Thoughts
Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2021 9:05 am
I am glad I did not write this over the weekend, because I was in a state of disbelief and really disappointed by what I saw Saturday. Been super busy, plus it gave me a chance to reflect objectively. I spent so many years expecting to lose this game each year, that I think my disappointment was magnified because I really have expected us to win these last few years. I realize these games are a battle each year, but I thought, and still think, we have the better team.
We gifted them the first touchdown. Andre Carter should have maintained inside leverage on the reverse, so if he missed the tackle, it forces the ball carrier to bounce it outside where the sideline becomes another defender and it allows other defenders more time to rally to the ball. He is a super talented kid, but he has things to work on, like maintaining assignment integrity and setting a harder edge versus the run and not getting stuck on blocks. But he has a particular skill that will attrract NFL teams. The shoulder blows on that drive rather than breaking down, wrapping, and working through the ball carrier was really hard to watch.
I don't mean to pile on, but the decision to continually insert Tyler was inexplicable. Particularly since Anderson seemed healthy and we scored quickly on that first drive. Anderson is the superior player, pure and simple. Any momentum we had going was stalled. If you want to give the kid a series here and there toi keep Anderson fresh, I might understand that. But to switch QBs in the middle of a series is counter intuitive. With Tyler in, it becomes a wildcat setup or really the old single wing. It's fullback dive, or QB off tackle. No guess work for the defense. Put the kid at slot back or back as a returner and be done with it. JM's dogged insistence on this QB decision is puzzling to us all.
I agree with others that we should have stressed their perimeter defense more. Navy pursued hard, to the point of literally playing half the field. A few reverses might have yielded big results. Getting Anderson out on the perimeter with a trail (pitch) back needed to be utilized much more. Navy had a decided advantage with their defensive line, so getting out on the edge would have helped.
Our offensive line really had a poor day. And I'm not talking about their inability to control the line of scrimmage. It was more the miscommunciation and inability to identify the adjustments Navy was making with their front seven. There were quite a few instances I saw our linemen throw up their hands in frustration or motion to a linemate as if to ask what they were thinking.
Isaiah Alston is a Power 5 recruit. I've said that before and I will say it again. And Robinson isn't far off from that. However you do it, find a way to get the ball in their hands. Particularly in space. Let your playmakers make plays. Our predictabilty on offense I'm sure comes from the desire to limit turnovers and win the fireld position battle, but these games can turn on one or two plays.
Let me preface what I say next with this caveat. I still believe Jeff Monken brought this program out of the dark ages and into some national relevance. Say what you will about the schedule, but we have won MAC and CIC games we have not in the past. He has brought pride back to our football program. Which brings me to a main point. Saturday was not our finest hour as a staff. Our team did not look prepared or motivated. When you have two weeks to get ready, you spend the first week healing up, getting back in the weight room to rebuild foundational strength, and focusing on fundamentals. And the staff should be grinding film day and night, looking for schematic tendencies and tipoffs to certain plays. The second week is a specific gameplan. Our tendencis are easy. 2nd and long: counter boot. 3rd and long: QB delayed draw. Navy seemed to have us scouted perfectly. They consistently had free rushers and numbers advantages at the LOS. We looked as if we had the attitude of this is who we are and this is what we do, and we dare you to stop it. And Navy did. They were the dominant team despite the close score. They moved the ball more efficiently and continually won the line of scrimmage. We tackled poorly and did not execute the fundamentals well. We looked outprepared and outcoached.
Army, Navy, and Air Force play a similar brand of football and have similar recruiting profiles. Any of these teams can beat the others on any given day. Navy's record is an anomoly because they play in a meat grinder of a conference. These teams are all very evenly matched. So, you look for an advantage. You scout your opponent and scout some more. You put in a new wrinkle just for this game that might help. You give them different looks. Navy did not win because they play a better schedule. That's nonsense best left to the conference chest thumpers. Navy seemed to have a great game plan. They looked prepared. The enormity of the game can make kids forget the basics, I get that. But these young men have to be the epitome of calm under pressure, play assignment sound football, and impose their will on the opponent. When you end every sentence wth "Beat Navy" for an entire year, you expect your staff and the players to leave it all out there on the day of the actual game, not have unanswered questions about what happened.
