternative service option program that allows cadets to turn pro – and play – right away. Cadets accepted into the program "will owe two years of active service in the Army, during which time they will be allowed to play their sport in the player-development systems of their respective organizations and be assigned to recruiting stations. If they remain in professional sports following those two years, they will be provided the option of buying out the remaining three years of their active-duty commitment in exchange for six years of reserve time." The Air Force Academy and Naval Academy do not offer such a program. Both academies require two years of active service upon graduation before presenting the option of swapping the final three years of active time for six years in the reserves. |
|
|
|
Post by flexspread on Apr 21, 2008 11:01:51 GMT -6
Coach,
After your initial 2 years you can continue with recruiting and being present for speaking engagements but only as long as you are currently participating in an athletic career. If you are only "pursing" a career in athletics you only have two years to make it, at which time you can opt out of the remaining 3 years in exchange for the reserve time provided you are continuing to "pursue" an athletic career. I believe that this is done so you must be on an active roster after 2 years but for those first two years if you are only on a practice roster you still have the opportunity to try and make it. It looks like this year may be the first year that somebody opts out for football but there have been a few people in the past two years do this for other sports. I do not know what happens in the event of an injury.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 21, 2008 11:07:24 GMT -6
The net is there is a 6 year Reserve Stint regardless, not recruiting, etc reserves. when you are done. Reserves get called up ALL the time in todays Military equation.
Are these guys really running the Wishbone? Seems like the Flexbone would make more sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by burtledog on Apr 21, 2008 15:51:21 GMT -6
Their spring game didn't publicly show offense at all. Few still know what their offense will look like.
Greg
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Apr 21, 2008 16:36:31 GMT -6
All talk of military contracts aside, I do have to agree with Airman on the academies and their 1A status.
I think it would be good for these programs to drop down to 1AA; they're enrollment and recruiting difficulties would easily put them in that area. Navy and Air Force have been doing a great job of competing with the big dogs for the past few years and they will continue to do so.
However, it would be a great for the academies if they were actually competing for something year in and year out ; i.e. a National Championship, not just a mid range bowl game. There wouldn't be any shame in it; in fact it would be a fair move for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 21, 2008 17:01:08 GMT -6
If you serve two tours in a combat zone you can be released from the contract. most do not becasue they want to serve their coutry
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Apr 21, 2008 17:07:07 GMT -6
Airman, My mistake, somehow I thought it was 6, maybe the number was reduced in the last 10 years? Regardless if it is 2 years or 5 (5 is what is is today), it doesnt change the "value proposition" of the offer in the minds of 17-18 year old kids. Im talking legit DI recruits, when they consider their interests and needs at that age and add to it a 5 year commitment that puts your life in danger etc? Dont even add in all the other restrictions, Golly they have the tiniest of tiny recruiting pool, not only a tiny pool but a very shallow one too. Hats off to all the Servie Academy kids playing football, I love watching them play with the cadets up in the stands, the tradition, pagentry. "Civil War" by Feinstein is a great book for any football coach, a great read. The National Guard , Army Reserve and USMC reserve are 6 year contracts becasue they are one weekend a month and 2 week active duty in the summer. I believe the Navy Reserve and Air Force Reserve are the same way. I remember reading how the army was going to a 2 and 4 deal as well. 2 years active duty and 4 years reserve. your two was basic, AIT, your MO training and then 12 months in IRAQ. |
|
