SB Nation Article. Preview.

Discussing Army Black Knights football, basketball and more. United States Military Academy sports forum. West Point athletics discussion board.

User avatar
ARMORMAN
New Recruit
Posts: 209
Joined: December 2016
x 2
x 78
Contact:

Most important finding, imho:

Post by ARMORMAN » Tue May 07, 2019 9:47 am

Our (lack of) first down efficiency last year. That's because we ran the fullback dive so predictably on first down over and over and over. Truth be told, it was close to maddening. I think our new Offensive Analyst will cure that shortcoming.....
1 x

prairie
New Recruit
Posts: 214
Joined: December 2016
x 73
Contact:

Re: Most important finding, imho:

Post by prairie » Tue May 07, 2019 12:35 pm

ARMORMAN wrote:
Tue May 07, 2019 9:47 am
Truth be told, it was close to maddening.
It was probably DEFINITELY maddening to our opponents.

That first down statistic is just silly in my opinion and nothing to be concerned about. Army ran on 89.2% of its offensive snaps last year. Most teams average at least double the yards on their pass attempts than their rushing attempts. Army averaged 4.9 yds/rush attempt and 10.9 yds/pass attempt. For a team that runs as much as we do, yards per play is going to be much lower than a balanced team that passes 50% of the time.

This is one of the reason that S%P rating doesn't work too well for Army. Its style of play just does not fit the model. If Army is averaging 5 yards on each first down, it'll be a long afternoon for any defense and very few teams will beat it because this is RELIABLE 5 yards as opposed to 5 yards mixed in with incomplete passes scattered around the average.

Another big problem for the S&P rating for Army is that it does not take into account 4th down plays at all. Army lives on 4th downs and was (and will be ) unusually successful. Until it tweaks the 4th down issue, S&P will always rank us lower than other models.
0 x

wpgrad
New Recruit
Posts: 641
Joined: December 2016
x 8
x 109
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by wpgrad » Tue May 07, 2019 3:17 pm

Jeff Monken can run the fullback dive 35 times a game for all I care, if that means we are competitive in every game, going to bowls, and keeping the other offense on the bench as we run 65-75 plays.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the worst game we have played in 2 years was the time we passed 21 times (Duke) and in my opinion the best game we played in the last 2 years was Air Force 2017 (zero passes) or Oklahoma (3 completed passes).

lets run the fullback dive every play :)
0 x

User avatar
RABBLE
New Recruit
Posts: 29083
Joined: December 2016
x 1
x 122
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by RABBLE » Tue May 07, 2019 9:31 pm

I'm all for running the FB dive on 1st down as long as we can pick up 4-5 yards on it. I'M GOING TO MISS DARNELL WOOLFOLK terribly though. He was always Mr. Dependable. If Slomka can pull the FB weight, we will be OK. If the FB falters, we will not be as successful as we were a year ago. Our most important down is first down. We go 2nd and ten, our chances of making a first down will drop quite extensively. We go 3 and out, our defense will be pressed even more to stay off the field.
0 x

User avatar
Mack270
New Recruit
Posts: 398
Joined: December 2016
x 399
x 64
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by Mack270 » Tue May 07, 2019 9:40 pm

How is it that we've been discussing the roles of offensive analysts/quality control coaches in college football for five months now and folks still think that they have any impact whatsoever on play calling?

That article stated we had somewhere like an average of 5.2 yds per first down play. In my mind, that puts us two yards ahead of schedule. Some people just want to complain for the sake of complaining.
0 x

prairie
New Recruit
Posts: 214
Joined: December 2016
x 73
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by prairie » Wed May 08, 2019 9:49 am

Mack270 wrote:
Tue May 07, 2019 9:40 pm
That article stated we had somewhere like an average of 5.2 yds per first down play. In my mind, that puts us two yards ahead of schedule.
Exactly! The FB dive is only a part of the big picture.

What people seem not to grasp is that we have a lot of 230lb FBs. We have only one Kelvin Hopkins. We want the DT to tackle the FB on EVERY play, not just when the FB carries the ball. The only way to do this is to fully commit to the FB dive. The price we pay is some carries end with minimal gain.

I don't want to see Hopkins get hit when he is not carrying the ball. If the FB is only getting the ball on a third of rushing plays, Hopkins will be getting hit an extra 10-15 times a game when he does not have the ball. Goal for many defense in defending the option is to get a hit on the QB on EVERY play. I'd rather it not be the DT who will have a 80-100lbs of weight advantage.

I mean, come on. Does anyone seriously believe that Army QB's are staying healthy for the past 3 years because of good luck? They are getting hit less because of the commitment to the FB dive. When they do get hit, it is by the LBs and not by the DTs.
2 x

User avatar
guppie58
New Recruit
Posts: 499
Joined: December 2016
x 45
x 68
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by guppie58 » Wed May 08, 2019 11:08 am

prairie wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 9:49 am
Does anyone seriously believe that Army QB's are staying healthy for the past 3 years because of good luck? They are getting hit less because of the commitment to the FB dive. When they do get hit, it is by the LBs and not by the DTs.
Beautifully put. I hadn't considered that.
0 x
It doesn't take better players. It takes a better TEAM.

gabn92
New Recruit
Posts: 336
Joined: December 2016
x 31
x 66
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by gabn92 » Wed May 08, 2019 11:24 am

Great point, Prairie. Hadn't thought of the FB dive in that way before...but I think you are right in terms of it being a benefit to the QB.

Will be interesting to see how Navy manages Malcolm Perry this year. It would seem they want him handling the ball primarily for their O because of his explosiveness...but how will he hold up to the pounding over the course of the season?
0 x

wpgrad
New Recruit
Posts: 641
Joined: December 2016
x 8
x 109
Contact:

Re: SB Nation Article. Preview.

Post by wpgrad » Wed May 08, 2019 12:22 pm

gabn92 wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 11:24 am
Great point, Prairie. Hadn't thought of the FB dive in that way before...but I think you are right in terms of it being a benefit to the QB.

Will be interesting to see how Navy manages Malcolm Perry this year. It would seem they want him handling the ball primarily for their O because of his explosiveness...but how will he hold up to the pounding over the course of the season?
As I (and others) predicted last year, the Malcolm Perry experience will end poorling in 2019 just like it ended poorly in 2018. A 160 pound QB can not take the pounding in Navy's offense for 12-13 game (and, please, keep in mind that Navy's offense is quite different than Army's offense even though most folks think both are the same).

We may be in a similar, but less obvious, situation next year with whomever replaces Hopkins. Current candidates are not big'ns. But I think the QB from TN who is a plebe might beat them all by 2020 kickoff.
0 x

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AirCav07, ArmyBN82, Armyfan, armyfan1993, armymule, Bing [Bot], BlackGrayGold82, bpfeifer, ColdWarYushok87, Constant69, Google [Bot], guppie58, JKillerK, joeschmoefromkokomo, Mack270, Majestic-12 [Bot], Mudent, stash76, thedoc85, tre72ow75, Usma80 and 232 guests