A potential way for Army to mitigate the portal

[gabn92]

We have all seen how the portal is changing college football...and that is a one-way exit door for Army with athletes leaving and nobody coming in.

Army needs to be thinking about how to remain competitive in this new era. I don't think throwing up our hands and thinking there's nothing we can do is the answer. Here's my thought: utilize grad assistants to help mitigate the impact of the portal on Army football.

How this would work: gain an authorization for a select number of graduates to serve the fall semester at West Point as "grad assistants" in order to be able to play football that fall season, providing veteran leadership and skill to the team. A way for Army to have an "internal portal" from season to season.

Rationale: cadets already often have OBC dates with class report times in August and September. Delaying a couple of months and having them report to OBC in January isn't going to have a negative impact on the Army or on their careers. Army is a developmental football program, so this would play to that strength allowing another season for veteran players to use their NCAA eligibility to benefit the team.

If they have to be enrolled as students to be able to play, perhaps the cadets could take some kind of academic course in the fall that could count as a graduate-level credit on their resume towards a future graduate degree.

I think we allow some players to be grad assistants to serve as assistant coaches already...this would perhaps be a better use of those same folks as a counter to the impact the portal is having on football that allows every other team to quickly rebuild or fill critical needs.

Thoughts?

[RABBLE]

I will say it again and again but it is my opinion that the Transfer Portal must be BANNED heretofore for all time.
It's us is killing the competive nature and the essense of the academies in the athletic area.
This jumping from one team to another must be eliminated. Our academies cannot do that.
Until this happens the strong will get stronger, and the weak will get weaker. In a short amount of time there we be about 25-30 teams that will be relevant in the game, a situation that the Media want and crave. It will eliminate the lesser-lites to a newer division of irrelevancy.
Attendance will drop as well as the interest because of the lack of availability to see your favorite team on the tube.
You have 4 years of playing football and that time begins when you first register for class taking a minimum of 12 credit hours of core curriculum study and ends immediately when your initial class graduates- INJURED OR NOT INJURED. No REDSHIRT ALLOWED.
If one desires to transfer, you sit out a year but your eligibility ENDS the day your original school graduates.

Tough? I believe not. After all, what is the purpose of attending college? Believe it or not, to get an education for life's work.
Gee, what a novel idea !!

[gabn92]

Rabble...you can bang your head against the wall and complain about the transfer portal all you want and wish that it would go away...but it's not going away. It may get tweaked on the margins in the details of when/how/etc. but it is here to stay.

If Army is wants to stay competitive in the changing landscape of college football, then finding creative solutions is necessary. Army will never "win" in the transfer portal...it will always be a one-way exit door for players leaving the program and not being replaced. The concept of using recent graduates would be a way to create a portal into the program at the other end for Army.

"Grad assistant" may be a bad term I'm realizing...basically, you'd have a select few slots each year where a brand new 2LT graduate would be allowed to remain at West Point to perform whatever duties are assigned, and allowed to have one more year of their eligibility utilized on the field. If they must be students to do that, then allow them the opportunity to take some graduate level classes. West Point could create a few classes that would permit them to do that.

The delay of going to OBC by that one semester for a few players (3-5?) would not impact the Army greatly...as I mentioned before, it's not unusual to see OBC dates in September for some graduates anyway...there's not much difference between Sep and Jan from an institutional perspective. Nor would it be detrimental to the graduates' career to have a delay in the pipeline of those couple of months. They'd get to play one more season, could perhaps earn a few graduate level credits towards a future degree...and the football program gains the value of having a few veteran players for that fall season.

For positions like OL where most don't get to play until their Junior or Senior season, it could be huge for Army. Rather than collectively being like Rabble and just complaining about the way college football is going, I hope the AD and administration are taking some serious looks into how they can find creative solutions to stay competitive, without compromising the core mission of USMA to produce officers for the Army.

[PrideandDream]

I don't know that this would help keep kids from leaving. Maybe it allows some to extend their eligibility but that's not what is driving the portal for most kids. Some yes but not most. My opinion, and only that, is that the portal is more often about kids getting playing time and or a better NIL deal. There are a good number of grad transfers but I believe most are looking for a better deal (playing time, money, or both).

I'm not sure what the best path for SAs is going forward. Maybe guaranteeing branch and post choices or grad school might be something that helps retention. We already exchange that benefit for more time in commitment to my understanding for the corps on the whole.

Maybe, and wait till you see the negative response on this, we reduce the commitment of football players based on years played by 2 for 1. So for every 2 years you play you lose a year of commitment. Hear me out before you flamethrower this idea as if I'm a communist.

Here's the deal though and you have to take it on the whole. The reason you have these issues is because of the money that was made by everyone involved except players. Now we can argue the "they got an education in exchange" and I believe for a long time that was true. However in the past 30 years we've seen less and less of that in my opinion. UNC had kids that never attended classes and only played sports for years. Almost every school has lowered required academic standards for athletes, and nearly every school has created hand holding programs with lighter course loads, tutors, and all kinds of support staff to keep guys eligible and graduating. All because the coffers in the Athletic Department were getting filled to the brim. And oh btw Coaches were traveling from one school to another shopping better deals and players were locked in before the portal. Then layer in NIL and the issues it has created.

