Our O-Line is putting on weight

[wpgrad]

Do we all think this guy is so stupid that he doesn't know what will, and what won't, work at Army given his longevity not only here, but also at Navy? Also, I think that if Monken wanted the OC from Kennesaw, he would have hired him already.

I think I read somewhere that new Navy HC Newberry hired the Kennesaw St OC. Makes sense given that Newberry came from there too.

Correct. I am saying if Monken wanted him, he would have hired him prior to Navy getting him in Dec 2022.

[PrideandDream]

Well we will all just wait and see. I agree Monken deserve the benefit of the doubt. But just to be on record he Monken has really never coached another offense and been successful. His only time with a different system was as a GA for 1 year at Arizona State where they were 6-5. Then 3 years at Buffalo as a WR/TE/RC from '92-'94 and they went 8-24 in three years. Then he winds up coaching HS for two years before winding up on the train with Paul Johnson at GA Southern.

Make no mistake. I love Coach Monken and what he's done for Army Football. But this is a gamble. He really got into the Flexbone/Triple Option at GA Southern in 1997. Now keep in mind that the triple option, as far as I recall really showed up at Air Force under Kenny Hatfield and Deberry was the QB coach and then OC before he took over in 1984. Army went to the triple under Jim Young in his 2nd year in 1984. I don't know Navy's history prior to that but I don't think they ran it until Paul Johnson showed up as the OC in '95 under Charlie Weatherbie. One gap I have is George Welsh so maybe someone can comment on his success at Navy.

The option goes back for years and years but really start to form under Bill Yeoman and the split back veer at Houston which then leads to Emory Bellard and Darrell Royal turning it into the wishbone at Texas in '68 and then it gets picked up by Bear Bryant in '71 at Alabama and Oklahoma is in there somewhere. The next big iteration is really the flexbone which Deberry usually gets a ton of credit for but Johnson was early on to that as well.

The bottom line is this. Monken has no real experience with any other type of offense. And there is no case study for any different system working at a Service Academy for almost 50 years.

Monken continues to say we will be physical and tough and "Run First" and that's great but my personal opinion is that eliminating the quick hitting dive out of the under center option is one of the single best tools in the arsenal and that we will be significantly challenged to gain and maintain blocks long enough for the plays to develop.

I sure hope I'm wrong. And if and when I am I'll be happy to eat crow. I know Monken is a great coach. I also know he knows more about football than I and watches and talks more football than I have ever. Seen. Conversely I might argue that I and many on this forum know all too well how fast it can go south trying to run a different system.

We will see and I sure hope that this becomes the case that SA can do something other than just the Triple Option under center.

PD

[ARMORMAN]

I'm seeing both sides of this. JM is an outstanding coach and also, by admission, a "football junkie" who has forgotten more than most on this board will ever know about the game. Obviously, he has had great success at Army with a run-heavy, under-center, semi-option offense and is revered by our fan base. He has absolutely earned our trust and deserves the benefit of any doubt.

However, I also recognize that no service academy has ever enjoyed any offensive success WITHOUT RUNNING AN UNDER CENTER OPTION since it was introduced at air force under Hatfield in the early 80's....that's a cold, tough fact. And nothing has been personally more satisfying for me than to watch ARMY grind out a 15-play, no-pass, smash mouth, 10 minute drive against the likes of Oklahoma or Michigan...

Now, having said those 2 things, 2 additional things are relevant, imho, and tilt the balance toward Jeff's decision to change:

1. The ever-increasing cut block prohibitions (thanks again berry, you maggot) made it more and more difficult to get defenders on the ground and execute our power-run offense. As was pointed out, our particular offense has steadily worsened the last 2 years, to the point of unwatchable. We shall see how the zoomies fare keeping it the same..

2. We finally have a full bucket of TALENT sufficient to run a gun-option offense. We are deep at run-throw quarterbacks, we are deep at fast, elusive slots and straight-ahead power backs, we are deep at receivers, we are deep at big, strong tight ends, and we are huge and talented and experienced on the O-line. Never have we enjoyed such raw talent and depth on one team. So, if we are ever gonna run a gun-option successfully, it'll be this year.

Like everyone, I can't wait for September.

Meanwhile, GO ARMY LAX!

