Army v. Navy Game

Mom1315

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
387
Yes! Go Navy! What a fun game! Hope to be in Philly to watch live next year and then hang out with our plebe (If he becomes one!!!) Yay!
Congratulations Midshipmen, have fun tonight, but behave yourselves :)
 

qwerty52

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
51
Does anyone have a theory about why USMA has such a poor football team year after year. I went to the game the last two years; last year I knew why, but this year I'm wondering what was I thinking. Katie, you go first.
 

Harrison Morgan

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
100
there are a few reasons, but when it comes down to it, its recruiting.

westpoint hasn't been able to recruit for the past few years the way they were due in large part to the conflicts overseas and when recruits on their trips to army and navy look at the academies and their future, its often easier to see themselves as a sea warrior then as a land warrior. consequently westpoint has not been able to keep pace, and navy (continues to) dominates year after year
 

CurrentMid

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
70
And where exactly are you getting this information? Army has not been successful with the type of offense that they have been running. I don't believe for a minute land or sea warrior has anything to do with it.
 

acgeaux7

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
24
Army just started implementing their offense recently. This season was a transition for them into the new more pro-style offense. They will be much better in the future. And Navy definitely has an edge in recuiting in my opinion.
 

NativeTexan

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
86
Yes Army has just switched their offense. You have it backwards however. They were running a more pro style offense that just does not work for a Service Academy size team and switched to the triple option this year. A pro offense needs players that are bigger and faster. And lets face that style of offense does not take a lot of brains. A triple option requires the players to read a defense and make decisions. Certainly a trait of All Academy kids. Also, keep in mind that the majority of kids that come to USMA, USAFA, or USNA specifically to play ball do so because they are the few programs that these players can make it in to in the top tier of College Football.
 

bigcox

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
199
it was a nice romping, but it's true, army is getting used to an offense. i heard from one of the announcers that they only practice passing for about 10 minutes a practice and only emphasize running the ball...no wonder why their record is 3-9. you need to have a balanced offense to win games. and i thought their uniforms were peculiar...i liked navy's sharp-looking uniform, but what was army's goal with the camo? :confused:
 

Maximus

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
1,484
And where exactly are you getting this information? I don't believe for a minute land or sea warrior has anything to do with it.
I'll have to admit, I've heard the same thing. Of course it's not an official stance but just ask around any JROTC unit or High School Guidance office. Plus, if you play on the Navy team you can have a cool full beard lol
 

CurrentMid

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
70
LOL and you believe a High School Guidance officer.... I can tell you knowing many players that never entered into their decision to Go Navy!

Also, NT is correct. Army will get better as they get more used to the triple option. Navy does not exactly practice passing either and they have been successful so it has nothing to do with a lack of passing on Army's part.
 

2012Dad

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
14
I don't think it's land vs sea, per se, but it might enter the mind of the potential recruit that upon graduation, they can be "safer" on a boat (i.e. not Marine option) as opposed to sent in on ground forces. You really think that plays no part in recruiting? I would be inclined to disagree.

Mom3Boys (accidently logged in on hubby's account)
 

CurrentMid

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
70
You may as a parent be inclined to disagree but try asking those of us that are either Cadets or Midshipmen and you will find that in the end it played really no part of where any of the recruited athletes ended up. Much more went into the equation. The biggest was which academy made it clearer that they wanted the athlete, which program did could the recruited athlete feel that they could make a difference.

I seem to recall looking at past posts mom3boys that your son was irritated that Navy didn't seem as interested in him as Army. You don't believe that was a huge factor? He went Army so obviously the your perceived "safety" factor didn't mean too much.

I really do find it rather offensive that people can claim that somehow I ended up at Navy because it was the "safer" option. That my desire to serve is somehow diminished because I may not be in direct harms way. You really think that my desire to go marine pilot is safer than the Army? So I get the impression that the only SA student that will be "really" serving is the Cadet at Army. I guess as the Army spirit spot showed we are just doing our time at the yatch club.

I would hope that the parents and applicants on this site were more gracious than this. It is pretty low to claim that Navy beats Army because our athletes don't want to serve in harms way. At least the Navy didn't try to get our football players released from their service commitment.
 

hyb128

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
27
Was anyone at the game? I'm a candidate for the USNA and they gave me free tickets around the 45 yard line 27 row. It was really fun.
 

Maximus

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
1,484
You may as a parent be inclined to disagree but try asking those of us that are either Cadets or Midshipmen and you will find that in the end it played really no part of where any of the recruited athletes ended up. Much more went into the equation. The biggest was which academy made it clearer that they wanted the athlete, which program did could the recruited athlete feel that they could make a difference.

I seem to recall looking at past posts mom3boys that your son was irritated that Navy didn't seem as interested in him as Army. You don't believe that was a huge factor? He went Army so obviously the your perceived "safety" factor didn't mean too much.

I really do find it rather offensive that people can claim that somehow I ended up at Navy because it was the "safer" option. That my desire to serve is somehow diminished because I may not be in direct harms way. You really think that my desire to go marine pilot is safer than the Army? So I get the impression that the only SA student that will be "really" serving is the Cadet at Army. I guess as the Army spirit spot showed we are just doing our time at the yatch club.

