Pretty blunt comments from monken

Discussing Army Black Knights football, basketball and more. United States Military Academy sports forum. West Point athletics discussion board.
wpgrad
Warrior
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:49 pm
x 117
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by wpgrad »

WrekDivr wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:49 pm One key point that JM made repeatedly is that the new blocking rules were a key reason for moving to the Gun TO. He makes a point that it makes blocking for the center a bit easier or at least makes it so more guys can do it successfully.

I’m looking at some Gun TO info online, another reason that it helps is that an option play includes both the right and left sides of the line, no matter which way the play is going. For example, if the option goes to the right, the dive portion is run to the left. I’m the flexbone, both the dive and option are run to the same side. Perhaps by forcing the D to cover defend both the left and right sides on every play holds the LBs a little longer making it easier to get a block in them.

Any other insights on how the Gun TO might make it easier to make the necessary blocks?
At the very basic level, which is my level of understanding, we are going from option-style blocking which involves cut block and everyone going in the same direction, to a blocking scheme that involves zone blocking and no cut blocks.

Anything more complex than that...I don't know.
0 x
WrekDivr
Warrior
Posts: 2209
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 9:04 pm
x 92
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by WrekDivr »

I wonder if the move to zone blocking was what Steve Chaloult was talking about when he was on “This Week on Army Football” with JM last year. His comments about how difficult it was to execute the blocking scheme in our offense last year stuck with me. Perhaps the Gun TO will help.
0 x
wpgrad
Warrior
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:49 pm
x 117
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by wpgrad »

WrekDivr wrote: Tue Mar 21, 2023 6:41 pm I wonder if the move to zone blocking was what Steve Chaloult was talking about when he was on “This Week on Army Football” with JM last year. His comments about how difficult it was to execute the blocking scheme in our offense last year stuck with me. Perhaps the Gun TO will help.
At the end of the day, I believe Coach monken is one of the top 10 coaches in the country. And I also believe that the team lost its way this past season, and it was not his fault, It was Davis’s fault and the rule change fault. And I think monken knew that this year was fuc#ed of March 2022, because in his last interview, he said that if they had passed the rule change before spring practice in March 2022, he would’ve made the switch last year to this new offense.

I think he’s had drinkall on staff for this exact reason

I think this is all going to work out, and I really believe it is going to help recruiting, especially centers and quarterbacks.
0 x
Dong Fong '09
Warrior
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 11:58 am
x 8
x 104
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by Dong Fong '09 »

wpgrad wrote: Thu Mar 16, 2023 11:06 am Pretty blunt interview today. His comments include that running the option under center is basically no longer possible with the new cut block rules, the new cut block rules have really impacted what he wants to do, the new offense will have option elements but it will be run from the gun and will not involve cut blocking, and Matt drinkall and thatcher will be running the show

Still wants to run the ball

Indicated pretty clearly that he has been running the Paul Johnson offense since he first got into coaching in the 1990s, and he does not think he can run that offense anymore. This is doubly interesting because as we are going away from that offense, navy appears to be going very hard back to this style

Also indicated new offense will be easier to recruit QBs since very few run an under center offense in HS, and indicated there is difficulty finding centers who can snap u der center, and the new offense will make it easier to find centers
Besides helping with recruiting since many of these kids do this offense in high school, I wonder if that means much of the current team ran a simile offense in high school. Maybe less learning curve and less growing pains?

I also gotta assume this means guys like Buchanan will have a minimal role going forward.
0 x
User avatar
PrideandDream
Warrior
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:36 am
x 2
x 127
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by PrideandDream »

I have my concerns too about this switch. Most importantly because Air Force had the same rule changes and has gone back under center and more traditional. They had a ton of success last year. So thinking that it's a schematic or rule change issue just doesn't quite sit with me when another SA is moving in the opposite direction with success. Just doesn't smell right.

I do believe to simple things:
1. Our O Line didn't execute well and limited our ability to run the dive and inside QB power
2. Removing the dive under center is a net negative for Army due to the speed the play develops and forward momentum of the fullback.

It's really very simple.