Will we bounce back? Of course we will. We will more than likely play well against and beat Missouri. And we will continue to play good football moving forward. And I think we will beat Navy next year. But it is a long time between now and then, and they have bragging rights. Things look better today than they looked Sunday, but that's the nature of sports to a degree. It's a pleasure to share this board with other posters who have such a strong base of knowledge and such passion for Army football.
We gifted them the first touchdown. Andre Carter should have maintained inside leverage on the reverse, so if he missed the tackle, it forces the ball carrier to bounce it outside where the sideline becomes another defender and it allows other defenders more time to rally to the ball. He is a super talented kid, but he has things to work on, like maintaining assignment integrity and setting a harder edge versus the run and not getting stuck on blocks. But he has a particular skill that will attrract NFL teams. The shoulder blows on that drive rather than breaking down, wrapping, and working through the ball carrier was really hard to watch.
I don't mean to pile on, but the decision to continually insert Tyler was inexplicable. Particularly since Anderson seemed healthy and we scored quickly on that first drive. Anderson is the superior player, pure and simple. Any momentum we had going was stalled. If you want to give the kid a series here and there toi keep Anderson fresh, I might understand that. But to switch QBs in the middle of a series is counter intuitive. With Tyler in, it becomes a wildcat setup or really the old single wing. It's fullback dive, or QB off tackle. No guess work for the defense. Put the kid at slot back or back as a returner and be done with it. JM's dogged insistence on this QB decision is puzzling to us all.
I agree with others that we should have stressed their perimeter defense more. Navy pursued hard, to the point of literally playing half the field. A few reverses might have yielded big results. Getting Anderson out on the perimeter with a trail (pitch) back needed to be utilized much more. Navy had a decided advantage with their defensive line, so getting out on the edge would have helped.
Our offensive line really had a poor day. And I'm not talking about their inability to control the line of scrimmage. It was more the miscommunciation and inability to identify the adjustments Navy was making with their front seven. There were quite a few instances I saw our linemen throw up their hands in frustration or motion to a linemate as if to ask what they were thinking.
Isaiah Alston is a Power 5 recruit. I've said that before and I will say it again. And Robinson isn't far off from that. However you do it, find a way to get the ball in their hands. Particularly in space. Let your playmakers make plays. Our predictabilty on offense I'm sure comes from the desire to limit turnovers and win the fireld position battle, but these games can turn on one or two plays.
Let me preface what I say next with this caveat. I still believe Jeff Monken brought this program out of the dark ages and into some national relevance. Say what you will about the schedule, but we have won MAC and CIC games we have not in the past. He has brought pride back to our football program. Which brings me to a main point. Saturday was not our finest hour as a staff. Our team did not look prepared or motivated. When you have two weeks to get ready, you spend the first week healing up, getting back in the weight room to rebuild foundational strength, and focusing on fundamentals. And the staff should be grinding film day and night, looking for schematic tendencies and tipoffs to certain plays. The second week is a specific gameplan. Our tendencis are easy. 2nd and long: counter boot. 3rd and long: QB delayed draw. Navy seemed to have us scouted perfectly. They consistently had free rushers and numbers advantages at the LOS. We looked as if we had the attitude of this is who we are and this is what we do, and we dare you to stop it. And Navy did. They were the dominant team despite the close score. They moved the ball more efficiently and continually won the line of scrimmage. We tackled poorly and did not execute the fundamentals well. We looked outprepared and outcoached.
Army, Navy, and Air Force play a similar brand of football and have similar recruiting profiles. Any of these teams can beat the others on any given day. Navy's record is an anomoly because they play in a meat grinder of a conference. These teams are all very evenly matched. So, you look for an advantage. You scout your opponent and scout some more. You put in a new wrinkle just for this game that might help. You give them different looks. Navy did not win because they play a better schedule. That's nonsense best left to the conference chest thumpers. Navy seemed to have a great game plan. They looked prepared. The enormity of the game can make kids forget the basics, I get that. But these young men have to be the epitome of calm under pressure, play assignment sound football, and impose their will on the opponent. When you end every sentence wth "Beat Navy" for an entire year, you expect your staff and the players to leave it all out there on the day of the actual game, not have unanswered questions about what happened.
Will we bounce back? Of course we will. We will more than likely play well against and beat Missouri. And we will continue to play good football moving forward. And I think we will beat Navy next year. But it is a long time between now and then, and they have bragging rights. Things look better today than they looked Sunday, but that's the nature of sports to a degree. It's a pleasure to share this board with other posters who have such a strong base of knowledge and such passion for Army football.