[wpgrad]

Wthat's great but my personal opinion is that eliminating the quick hitting dive out of the under center option is one of the single best tools in the arsenal and that we will be significantly challenged to gain and maintain blocks long enough for the plays to develop
PD

I don't disagree. But when is the last time we have really seen the fullback dive run like that for Army? I can't recall any sustained example since the 2018 season ending with the Houston game, right?

We can pine away for the fullback dive, and I LOVED the 2017-2018 offense, but we haven't see that offense in 5 years.

And....think about the iconic triple option play where the QB fakes the dives, goes out wide and then eventaully pitches to the back who runs down the sideline. the ICONIC triple option play. When is the last time we have seen that play run by Army? I can not even recall.

When I played, I played in the wishbone (the old school wishbone) and i have watched far, far too many army games. It is my favorite offense.

But I have not seen my favorite offense run well in 5 years.

[WrekDivr]

The move to the new offense is not a gamble- though it is a calculated risk. We saw the flexbone become completely unworkable last year. Any move has risk associated with it, but I think it is WAY riskier to continue to do something that is not working than to do something that has a chance of working. Is the new O guaranteed to be a success? Heck no. Even if it is ultimately the right answer, Army will likely struggle at times this year. JM has been very successful, but the wins were hard to get in the first couple of years.

At any rate, this move was not just a roll of the dice but an answer to a big problem. We’ll see if the answer works. We know the old answer did not.

As P&D rightfully points out, we will lose the quick hit dive play. I don’t worry about that too much as it didn’t work well for us last year. The real question is what the gains are for the move. Things like simplified offensive like execution are big wins, in my opinion. We’ll see if the gains are worth the cost.

[PrideandDream]

The reason we struggled inside last year wasn't due to cut blocks on the perimeter. That's the whole point. We struggled because our center and guards often got man handled at the line of scrimmage and even against other service academies. Air Force was running Roberts 30 times a game inside because they had 3 interior lineman that were blocking their assignments. That's my point about execution. Scheme doesn't fix that.

Here's a quick reminder from the navy game last year of what and how it can go wrong and fast. We started off in the gun. Watch this play at 4:22 and watch the left tackle. We have 6 O lineman. Navy has 6 defenders on the LOS. We had breakdowns like this all year. Next play after this one is a pass gone bad. I guess my point is from time to time we've gone the the shotgun. Navy has done it too. Not sure it's made meangful difference. The worst part is we had game after game with missed assignments and poor blocking up front the last few years. So that's really my big contention. Happy to be wrong about this. Just really really concerned. Again, no doubt Jeff Monken has insights I can't even begin to appreciate or comprehend.

[url]https://youtu.be/8bWwaMVUfOg?t=276[/url

Again, hope I'm wrong but if we continue to block the way we have the last couple years then it will be painfully obvious what the issues are this year.

PD

[kfan12]

I think it is pretty clear the O-Line had significant problems last year when faced with equal talent. I would think Viti is on a short leash; the line has to perform this year or he is likely gone. It appears that Drinkall has been promoted above him as Co-Offensive Coordinator / Offensive Line, so that may make a difference.

[ArmyRoadFan7]

https://youtu.be/KV_Qjq-qRn8

[Dong Fong '09]

in my opinion, the offense has been trending the wrong direction for a few years, but i think its been most obvious the past two years.

That said, even with a terrible offense, we somehow won 6 games last year and 9 games the year before (that should have been a ten win season and that loss to navy still really bothers me).

literally the only way our offense could get worse is if instead of going 3& out over and over and puntin the ball 40 yards, we start turning the ball over 2-3 times again on our side of the field.

i agree with P&D that this is a gamble, but i'm optimistic because i can't see how offensively we could be any worse than last year.

back to the original topic, our offensive line play was terrible last year, and that might be in part because we put a fullback coach with only a few years of coaching experience in charge of it. seems like drnkall is going to be very involved with our line, and personally i like the idea of having 300+ guys up front.

[Dong Fong '09]

the other reason i have optimism is that my assumption is that we've made a massive upgrade at offensive coordinator and quarterback, which i guess remains to be seen.

Especially last year, Brent Davis looked like he was totally unprepared or confused. That plus the fact we haven't had the quarterback position solidified for years, its like we've been playing with a hand behind our back.