However, as I've said it's a gamble and Monken either looks like a genius or a goat. There is no in-between.

We will see the proof of this in a 4 game stretch from Sep 23rd through October 21st. Those 4 games are as follows:

Syracuse at Syracuse
Boston College at home
Troy at home
LSU in Death Valley

If this thing isn't humming by the Syracuse game I'm worried we'll be begging for the old offense once we face the Bayou Bengals.

Buckle up because it's more than the offense that is gonna have to be markedly improved. This may be the toughest schedule we've had in a couple decades. After these 4 games you've still got AF, Coastal Carolina and Navy. 2 of 3 have new coaches too.

PD
0 x
wpgrad
Warrior
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:49 pm
x 117
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by wpgrad »

Losing 3 of 4 to power 5 schools still gives us a shot for CiC and Bowl game. I wouldn't put "too" much weight on those 4 games. We go 1-3 in those games, and then 6-2 in the other games and win CiC and end up 7-5, its a very, very successful season.

End of day, I trust monken has given this 1000x more thought than us, and he thinks this is the right path. I am also 100% sure that staying the course with Davis was a dead-end. Last year, in games like Air Force, our offense was literally unwatchable. A joke.

We had to do something. This seems like a logical, thought-out plan.
0 x
User avatar
PrideandDream
Warrior
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:36 am
x 2
x 127
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by PrideandDream »

I sure hope I'm wrong and you are right. Only one way to find out at this point and that's line up and play. No reason on arguing about any of it really just time to wait and see how it turns out. He'll be a damn genius' if it works out really well.
0 x
User avatar
ARMORMAN
Warrior
Posts: 712
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 7:00 am
x 2
x 110
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by ARMORMAN »

We all hope this works P&D, but I completely understand your reluctance to embrace it right now. You were a fullback; arguably the toughest job on both sides of the line. You had a running start and a violent collision against huge men on virtually every play. No other position had it that tough. That physical mindset, if not the actual recurring event, was carried over and installed in the rest of the team when Monken took over the reins, and it bore us fruit for some wonderful years. But we also had manpower; Toth, Holland, Woolfolk, Bradshaw and others, and the smaller guys could still compensate for lack of size with slashing cut blocks to get defenders on the ground. THOSE BLOCKS WERE NEVER DANGEROUS, AS WAS CLAIMED. THEY NEVER RESULTED IN MORE SERIOUS INJURIES. But lead by toddfu**ingberry and his revenge tour, the NCAA saw fit to outlaw 'em outside a tiny box.

So our days of 14 play, pound the s**t out of you scoring drives gradually dissolved, and Davis failed to adapt. Our offense, as was precisely described, became a joke. (Ironically, a similar thing happened to Bob Sutton, and he was summarily fired.) But JM was having no more of our inept offense. He did what he had to do. He adapted, big time. Drastically. The physical mindset remains, Last of the Hard, etc.... But now we become FAR less predictable and far more flexible. Now we restore some semblance of an OPTION as the play develops. Now our line blocking schemes become less complicated. Now we spread the defense, laterally and vertically. Now we get the ball to our playmakers in space.

As has been mentioned, I hope we keep a few under center plays in the book, so guys like you can get us 2 yards when we absolutely, positively need it...

:D
0 x
ArmyRoadFan7
Warrior
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:56 pm
x 12
x 46
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by ArmyRoadFan7 »

I understand there is little to no tape on UNK but do we have any other teams that run something similar? Coastal? 2017 Army offense for Air Force? Just trying to watch some video to get an idea on what this might look like.
0 x
WrekDivr
Warrior
Posts: 2209
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 9:04 pm
x 92
Contact:

Re: Pretty blunt comments from monken

Post by WrekDivr »

While each team’s offense is unique (Army, navy, and AF all run different versions of the TO), there is a decent amount of info on the Gun TO online. Coach Thatcher even has some instructional videos and uses tape from UNK to demonstrate the principles. You can find it on YouTube. Here is a link to one:

https://youtu.be/J_6q_Hp7BpE
0 x
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DoubleNuts, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], neumanna1, Semrush [Bot], thedoc85 and 351 guests