We suck.

[PrideandDream]

Just to be clear Monken was never an offensive coordinator and only a position coach offensively. So technically he's never been a play caller. However I'm certain he has a solid grasp one the offense. But then again maybe he was overriding Davis in the play calls and schemes? Maybe he does the same to Thatcher? If he really knows the offense and has a knack for creativity I wouldn't say we've ever seen it. Look I love Monken but between the vanilla play calling the last few years the lack of execution and now an extremely slow start to this scheme I think we can all agree something doesn't add up. Now we are just debating where the issue lies.

PD

[Oliphant]

First off wp, scrap the sarcasm, savvy? All it does is piss off those who don't happen to share your opinion.

Second, and right to the point, NO ONE, least of all me, suggests returning to the stupidly stubborn and stale and predictable offense of the last year. I say again, NO ONE. That is a complete misrepresentation. So, not "incredible". Sorry, not sorry.

Instead, and a reiteration, we want some semblance of a return to the true under-center triple option, where the play (usually a dive) is not demanded from the press box irrespective of the defensive alignment or reaction. Instead, we let a heady, strong QB (like Dailey) actually READ the defense and either give, keep or pitch accordingly.

And again, even this change will not produce more success if we don't fix our O line deficiency with the right hire(s).

You act like Jeff monken, who is probably one of the top two or three best minds when it comes to old-school triple option football, doesn’t know how to run the offense. Like he is actually sitting there, saying to himself, you know, armorman thinks we should run a few more true option plays. you know what, let’s try it!!!

His offenses last the two seasons have been inconsistent at best and completely immobile at worst. So, maybe, he lost the ability to direct an offense. The results haven't been pretty.

In the last two years, our defenses held Troy to a combined 29 points. That should have resulted in two wins. It would have been two wins in 2017 and 2018. Instead, we were 0-2 because the offense scored nine points.

[ArmyRoadFan7]

Just scrap it all, and lets return to the offense that had us gain SEVENTY EIGHT YARDS on 35 carries versus Air Force. Lets return to the offense that had us run 48 (!!!!!) times for 125 yards versus Navy (and in regulation, it was 44 runs for 97 yard)s.

We ran 44 times for 97 yards in regulation last year versus navy, and now you want to switch back to the same offense after 6 games. Incredible.

Sorry, but I don't share your optimism that we can score any points against navy with this offense.

HOWEVER, I don't see JM being able to admit he was wrong about anything ... if he was capable of that, we might have had a different QB running the show last year. I think he's a bit stubborn.

You’re right Monken is way too stubborn to ever switch back. The whole Tyler saga is proof of that. It was plain as day that Andersen was a better quarterback but Monken refused to admit what he was seeing on the field.

[stash76]

When I saw JM struggling through the Analytics binder during the BC game to decide whether to take a 2nd down and 8 yards to go or a 1st and 20 I knew something wasn't right. That image keeps playing in my mind. I always thought of him as a decisive leader. I hope that doesn't change.

[Lusk2003]

I don't think anyone wants the old offense in the sense of the results or play calling and o line play of the last couple years what people want is to go back under center and run the triple option and to do so effectively. We are looking to run the same type offense that Air Force has that ran Brad Roberts down our throat last year on 33 carries and he lead the NCAA in rushing.

However, the only way this happens is to scrap his offensive staff. He's going to need several new coaches with expertise to do this. We have no expertise on our staff with under center triple option. Not as players or as coaches and we have very little FBS experience as coaches on our staff. Very little. I think this is one of the most often overlooked parts of our team. And I don't mean it as these are bad men or that they are not working or trying there best. I purely mean they have a minimal track record of success. The truth is collectively they own this just as Monken owns the decision to change.

Thatcher's offense put up big numbers routinely in his 4 seasons at Nebraska Kearney. It was rare to score less than 30 points during his tenure. There are clearly differences here. Even in his first year as OC they didn't struggle to score points. So something isn't translating. Doesn't matter though.

This is a performance based business. Excuses can not be accepted. This is year 10 not year 1.

Thatcher needs to GO. D2 coaches don't just become coordinator's at FBS schools. Name one school that has happened successfully? Buy out his contract so we can be put out of our misery. I'm concerned it's a multi-year contract, does anyone know?

[WrekDivr]

When I saw JM struggling through the Analytics binder during the BC game to decide whether to take a 2nd down and 8 yards to go or a 1st and 20 I knew something wasn't right. That image keeps playing in my mind. I always thought of him as a decisive leader. I hope that doesn't change.

That was a terrible look. He looked confused and out of sorts and not what you usually see from him.

[palidog]

You guys ever think that Army is just not that talented? I mean we have some decent players but, overall, we do not have an FBS squad, year in and year out?

[Cedon199117]

When you are half way through your schedule and major position changes are occurring, it shows an inept coaching staff a d poor preparation. No one else in FBS does that during the season. Staff is a joke. JM Jason done well but you can stay long enough to see something that you have built up, destroyed.

[RABBLE]

My take is this--

We had a TO offense. A rule change made us change to a gun team. So say our coach.

To my way of thinking, you do not change your entire offense because of any rule change. You adapt your offense to the NEW rule change.

Rules are rules and play within those rules no matter what has been changed.

We have recruited talent to accommodate the TO. You just don't change a system and expect your talent to play as well in another system. Our woeful record indicates just that.

Why change the way you play just because of the new cut block rule? Instead of busting your butt to change, Monken could have spent his valuable time figuring how to play the TO WITHIN the rule change.

Wasted effort to my way of thinking. Personally, I think if we had retained the TO, we would at the halfway point, carrying a 6-0 record.

Optimistic? I suppose so but hey, what I see out there is guys not knowing what the hell they are doing. There is not a team we have played that we could not beat in the 6 games we have played.

Example-- The toughest team we did play so far is Syracuse. Look what they have done the past two weeks. Certainly no ball of hell.

Now when we play a legitimate top team from the SEC, I have now idea of the final score. I think Coach Kelly will pour it on because he wants to pick up his pace in the ratings game.

What do we get out of this game Saturday? A humilitating defeat most likely but a helluva good guarantee.
Maybe that is all we wanted when we scheduled these guys. If so, the bottom line is you will get what you asked for.

Of course, the players want it playing for the experience of playing in primetime before 102,000 fans and on national TV. Good for them.
However, that experience becomes with a heavy price tag. If the players really want this, so be it. Good Luck, everybody.
For the fans of Army, we will absorb what LSU will want to give us. What they give us and how much of it Saturday night remains to be seen.

[ARMORMAN]

OK Rabble, I'll borrow the words of Judge Chamberlin Haller (favorite character in "My Cousin Vinny"):

"That is a lucid, intelligent and well-thought-out objection!"

Good job.