Coaching Updates

[Lusk2003]

Good point. What does Drinkall bring to the table? I see he no longer has the co title. Is he better suited somewhere else? Maybe Viti to running backs?

[PrideandDream]

Look I agree that the O Line has been the point of contention these last few years. But the idea you can't install a new offense in one season is ludicrous. It happens all the time and it has happened at Army. You might remember Jim Young in year 2. It is also not correct that the zone scheme is so radical that it can't be taught. We ran both a zone scheme and a traditional option scheme in 1996. It was installed in one off season and it was taken directly from playing Notre Dame in '95 who ran it effectively.

It can be taught, you can run both. I think the question is can Viti and Drinkall teach it in one year? Do those two have the competency to make it work.

My biggest issue with this year is that we didn't really ever get better on offense. We were just as lackluster at the end as at the beginning. Even teams with not enough talent get better throughout a year with good coaching. I'm not certain that happened for us.

PD

[Dong Fong '09]

Not sure vitis coaching ceiling is much higher than being a fullbacks coach at army. If he has aspirations for higher than that he should prob go somewhere else for a while. Not a good sign that our offensive line has struggled under his coaching for two years, despite there being some talent at that position.

He’s been on the staff for 8 years and was good friends with the long time offensive coordinator (Davis). You’d think with that pedigree he would at least be considered for the o coordinator job at this juncture. Instead the internal promotion went to another similarly aged assistant that has been on staff for less time, but has made a noticeably positive impact and demonstrated potential.

I’m assuming being a former captain of the team etc helps with recruiting, but seems like his career is plateauing (which is ok if he’s ok with being a career position coach like fullback at his alma mater).

Not sure what drinkalls role should be either at this point either, but I agree we should be bringing in somebody that knows how
To coach the line.

[kfan12]

Look I agree that the O Line has been the point of contention these last few years. But the idea you can't install a new offense in one season is ludicrous. It happens all the time and it has happened at Army. You might remember Jim Young in year 2. It is also not correct that the zone scheme is so radical that it can't be taught. We ran both a zone scheme and a traditional option scheme in 1996. It was installed in one off season and it was taken directly from playing Notre Dame in '95 who ran it effectively.

It can be taught, you can run both. I think the question is can Viti and Drinkall teach it in one year? Do those two have the competency to make it work.

My biggest issue with this year is that we didn't really ever get better on offense. We were just as lackluster at the end as at the beginning. Even teams with not enough talent get better throughout a year with good coaching. I'm not certain that happened for us.

PD

The point was, is and will remain. You can't install an offense in one year with an O Line staff that was not getting the job done in an offense scheme they "knew." Absent a once in a career talent somewhere in the offense, the implication is somehow they will be better at coaching the O Line in a system they didn't know. Absotively, posilutely not going to happen in one season. You bring in a full set of coaches with a new scheme or have coaches that are experienced and excelling at what they are doing, no doubt it is possible. That simply isn't what we had to start 2023 in Shotgun.

I think there were significant gains in Daily's abilities, that led to decreasing numbers of interceptions and turnovers. I also think there were some minor improvements throughout the full year in our line play, but not enough to get where they needed to be. This next year or two will really decide if the O Line coaching staff have what it takes or not. 3-5 years of "learning" ought to be enough to get reasonably efficient line play out of two coaches. We essentially have a year in this new conference to establish a winning record amongst conference foes and build some confidence and momentum. By the second year, the other teams will learn Army's schemes, so the O Line has got to be tightened up-synchronized, to enable the offense to execute, else the second conference experience may resemble the first.

[Lusk2003]

Not sure vitis coaching ceiling is much higher than being a fullbacks coach at army. If he has aspirations for higher than that he should prob go somewhere else for a while. Not a good sign that our offensive line has struggled under his coaching for two years, despite there being some talent at that position.

He’s been on the staff for 8 years and was good friends with the long time offensive coordinator (Davis). You’d think with that pedigree he would at least be considered for the o coordinator job at this juncture. Instead the internal promotion went to another similarly aged assistant that has been on staff for less time, but has made a noticeably positive impact and demonstrated potential.

I’m assuming being a former captain of the team etc helps with recruiting, but seems like his career is plateauing (which is ok if he’s ok with being a career position coach like fullback at his alma mater).

Not sure what drinkalls role should be either at this point either, but I agree we should be bringing in somebody that knows how
To coach the line.

To your point here, shouldn’t Drinkall be the obvious Offensive Coordinator if we are blending the two systems? He was the co last year and has been here longer than Worley.

[RABBLE]

Now that the season is well over, all we get is updates. OK somebody must like all these firings, movements and changes, but will they really make a difference?
To me, not really. 6 wins probably. So what is new?
Well, here is a tidbit. AF finally sent the CIC Trophy to us a few days ago. Must have been a shipping problem. Hell, the damn game has been over for a month. What is the problem with the Zooms?
Oh yeah, probably shipping!! What a damn joke.

[kfan12]

Now that the season is well over, all we get is updates. OK somebody must like all these firings, movements and changes, but will they really make a difference?
To me, not really. 6 wins probably. So what is new?
Well, here is a tidbit. AF finally sent the CIC Trophy to us a few days ago. Must have been a shipping problem. Hell, the damn game has been over for a month. What is the problem with the Zooms?
Oh yeah, probably shipping!! What a damn joke.

The move to Worley at OC may...because he may have a better feel to running a series of plays that complement each other and keep the D guessing...just not sure how much information there is to support the supposition.

[RABBLE]

I think you need the recruitment that will match the style of play on both offense and defense. Sadly, the switch was made very quickly, and it took the team the first half to adjust. You just can't change with the personnel that was recruited to play the under center and switch to something entirely different. Unfortunately, the experiment cost us dearly, probably 3 wins and a bowl game. Monken knows it and we all know it. Lesson learned.
Reminds me of the GREAT EXPERIMENT of 1955 when Coach Blaik moved All-America Don Holleder to QB because He felt we had no QB for that season.
I disagreed . We did have a good QB replacement in Russ Mericle but coach felt different. Holleder was really no QB. He could not pass the ball much like Leamon Hall who could not run the ball but sure could pass it.
The season of 1955 was not a good one. The team even lost to Yale up in the Yale Bowl. BUT, the team finally made good by upsetting heavily favored Navy. It this made the season successful but not a great one.
Like our season this past year.
History always repeats itself sooner or later.