New Offense

[ArmyRoadFan7]

The new offense clearly gives us a better chance of beating Air Force and Navy. We rushed for over 200 yards in both games. I haven’t checked but I bet the last time we did that was back in 2017 or 2018 with our good teams. Navy and Air Force both looked out of sorts at times trying to defend it. It didn’t produce enough points but the offense put together enough first downs in the 2nd half to flip the field on a couple of occasions. Navy’s defense held the “vaunted” Air Force offense well under 200 yards as we did also.

Having said that the new offense reduces our chances of beating everybody else. If we ran the flexbone all year we would have beaten UMASS and ULM and would be going to a bowl. I am not sure we would have won yesterday though.

There needs to be some kind of fusion of the 2 offenses. The coaches get paid a lot of money they can figure it out. I guess a concern would be if we started running the flexbone again would a lot of our new recruits leave.

[wpgrad]

Very good point. Monken said that in press conference yesterday. He flipped to this offense to ensure we have better chance versus af and navy

But i agree…gives us less chance versus others

I’m sure we’ll see many modifications year 2

[USMAPAFAN]

I think there was 1 under center play yesterday. I would have thought we would have seen a mix yesterday. It’s not like JM tried the under center and it was getting stuffed. We were still running 3rd and 3 out of the gun. We punted 7 times yesterday, many of them only netting us about 20 yards. IMO if we don’t get to a true hybrid next season we are not going to maximize our chances.

[WrekDivr]

I am really curious to see how it plays out. I would expect some adjustments and we’ll start the year with some experience under our belt. Can’t wait to see Udoh as a sophomore and Daily in year 2.

[PrideandDream]

Look however you want to slice it the execution isn't good. W put up significantly more points in the old system. For starters we had 7 games this year where our offense failed to score a TD in at least one half of the game. And we had zero points (not even a FG against UMAss) in the 1st and 3rd Quarters.

ULM - zero offensive touchdowns
BC - no touchdowns the 2nd half
Troy - zero points scored
LSU - zero points scored
Air Force - zero points scored in the 2nd half
Holy Cross - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half
Navy - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half

That's 20 of the 48 quarters we played with no touchdowns. Think about that. All told there were 5 more quarters in the other games for a total of 25 out of 28 quarters with no touchdowns. Now I'm not saying that you should score every quarter but it shouldn't be that high. Last year we had about 16 quarters without a touchdown (Give our take as I just took a rough looks but it's close)

Air Force was a gift. 6 turnovers and two 4th down stops is like 8 turnovers. That is a total anomaly. And yet we still kicked 3 FGs. So in 2 service academy games you put up 21 points in this system.

Yesterday we had 11 possessions all told. Here's the breakdown:

7 punts
1 turnover on downs
1 Safety
1 FG at the end the half
1 TD drive

Only two of those drives (the touchdown and on of the punts) were more than 7 plays. In fact the last 3 possessions (not counting the safety were three and out.

Air Force frankly not much better. We scored Zero points in the second half.

Rushing yards are nice but we got 8 turnovers against these to rivals. Which is great but let's not think that the offense made some significant contribution to winning the CIC. Turnovers and Special Teams did as much as anything to win. Offense got 18 points off of touchdowns and Special Teams got 4 FGs and 3 extra points which is 15.

This system has just complicated things in my opinion. We were already not blocking well up front. We already lacked some creativity in the run game. We already couldn't throw. None of that has changed much this year. However we did throw more and with about the same with only a slightly better completion rate. And we rushed it less with fewer yards per carry.


