Army Football in the news

The non-football cadets are pretty upset about this. They are talking about a "sit down Saturday" vs Air Force this week, as in not standing during the game. I doubt that will materialize, but still, there is a lot of anger.

If you don't know about the "Yik-Yak" app that has become the rage on college campuses, you can "peek in" on what they are saying. They think it's anonymous, but they say some racy things, and one day one of those Yaks is going to end up like the rugby email. No electronic message is "anonymous" if the government sets out to find it out.

That said, IMO, the newspaper articles are always worse than the actual truth.
 
How many people in America know there's a Coast Guard Academy, compared to the other SAs?

But why do you need name recognition? People who want to join the armed forces will do their research. They will decide whether they want to enlist or commission. They will look into which service they want to join. They will look at the commissioning sources available to them.

I don't feel that name-recognition means that much. I may be biased because I come from a service where the SERVICE often doesn't even have name recognition, but still. People who want to join will do the leg work to figure out how they want to serve: whether the name of the SA is a household name or not.

And on a sidebar, not being recognized by name also has perks: i.e. when a scandal comes out at CGA, it's not picked up by many news outlets and does not bring discredit on the entire service like allegations at other SA's tend to do. Just my humble opinion though.
 
How many people in America know there's a Coast Guard Academy, compared to the other SAs?

Scout, I know it's easy to feel comfortable in your Army circles, but far less people have any idea what West Point is than you think. And they certainly don't know West Point for its "great" athletics…. :rolleyes:
 
The USAFA is a Div 1 school, and there are loads of people who have no idea it exists. I have to explain that it is like the military academy at West Point, but it is for the Air Force. So being a Div 1 doesn't necessarily generate the "name recognition" that some might think.

I didn't say there weren't. I asked for a relative comparison. Plenty of people think Ohio State and Ohio U are the same school. One has 55,000 students and one has 30,000.

The presence and persistence of uninformed dolts is rarely a good measuring stick.
 
Scout, I know it's easy to feel comfortable in your Army circles, but far less people have any idea what West Point is than you think. And they certainly don't know West Point for its "great" athletics…. :rolleyes:

Don't take it personally that the name recognition of the Big Three exceeds that of our little brothers. I didn't build this world, I'm just living in it. As a USMA grad, I'm not at all unfamiliar with the fact that people don't know what it is. Again, we're speaking in relative terms here.
 
But why do you need name recognition? People who want to join the armed forces will do their research. They will decide whether they want to enlist or commission. They will look into which service they want to join. They will look at the commissioning sources available to them.

I don't feel that name-recognition means that much. I may be biased because I come from a service where the SERVICE often doesn't even have name recognition, but still. People who want to join will do the leg work to figure out how they want to serve: whether the name of the SA is a household name or not.

The goal is to appeal to the kids who want top-flight educations and immediately think Ivy League or Public Ivies (I hate that term, but it's de rigeuer in college circles, so, so be it). The services did not become the vibrant and varied institutions they are by only seeking out the kids who only dreamt of Army men or sailors growing up.

And on a sidebar, not being recognized by name also has perks: i.e. when a scandal comes out at CGA, it's not picked up by many news outlets and does not bring discredit on the entire service like allegations at other SA's tend to do. Just my humble opinion though.

"Our scandals go unnoticed" is hardly a point of pride.
 
Don't take it personally that the name recognition of the Big Three exceeds that of our little brothers. I didn't build this world, I'm just living in it. As a USMA grad, I'm not at all unfamiliar with the fact that people don't know what it is. Again, we're speaking in relative terms here.

Oh I know it's more recognizable than CGA…. but I'm not sure relative terms mean anything in this context.
 
Just to provide some clarification on why a lot of cadets are up in arms about this:
1. The punishment most players received was 30 sitting hours. For comparison, a Company Level Board (adjudicated by a Captain) can award up to 20 walking tours or 40 sitting tours (only for cadets on profile or failing classes).
-The minimum punishment (heuristically) for anyone found "guilty" in a Brigade alcohol board (LTC/COL), is typically 80-120 walking hours.
-The BTO level alcohol board got bumped UP to a Comm's board but the punishment received dropped DOWN to a Company board level.
-Any other cadets found to have brought underage underclassmen and/or cadet candidates here for an overnight visit to the Palisades Mall, without signing out, and facilitate them drinking would get crucified. The common consensus is that a normal cadet would have become a turn back or kicked out.