I would hope that the parents and applicants on this site were more gracious than this. It is pretty low to claim that Navy beats Army because our athletes don't want to serve in harms way. At least the Navy didn't try to get our football players released from their service commitment.
No one said you or any particular Midn was any less honorable, it's just a fact that some do look at it that way, sorry, that's reality. We are at War right now and the fact of the matter is, a Marine or Army 2nd LT. will most likely end up in the war zone, on the ground.

My son looks at it the same way you do, he wants to be a Marine Officer from the Academy as his first choice, that's hardly the "Safer" option.
I personally felt the same way when I enlisted in the USMC during the Iranian Hostage Crisis back in 1979, my buddies and I wanted to serve our Country and most people in the Service want to serve their Country, most, not all.

BTW, Navy has had some Athletes take the "deferred service option" after Graduating.


This is hardly an ongoing problem for the services. The exceptions are so few as to be well known -- Naval Academy graduates David Robinson, serving for two years before going on to be a star center with the San Antonio Spurs,
 
Last edited:

acgeaux7

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
24
yeah, my bad, that's what I meant actually. that's why Mooney moved to starting FB and got so many carries this year.

I will disagree with you though. A triple option doesn't need as much decision making as a pro-style offense in my opinion. The decision making that takes place before the snap is reading the defense and figuring out if you are going to give it to the FB, or keep it yourself and run with the HB. In a pro-style offense, a QB has to read coverages pre-snap and communicate well with his WRs, plus he has to read blitzes for his OL to pass protect. Then he has to make good decisions during the actual play.

the reason why Service Academies can't really run pro-style offenses is because they have weight restrictions, and can't have 280+ linemen. Option offenses, whether triple option or spread option, rely on skills position players to minimize the size disadvantage at the line.
 
Last edited:

CurrentMid

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
70
it's just a fact that some do look at it that way, sorry, that's reality
I'll ask again what do you base this on - some HS guidance counselor or JROTC?

Try talking to those who are recruited, try talking to those of us that actually made the decision. I think you will be surprised. Personally, I do not know one Midshipman who decided on Navy because it was the safer service branch.

Robinson served out his time.
Upon graduation, he became eligible for the 1987 NBA Draft and was selected by the San Antonio Spurs with the first overall pick; however, the Spurs had to wait two years before he could join them because he had to fulfill two years of Navy duty.
The Navy excused him from three years of the normal five years of his military commitment following graduation from the Naval Academy because his height prohibited his deployment in many roles (e.g. aviation, the submarine service, and many ships). Nonetheless, Robinson continued to serve in a reserve role with the Navy and was regularly featured in recruiting materials for the service.
Like I said - at least the Navy did not request that he go directly to the Pros.
On Nov. 2, 2007, Navy Secretary Donald Winter issued a policy memo upholding every five-year commitment from Naval Academy midshipmen. Erased was the deal other service academies afforded professional athletes with contracts: serve two years, then double the remainder of your commitment in the reserves, and you are free to pursue your sports career.
 

Maximus

10-Year Member
5-Year Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
1,484
I'll ask again what do you base this on - some HS guidance counselor or JROTC?

Try talking to those who are recruited, try talking to those of us that actually made the decision. I think you will be surprised. Personally, I do not know one Midshipman who decided on Navy because it was the safer service branch.

Robinson served out his time.

Like I said - at least the Navy did not request that he go directly to the Pros.
I see this is getting a little personal and we'll just have to disagree. Good luck with your career in the Navy.
 

Just_A_Mom

10-Year Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
4,826
Does anyone have a theory about why USMA has such a poor football team year after year. I went to the game the last two years; last year I knew why, but this year I'm wondering what was I thinking.
I am not an expert on Army or Navy football by any means - but no one else here is either so I will throw in my two cents -
In no particular order:
1. Winning begets winning. There is a lot of psychology in sport and this is a fact. Even though it's the Navy coach's first year he is simply continuing what Johnson started. Navy got extremely "lucky" in getting and affording Johnson. (Thanks to Navy Alumni) He did a tremendous job in turning around a losing program.
Winning seasons make recruiting easier as well.
Winning also keeps money flowing into the program. Alumni don't like donating to a losing team and when a team wins the money flows like Niagara Falls.

2. Army has been through a string of coaches and this is Brock second year. Last year he was basically ordered to institute the Triple Option. This is the most successful style of football for SA's for reasons stated above.
The QB on Sat - Bowden is a sophomore who did play the option in high school but this is his first year on Varisty and he only played in a few games this season. He basically won the job from QB who had difficulty executing the option early in the season.

3. Brock - a pro Coach has little or no experience with options football. From what I hear neither does the OC.

4. Recruiting - Army did have some rough years because ofthe War. All of WP did, it just got harder to get kids and parents on board with other options (civilian) available and the knowledge that WP grads would be heading into direct combat and many 2nd Lt. and Lts were making the Ultimate Sacrifice.
I have never heard that a recruit turned down Army for Navy to avoid War. It is more like they turn down Army for a civilian school.

5. You can be sure this loss is not going over well with the Army Brass or Alumni. Will changes be made? I have no idea but changes have been made and when changes are made it takes time to see results. Were the correct changes made over the past few years? Only time will tell that one.

6. Bottom line - A/N football is more than just football. I would have gone to the game even if I knew it was going to be a blow out.
 
Top