Total plays:
2023: 752 for 3738 yards and 246 points
2022: 764 for 4393 yards and 343 points

Passing

2023: 83/164 for 1234 yards for 7.5 yards per attempt and 7 Touchdowns and 11 Interceptions
2022: 42/104 for 920 yards for 8.8 yards per attempt and 5 Touchdowns and 4 Interceptions

Rushing
2023: 574 attempts for 2504 yards and 4.4 yards per attempt and 19 Touchdowns and 11 fumbles lost
2022: 648 attempt for 3473 yards and 5.4 yards per attempt and 38 Touchdowns and 8 fumbles lost

In short, we were less productive in yards bot in total and on average. We were less productive in points. We were less productive on 3rd down. We had more interceptions and more fumbles. We were worse on 3rd down this year as well. Hell Bryson Daily averaged fewer yards per carry than Tyhier Tyler did last year.

There is nothing that shows me that we are any better in this system after a full year. Thank god we didn't run it vs Coastal Carolina either. you have to execute any system you have but at the end of the day it's hard for me to see where the advantage is here. I'm not against some creativity in the offense but we have to build around what makes sense. Monken said as much in the presser that he wasn't sure we gained much from this. I agree. Have to wait and see what he does now.

And lastly I will say this, last year vs Navy we ran several series out of the gun. Specifically the first two and we didn't fare well at all when running it. If you are unaware of that you need to go back and watch that game. These rivalry games are more than the scheme. They are about attitude and grit and physicality and desperation. And when you understand that you will understand what it takes to win them.

PD

[kfan12]

I thought the initial game plan with the new offense was exceptional yesterday. Great decision by the coaching staff. The Coastal Carolina game probably had the Navy staff perplexed over what to prepare for.

Really liked the few plays they added with the direct snap / wildcat look during the Navy game, really caught Navy off guard. That is a nice addition that can pay dividends down the road...gives the D something to worry about. Army probably averaged about 8 yards per play on that, though I haven't researched it.

Going under center for the one short yardage play was good. I think they probably should have done so on at least one other short yardage play. Running that full time against Navy was likely not going to perform any better than what we saw. I think Navy only gave up more yards rushing in one game all year than Army had Saturday. Their run defense has been pretty good; their pass defense not so much.

Can't get too conservative with any offense as Army did in the second half on offense and late in the game on defense against Navy.

Daily was really on his passing game most of the game for the first time I can remember. Next step is learning how to get the ball up a bit and let the runner run through it. He had a couple of good passes batted away with really timely defense (and one defended by an uncalled hold by Navy, but I digress) that would have gone for TDs anyway if the passes had just a bit more air under them.

Know it is a complex thing to try to run the combination of two offenses, but there is real potential there, if they can get an effective mix tailored to game plan against the defenses they'll see next year.

Know some folks are disappointed/sore to the point of not being able to enjoy the W because the coach didn't listen to their admonitions and go back under center, but that would have been the wrong answer for the Navy game.

Can't wait to see what the O will look like next season, but I think it has promise if they apply shotgun, under center, and sprinkle in some wildcat looks tailored against the Defenses they'll face.

[Dong Fong '09]

i was at the game and was pretty surprised we didn't go under center given how well we did against CC, and thought we would switch to it at some point. i agree that a hybrid of the two would be nice to have in our arsenal. I don't want to be a pass happy team, but if we can complete a few of these passes (guys have been open and we've missed) that will open up the run as well.

Even though it felt like we left points on the board, that was easily our most productive offensive performance against Navy in like five years. Hard to argue with the decision to run the gun for the navy game.

[Oliphant]

Look however you want to slice it the execution isn't good. W put up significantly more points in the old system. For starters we had 7 games this year where our offense failed to score a TD in at least one half of the game. And we had zero points (not even a FG against UMAss) in the 1st and 3rd Quarters.

ULM - zero offensive touchdowns
BC - no touchdowns the 2nd half
Troy - zero points scored
LSU - zero points scored
Air Force - zero points scored in the 2nd half
Holy Cross - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half
Navy - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half

That's 20 of the 48 quarters we played with no touchdowns. Think about that. All told there were 5 more quarters in the other games for a total of 25 out of 28 quarters with no touchdowns. Now I'm not saying that you should score every quarter but it shouldn't be that high. Last year we had about 16 quarters without a touchdown (Give our take as I just took a rough looks but it's close)

Air Force was a gift. 6 turnovers and two 4th down stops is like 8 turnovers. That is a total anomaly. And yet we still kicked 3 FGs. So in 2 service academy games you put up 21 points in this system.

