ARMY HAS SECRETS!
Stan Brock has Army going places, people, if only for what he claims not to know.
So Brock will run the option, right? The coach didn’t bite.
When jokingly asked if he would use a West Coast offense, Brock said, “What’s a West Coast offense?”
Not knowing the West Coast offense given the performance of the WC system in the college ranks may be a resume line all by itself, but Brock is of course joking. He and the other Army coaches spent “50 hours” reinventing Army’s flatlined offense, an attack totalling 19 TDs in 12 games. (Yes…give it a minute…correct. That’s the opposite of good for an offense.) Brock talked extensively with ex-Army coach Jim Young, an option coach who got Army to three bowls, an achievement that should make you feel very, very bad for not knowing who Young was in the first place.
Now put on your beanies, grab a swig of bathtub gin, and hop in the jalopy for some vintage Army option in the Army/ND game from 1946. Huzzah, and death to Tojo!
Um…why are they playing “Anchors Aweigh” in the background?
Loading ...
26
#9 Great points on Sutton, absolutely right. However, you need to give them all back for not pointing out that the song IS NOT “Anchors Away”, but is indeed the Army Fight Song “On Brave Old Army Team”…Go stand in a corner and sing Sons of Slum and Gravy 5 times for pinnance…which will be 4 more times than I ever sang it
Comment by Pick6Bamr — March 13, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
25
Wow, only one game at home in October? An amazing venue to begin with, throw in the foliage and tradition oozes there on the Hudson.
The C-USA affiliation never seemed to make sense, but maybe Army’s mid-90s success (we lost to them painfully all four of my years at Navy) led to grand ideas that couldn’t be sustained as college football evolved. It’s not as if C-USA was a dominant conference, but I believe Army/Navy need to have the independent status. AF faces far less of the restrictions that Army/Navy have to endure (both coming in and post-grad). Now that Army’s C-USA scheduling legacy is fading and is replaced by more flexible (and appropriate) scheduling, the opportunities for success are there.
But I still think it all comes down to coaching and the system best suited for the players that come in year after year (smaller, slower but more disciplined). Navy’s success in the mid-90s and then from ‘03-’07 was almost all Paul Johnson’s doing. Let’s hope Brock is the man for the job in Woop Town.
Comment by The 17th Goat — March 13, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
24
In discussing the reasons why Air Force and Navy football have recently had winning seasons while Army has struggled, there is one contributing aspect that I find it suprising that no one has brought up: The 3 academies’ varying conference affiliation experiences.
Navy has remained independent, and can schedule whomever and however they please. They are not forced to share any of their annual windfall from their lucrative annual game with Notre Dame (Home: play the game in a 70,000 seat stadium and keep the gate; Away: the visitor’s share of ND’s NBC deal; both sums regularly top $2M, if not more).
Air Force’s membership in the WAC and then the Mountain West was rather seamless, as a) they had no real traditional opponents other than Army and Navy (they continued to play both), as the AFA only began playing football in 1957, and b) it did little to alter their schedules, as prior to conference membership, they would regularly play 3 WAC members every season, along with a rotation of middling programs (Vandy, Kent, K-State, etc.).
Army’s membership in Conference USA (1997-2004), however, was neither seamless nor a good fit, as traditional eastern opponents such as Boston College, Rutgers, Temple, 1AA Holy Cross, and 1AA Lafayette were replaced with C-USA teams that the Black Knights had no tradition of playing. Furthermore, due to some quirky C-USA scheduling, in 5 of the 8 years Army was in the conference, they played only 1 home game in October, traditionally the peak month for attendance (and recruiting) when the fall foliage is in its fullest splendor, making Michie Stadium one of the best venues for a college football game in the country.
While Army’s unfulfilling foray into C-USA membership was not the only factor in their struggles in the last 10 years, I think it should not be overlooked as contributing to them.
Comment by GeronimoRumplestiltskin — March 13, 2008 @ 11:37 am
23
Michigan Gator,
Valid points. I am not surprised that conditions at WP are worse and more restrictive than Navy, can’t say about AF specifically. However some of that is due to the differences between the services: Army is more focused on following orders and “the book” as the lessons have been learned the hard way; Navy is more accepting of originality and generally looser.
And your point about the Marines/SEALS being optional is true. However I would say that is an argument more applicable to the overall student bodies than the football teams. I believe that in general athletes in aggressive sports have more of the warrior mentality, hence they tend to go Marines or other warfare specialties - not supporting roles. I haven’t seen the data for WP but I would bet that your football players are probably pretty similar in WANTING to be athletes, not athletic supporters.
Comment by NavyHusker — March 12, 2008 @ 9:41 pm
22
For you academy debaters let me say a big Thank You for your service whether or not you have healthy knees. You are appreciated.
Comment by citiesaregreat — March 12, 2008 @ 8:05 pm
21
#16, #17, #18- Points taken. When I say quality of life regarding Army Officers, I’m not necessarily referring to the point of Army Officers getting shot at vs. being on a ship since many Marines are in the same boat. I was more talking about the frequent deployment schedules that Army Officers face since Iraq launched. Army Officers in all fields are facing constant 12-15 month deployments vs. a typical 6-month underway for Naval Officers (again excluding Marines but also keep in mind that no one is forced to be a Marine upon graduating). Furthermore, Army military bases are, generally speaking, shitty. I can say without hesitation that Air Force and Naval bases are much better than your typical Army base. Again, there are exceptions.
Regarding the point about life at one academy being easier / harder vs. another academy, I am going mostly off of what I was told from exchange cadets. The Middies and AF Cadets that I spoke with generally thought that the rules enforced and general living conditions at WP sucked compared to what they were used to. But again, to each his own.
In the end, coaching plays the biggest part in all of this, but I truly believe that it is harder to recruit someone to WP than the other academies… and it’s not solely due to our shitty performance on the field over the last 10 years. Most of the people taking bullets in Iraq (other that the Iraqis themselves) are soldiers or Marines. A USNA recruit knows that they don’t have to go into the Marines. A USMA recruit knows that they ARE going into the Army upon graduating and they are figuring that they will be in a combat arms branch because no one assumes that they are going to blow out their knee in their 4 years of playing ball.
But I’m seriously tired of watching Army get their ass kicked on a yearly basis. I guess it’s karma for what happened in the mid-90’s.
Comment by Michigan Gator — March 12, 2008 @ 3:56 pm