2. The team is still losing. I think a lot more people would be willing to write some of this off if we had a team that was performing on the field. Losses to Yale and Kent State drained support for the team pretty quick.

3. The "official" response only came out AFTER the article hit the news. Why was this not released as soon as the investigation was completed? Common practice has been for alcohol offenders to type up a report of the incident (replacing names with CDT X, CDT Y, etc.) and even the golf team had to describe an offense last year. Why was this not addressed in a similar manner?
 
I didn't say there weren't. I asked for a relative comparison. Plenty of people think Ohio State and Ohio U are the same school. One has 55,000 students and one has 30,000.

The presence and persistence of uninformed dolts is rarely a good measuring stick.

My point was that having a D1 sport team does not necessarily generate "public" awareness. For example, would the USAFA be less well known if it only had D3 IC sport teams?

Aside from potential commercial revenue, what are the other benefits of having a D1 vs. a D3 sport team? Does a D1 team cost more to run than a D3?

I am not against D1 teams. I am not against IC athletes. I am just curious as to the benefits of one vs the other when it comes to an Academy.
 
My point was that having a D1 sport team does not necessarily generate "public" awareness. For example, would the USAFA be less well known if it only had D3 IC sport teams?

Aside from potential commercial revenue, what are the other benefits of having a D1 vs. a D3 sport team? Does a D1 team cost more to run than a D3?

I am not against D1 teams. I am not against IC athletes. I am just curious as to the benefits of one vs the other when it comes to an Academy.

TV Time for starters. It would be interesting to see how much traffic to the Naval Academy site ramps up during the days leading to/following after games like Ohio State and Notre Dame. Even if only a small percentage of those views are prospective cadets/mids, that could still be several thousand applicants who might otherwise have never considered an academy.
 
If you don't know about the "Yik-Yak" app that has become the rage on college campuses, you can "peek in" on what they are saying. They think it's anonymous, but they say some racy things, and one day one of those Yaks is going to end up like the rugby email. No electronic message is "anonymous" if the government sets out to find it out.

I have been poking about Yik Yak a bit. Though there are racy, controversial and inappropriate posts, there are some funny ones too. Some of these cadets posses an awesome sense of humor and sarcasm.

These gave me a chuckle
"Came partly for the skiing, staying for the restrictions"
"if you ever feel down just think about the kid that got cut from the basketball team in Airbud to make room for a golden retriever"
 
TV Time for starters. It would be interesting to see how much traffic to the Naval Academy site ramps up during the days leading to/following after games like Ohio State and Notre Dame. Even if only a small percentage of those views are prospective cadets/mids, that could still be several thousand applicants who might otherwise have never considered an academy.

But do the televising of the games really reach that large of an audience? They were not televising the Navy vs. Air Force Football game in the North East. Nor was it generally advertised. It was only because my son attends the USAFA that I knew there was a game, and I got updates via messages from friends. I would have to pay extra money to access a televised viewing of the game via the internet or cable.

It seems to me their target audience is that which already knows about the academies. It isn't really assisting them in reaching out to "new areas of potential cadets."
 
Scout, I know it's easy to feel comfortable in your Army circles, but far less people have any idea what West Point is than you think. And they certainly don't know West Point for its "great" athletics…. :rolleyes:

I have a shirt that i wear all of the time with USMA on the front and the logo with the Black Knight over the large A on the back. People have asked me if it is everything from mixed martial arts to Southern Mississippi to part of the Marine Corps.

I can't believe how many people TRULY don't know. They know USAFA/ Springs and Navy/Annapolis, but for some reason they get West Point and Army all jacked up. Of course, I enjoy explaining the difference to them.

Then it ends with me laughing when they say, "Wow, you know a Senator?":shake:
 
Just to provide some clarification on why a lot of cadets are up in arms about this:
1. The punishment most players received was 30 sitting hours. For comparison, a Company Level Board (adjudicated by a Captain) can award up to 20 walking tours or 40 sitting tours (only for cadets on profile or failing classes).
-The minimum punishment (heuristically) for anyone found "guilty" in a Brigade alcohol board (LTC/COL), is typically 80-120 walking hours.
-The BTO level alcohol board got bumped UP to a Comm's board but the punishment received dropped DOWN to a Company board level.
-Any other cadets found to have brought underage underclassmen and/or cadet candidates here for an overnight visit to the Palisades Mall, without signing out, and facilitate them drinking would get crucified. The common consensus is that a normal cadet would have become a turn back or kicked out.