Yesterday we had 11 possessions all told. Here's the breakdown:

7 punts
1 turnover on downs
1 Safety
1 FG at the end the half
1 TD drive

Only two of those drives (the touchdown and on of the punts) were more than 7 plays. In fact the last 3 possessions (not counting the safety were three and out.

Air Force frankly not much better. We scored Zero points in the second half.

Rushing yards are nice but we got 8 turnovers against these to rivals. Which is great but let's not think that the offense made some significant contribution to winning the CIC. Turnovers and Special Teams did as much as anything to win. Offense got 18 points off of touchdowns and Special Teams got 4 FGs and 3 extra points which is 15.

This system has just complicated things in my opinion. We were already not blocking well up front. We already lacked some creativity in the run game. We already couldn't throw. None of that has changed much this year. However we did throw more and with about the same with only a slightly better completion rate. And we rushed it less with fewer yards per carry.


Total plays:
2023: 752 for 3738 yards and 246 points
2022: 764 for 4393 yards and 343 points

Passing

2023: 83/164 for 1234 yards for 7.5 yards per attempt and 7 Touchdowns and 11 Interceptions
2022: 42/104 for 920 yards for 8.8 yards per attempt and 5 Touchdowns and 4 Interceptions

Rushing
2023: 574 attempts for 2504 yards and 4.4 yards per attempt and 19 Touchdowns and 11 fumbles lost
2022: 648 attempt for 3473 yards and 5.4 yards per attempt and 38 Touchdowns and 8 fumbles lost

In short, we were less productive in yards bot in total and on average. We were less productive in points. We were less productive on 3rd down. We had more interceptions and more fumbles. We were worse on 3rd down this year as well. Hell Bryson Daily averaged fewer yards per carry than Tyhier Tyler did last year.

There is nothing that shows me that we are any better in this system after a full year. Thank god we didn't run it vs Coastal Carolina either. you have to execute any system you have but at the end of the day it's hard for me to see where the advantage is here. I'm not against some creativity in the offense but we have to build around what makes sense. Monken said as much in the presser that he wasn't sure we gained much from this. I agree. Have to wait and see what he does now.

And lastly I will say this, last year vs Navy we ran several series out of the gun. Specifically the first two and we didn't fare well at all when running it. If you are unaware of that you need to go back and watch that game. These rivalry games are more than the scheme. They are about attitude and grit and physicality and desperation. And when you understand that you will understand what it takes to win them.

PD

PD,

Forgot about your factual data. We stunk in 2004 and as a result, we should be happy forevermore with 6-6.

[wpgrad]

Look however you want to slice it the execution isn't good. W put up significantly more points in the old system. For starters we had 7 games this year where our offense failed to score a TD in at least one half of the game. And we had zero points (not even a FG against UMAss) in the 1st and 3rd Quarters.

ULM - zero offensive touchdowns
BC - no touchdowns the 2nd half
Troy - zero points scored
LSU - zero points scored
Air Force - zero points scored in the 2nd half
Holy Cross - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half
Navy - zero touchdowns in the 2nd half

That's 20 of the 48 quarters we played with no touchdowns. Think about that. All told there were 5 more quarters in the other games for a total of 25 out of 28 quarters with no touchdowns. Now I'm not saying that you should score every quarter but it shouldn't be that high. Last year we had about 16 quarters without a touchdown (Give our take as I just took a rough looks but it's close)

Air Force was a gift. 6 turnovers and two 4th down stops is like 8 turnovers. That is a total anomaly. And yet we still kicked 3 FGs. So in 2 service academy games you put up 21 points in this system.