USMA is making money off of our team. The Academy essentially gets paid to promote the school on Saturdays. The free marketing that West Point receives is invaluable. The football program is the financial driver for every sport at USMA and we are the largest NCAA sports program in America. All because of the product and content the players put on the field. However the players don't share in those gains helped produced. We sell tickets, jersey's, food, parking, tv contracts, and untold other items directly related to football. There is real value being created by the work these guys do. So why shouldn't the Army find a creative way to support these players?

Don't get me wrong. I truly believe in the mission of West Point and I believe they are getting a great education and have signed up for service to the Nation. However, I'm not under the illusion that what is demanded of an Army Football Player is the same as a regular cadet. And while other NCAA sports and teams also have great demand on them they don't generate the same exposure and return. It has been said that playing football at West Point is the "path of most resistance". I believe that to be true. What's interesting is that path leads to essentially the exact same outcome as any other path through the Academy. NIL and Transfer portal are going to force us to look at this aspect.

I'm just throwing this out there as a point of debate. I'm sure there are a ton of creative ideas. Some legal. Some not. Some feasible. Some not. The real question is if the legal and feasible ideas which ones will actually be palatable to grads, fans, Congress, the Army, and the Public.

PD

[USMAPAFAN]

The 2 for 1 commitment reduction you suggest is a short hop from just letting them have NIL money. I think the pushback from grads in general would be huge. Most grads didn’t play football and aren’t on this chat board so they probably wouldn’t take kindly to a reduction in commitment. The other aspect is the fact that USMA receives government funding which in the past is secured by the fact that they get a minimum 5 year return on investment. These changes would turn that on its head and now you would have average taxpayers against the idea not just non football graduates. Army is in a tough spot but I would be surprised to see changes of the magnitude in this thread.

[USMAPAFAN]

One other point: I think grads and the general public like the notion that West Point, Navy and AF are special places filled with men and women who are a cut above and willing to sacrifice. I for one would rather have a mediocre team if it meant having to institute these type changes. My final point would be we aren’t going to compete with the elite teams no matter what changes we make so why do it at all?? So we can be 9-3 instead of 6-6? Doesn’t seem worth it.

[PrideandDream]

I don’t disagree with any of your points. I would totally expect an unprecedented pushback on a change like this. In fact I would argue that this is the path most universities should have taken years ago to preserve the student athlete. Yet they succumbed to the influence of money and exposure. We are caught in the middle and frankly will have to make a hard choice one day about where and what level we choose to compete. I think the hard part for USMA and AFA and USNA is the public exposure that is generated through the lens of football. Like it or not that is a reality and giving that aspect up would be hard for any of the institutions at this point. Truth is I think my proposal would in the long term be detrimental to academies on the whole as it would open Pandora’s box.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see an NIL solution at some point. It may happen after a career in the Army or be in some kind of outside holding. But I think that a creative NIL solution is much more likely. In fact at some point I would t be surprised if players or former players actually sued the government to get access to NIL. I’m no attorney so maybe that’s not possible. Just saying it would t surprise me. Regardless of what the public thinks or grads think academies are generating meaningful revenue on these kids and at some point that will be challenged.

PD

[gabn92]

I don’t like the different service obligations idea…they are all cadets and will graduate and all be officers. Keep it equal.

Was listening to a Black Knight Nation podcast yesterday and Sal mentioned “athletic interns” and some of the players sticking around in that role in the fall. Call it an “athletic intern” or a “grad assistant”, it’s the same thing. We are already keeping a few former players around through the fall season. All I’m suggesting is be more strategic with this…would they be more valuable as assistant coaches or admin assistants or however they are used for that fall semester/season, or figure out how to let them use another year of their athletic eligibility?

[PrideandDream]

Well if we want to extend eligibility then we can just lighten the course load and make them all December grads. Just stay one more semester. Between that and the prep school we can maximize their development.

Issue with that is that most don't want to hang out at USMA any longer than they have to. The old adage "better to be from West Point than at West Point". We already have a good amount of this with turn backs for any number of reasons and medical turn backs where guys leave for a semester.

Still, I don't think the portal is about extra eligibility as much as it is playing opportunity or shopping for a better deal. Not sure any of this addresses any of that.

BTW totally expect people to not like the reduction in service idea. Just throwing it out there. It might be a novel idea and might even be founded but will never be popular or accepted. More importantly would likely be the death of the Academy once congress grabbed hold of it.

PD

[gabn92]

You’re right that creating a grad assistant opportunity for a few players to play an extra season doesn’t solve the problem of players wanting to enter the portal with hopes of better playing opportunities elsewhere.

What it could do is help to offset the advantage the portal gives to every other team in college football (except AF and Navy): new talent coming in that has the potential of getting on the field immediately.

Opening up an opportunity for a few Army players to have that extra season by creating a way for them to stay an extra semester after graduation gives Army “new” talent in the sense that these players aren’t currently available to them to team after graduation. My thought is that they would target guys that already have significant playing experience and would benefit the team with their presence for an extra season by helping to fill critical needs or gaps that might otherwise exist with their departure—due to normal graduation turnover, injury, or effects of portal departures.

Yes…I know the feeling that we all had/have about not sticking around WP any longer than needed. But for these guys, they would be 2LTs, so that final semester would not be the same as their first 4 years.