2. The team is still losing. I think a lot more people would be willing to write some of this off if we had a team that was performing on the field. Losses to Yale and Kent State drained support for the team pretty quick.

3. The "official" response only came out AFTER the article hit the news. Why was this not released as soon as the investigation was completed? Common practice has been for alcohol offenders to type up a report of the incident (replacing names with CDT X, CDT Y, etc.) and even the golf team had to describe an offense last year. Why was this not addressed in a similar manner?

The double standard is by far the biggest cause of concern. Cadets want the standard to be maintained, not watered down.
 
But do the televising of the games really reach that large of an audience?

Yes. College football has replaced MLB as the #2 sport in America by viewership and revenue, second only to the NFL.[/quote]

It seems to me their target audience is that which already knows about the academies. It isn't really assisting them in reaching out to "new areas of potential cadets."

You're being obtuse for the sake of it, with zero evidence to back your claim other than your own feelings. When Navy plays Notre Dame, it's huge. 3 hours of the US Naval Academy on NBC. When Army plays Stanford, it's huge. Coverage all over the Pac-12 network area, which stretches the width and breadth of the Western US and huge pockets of the Midwest, South, and East.

Name some famous Navy athletes. Roger Staubach. David Robinson. Hell, that's why David Robinson was known as "The Admiral" his whole career. Everybody who remembers him playing knows he went to Navy.

It's a dog-eat-dog world for admissions talent. Like it or not, there's value in TV time and seeing "Army at Stanford" and "Notre Dame at Navy" and "Air Force at Boise State" crawl across the bottom of the screen when you're watching a different game. There's a reason you've heard of Anaheim. They have a team. You think anyone would know Green Bay, Wisconsin exists without the Packers? Love sports or hate them, but they're the most popular thing on TV. Being in the mix matters.
 
You think a kid chooses to go to Navy because of Roger Staubach or West Point because of Eisenhower or Schwarzkopf?

You and I know some famous athletes from the academies, but today's stars did not come from the academies. This mindset feeds into why I disagree with playing the D-I games. The Napolean McCallums and Chad Hennings aren't walking through those doors any more, at least they haven't recently. The glory of the very storied pasts of each academy football program isn't enough for me to support continuing them.

The D-I landscape is more competitive than ever. We trot out undersized athletes who also have an incredibly different expectation off the field and get smoked by anyone not named Buffalo. I say this as I am scheduled to attend my first Army-Navy game ever in Baltimore, but it seems to me the Commander's Cup games could still be played, regardless of the level of conference play for the academy teams. We are at a very distinct and decisive disadvantage on the playing field. I don't see the past 10-15 years of football as glorious for any of the academies.

The academies aren't putting great players into the pro leagues any more. that's just a fact. It's not a negative either, because that's not really the mission, is it?
 
Last edited:
The double standard is by far the biggest cause of concern. Cadets want the standard to be maintained, not watered down.

Part of the point BigBear is missing that in almost every case where an officer failed to do the right thing or encouraged bad behavior, the cadet gets the light end of the stick and the officer gets crushed. Both of those officers involved are done in the Army. GOMR in their permanent file? Start job-hunting, fellas.

I will say that I have numerous classmates who are Tac officers now, and even the most hard-nosed among them said they found the punishment to be quite appropriate.

Cadets excel at cultivating the attitude of "everybody else is getting a better deal than me" which leads to the "if it had be you or me, we'd be done but they got special treatment.

BigBear, did you know the cadets involved also got a Military Development "F" for the semester? That's a career-altering event when branch time comes around.
 
You think a kid chooses to go to Navy because of Roger Staubach or West Point because of Eisenhower or Schwatzkopf?

I think kids choose to go to an Academy for more reasons than you and I could ever list in one sitting. But they all boil down to one starting point: knowledge of the existence of the academy as an option.
 
Apparently the Gazette reporter is slated to appear on Good Morning America about this. I wonder why he didn't feel compelled to launch a televised crusade against this incident 2 months ago...

http://kdvr.com/2014/08/03/report-a...ng-air-force-academy-athletes/comment-page-1/

After all, that one happened out his back door and involved felony rape allegations.

Like I said originally...consider the source. Don't get a spark in your eye from the ax he's grinding.
 
Back
Top