Yesterday we had 11 possessions all told. Here's the breakdown:

7 punts
1 turnover on downs
1 Safety
1 FG at the end the half
1 TD drive

Only two of those drives (the touchdown and on of the punts) were more than 7 plays. In fact the last 3 possessions (not counting the safety were three and out.

Air Force frankly not much better. We scored Zero points in the second half.

Rushing yards are nice but we got 8 turnovers against these to rivals. Which is great but let's not think that the offense made some significant contribution to winning the CIC. Turnovers and Special Teams did as much as anything to win. Offense got 18 points off of touchdowns and Special Teams got 4 FGs and 3 extra points which is 15.

This system has just complicated things in my opinion. We were already not blocking well up front. We already lacked some creativity in the run game. We already couldn't throw. None of that has changed much this year. However we did throw more and with about the same with only a slightly better completion rate. And we rushed it less with fewer yards per carry.


Total plays:
2023: 752 for 3738 yards and 246 points
2022: 764 for 4393 yards and 343 points

Passing

2023: 83/164 for 1234 yards for 7.5 yards per attempt and 7 Touchdowns and 11 Interceptions
2022: 42/104 for 920 yards for 8.8 yards per attempt and 5 Touchdowns and 4 Interceptions

Rushing
2023: 574 attempts for 2504 yards and 4.4 yards per attempt and 19 Touchdowns and 11 fumbles lost
2022: 648 attempt for 3473 yards and 5.4 yards per attempt and 38 Touchdowns and 8 fumbles lost

In short, we were less productive in yards bot in total and on average. We were less productive in points. We were less productive on 3rd down. We had more interceptions and more fumbles. We were worse on 3rd down this year as well. Hell Bryson Daily averaged fewer yards per carry than Tyhier Tyler did last year.

There is nothing that shows me that we are any better in this system after a full year. Thank god we didn't run it vs Coastal Carolina either. you have to execute any system you have but at the end of the day it's hard for me to see where the advantage is here. I'm not against some creativity in the offense but we have to build around what makes sense. Monken said as much in the presser that he wasn't sure we gained much from this. I agree. Have to wait and see what he does now.

And lastly I will say this, last year vs Navy we ran several series out of the gun. Specifically the first two and we didn't fare well at all when running it. If you are unaware of that you need to go back and watch that game. These rivalry games are more than the scheme. They are about attitude and grit and physicality and desperation. And when you understand that you will understand what it takes to win them.

PD

PD,

Forgot about your factual data. We stunk in 2004 and as a result, we should be happy forevermore with 6-6.

Well, to be factual, we stunk pretty much from 1989 to 2015. And, yes, I’d be thrilled with 6-6 and the CiC each year. You army fans have 80/20 hamburger in the fridge and want it to taste like filet

[GO 150s 87]

As usual, I was at the game and in the midst of celebrating was still scratching my head. During Ken Kraetzer's huddle last week both Steve Chaloult and I predicted Army's offense would use both offenses and would jump from one O to the other at the LOS. Obviously that did not happen. But it became even more perplexing that as the game progressed Army didn't use the under center TO at all. When the teams came back after halftime it was obvious navy had made adjustments to counter Army's offense of choice. Why did Army not counter with under center TO? This is the mystery and, quite frankly, it allowed navy to get back in the game on an afternoon when this match should of been won by three scores and NOT come down to a goal line stand with 3 seconds to go.

All I can say is thank God for 6-6 and the CIC. The team achieved this, for the most part, in spite of the offense. I trust in Monken. However, I have to believe Coach M is already looking at shaking up the approach to offense during the off-season. The Thatcher offense was a big step backwards all season long with painful stretches embedded within almost every game. From my foxhole, I believe we're using Bryson Dailey with one hand and leg tied behind his back. The guy is a warrior QB who is built for the role and he flourishes under center in TO. I believe he is is the second coming of Ronnie McAda. We'll see what the off-season brings.