AcademyWars.com

Generally I give myself a few days to really process what happened in the game, but my thoughts now are what they were Saturday. Just a nagging feeling that we should be 4-1 right now were it not for some vital mistakes in the crucial moments of a game. I found myself screaming at the television, and I haven't done that in a while. But I'm not comfortable in close games with this team right now, and the ability to win a few close games each year is what separates a good season from a mediocre to poor one. We continue to make mistakes in crunch time and that is beyond frustrating. This teams finds ways to lose games.

Daily is an incredibly tough and resilient kid who runs hard, plays through the bumps and bruises, and really is a team first kid. He lacks a strong arm and touch on his throws, but is serviceable in that area. Just can't get him behind the chains and into obvious passing situations, because that is not his strength. I feel badly for the kid because despite all his good deeds Saturday, if he doesn't underthrow that wheel route to Robinson or miss Lingenfelter in the flat those are two scores right there. And the forward lateral speaks for itself. And that's the game. The loss definitely not all on him, but if you play QB the responsibility comes with the territory. I disagree with the posters who said that forward pitch was a heat of the moment decision and could be absolved. It was a desperation move in a situation that did not call for desperation. You have the first down there, plus the four point lead. Go down on contact. Let's take four new downs and churn some clock. Castellanos won that game for BC. He did some impressive stuff, but not greater than that last drive when on 3rd and 10, he got crushed on a 5-6 man rush, and was still able to maneuver and hit on a 7 yard pass over the middle to give them a manageable 4th and 3.

Defensively, we continue to get run on relentlessly, especially between the tackle boxes. The inability to stop the run has cost us the ULM and BC games in my mind. We are not stout enough at the line of scrimmage, and not athletic or fast enough in the back 8. Lowin did some good things, but I see some bad run fits from our LBs and safeties, and those are the hallmarks of big run plays against a defense. We've had a string of big time inside linebackers who have been able to mask our deficiencies up front, but that's no longer the situation. Tons of missed tackles from the entire defense as well. Teams are gaining a lot of yards after contact. I've said this many times, but we need to really rethink our recruiting priorities, and start to stock that defense with size, strength, speed, and athleticism. Most college teams test their players in combine style drills each spring. If we do that, I'd love to see our 40 times, 3 cone, and short shuttle numbers. I think our kids can go north and south adequately, but moving laterally and changing directions quickly is what separates athleticism comparisons.

Our placekickers continue to handle business, but the punting game was atrocious. Weather conditions notwithstanding, you can't shank two punts and present an ACC opponent with a short field. I think we all feared what was going to happen on that last drive, but were praying for some divine intervention via turnover or penalty. Kudos to Mundell for that terrific KO return, but he ran out of gas. We just need to break even on specials, not win the game there. But certainly we are missing those blocked punts that were once a staple of our special teams.

Jeff Monken has taken our program from the depths of despair, and brought it to a place of respectability and continued success, to the point where winning seasons, CIC trophies, and bowl games have been become expected. For that, he has my ongoing respect. His strength lies in the ability to lead and motivate, but he's not an X's and O's guy. I think the staff has really not done the job this year to be quite honest, to the point where JM continually pointed to coaching breakdowns in his presser. That was not to take the heat away from his players, he was being very candid. JM tells it like it is, that's another thing I respect about him. I don't think we are adept at in game adjustments. We have a game plan, and when we have to go off script is when things get quirky. A lot of chatter and confusion on the sideline. A lot of that is our over reliance on analytics. I think that takes the feel for the game away from the coaches. Quite frankly, I think it is ludicrous that the game was actually being held up while the analytics binder was run out onto the field to decide whether to accept a 10 yard penalty. I was sitting home and I could tell the penalty occurred at the line of scrimmage and it was going to be 1st and 20 vs 2nd and 8, and we should have accepted it. The snafu with their FG that led to them actually getting a TD. Our late substitution offensively on our very last possession, that allowed BC to roll out 3 new DL at a snail pace resulting in a delay of game for us. Thought the BC staff out coached us in this one. With a lucrative contract extension come certain expectations.

I'm not as pessimistic about Thatcher as some others are. In fact, I think he may end up being a rising member of the profession. I think it will all look different when he gets his personnel in there, meaning kids whose recruitment happens with his input. You're going to see them go get a Castellanos type QB sooner rather than later, a guy who can make plays off script and change a game with one or two plays. If I have some gripes now, it is that we get very conservative and predictable with the lead. And where is that FB dive where the QB and FB are both moving forward at the mesh point? That's a guaranteed 3 yard gain with Buchanan, and i don't think we ran it once. I wanted more jet sweep with motion guys, and a little more diversity in the play calling, but we didn't lose this game on offense.

Schedule is a meat grinder, even under the best of circumstances. I think we will be competitive in every game, with the exception of LSU although we play those top 25 programs tough. There will be glimpses of real progress this year, but also frustration as we have our work cut out for us to get to the 6 wins and bowl eligibility. Has to start this weekend. Weather calling for cold and rainy Saturday.

Great comments and input

1) It is never one player, one play....but....wow, after 6 games, personally I expect our QB to hit the pass to the TE for a TD, and I expect our QB to understand "hey i got the first down and we can burn another 2 minutes off the clock" in a key 4th quarter situation.

At some point, he isn't the "new starter with little experience." He is the junior who also played at the prep school so he is essentially a redshirt junior. This isn't some 17 year old true freshman

2) I am not surprised by any of this stuff with our offense and defense, I attribute to growing pains, and I think by 2024 its going to work out. But as I have said a few times, I think this is going to be a long, ugly season and we got a good Troy and then LSU plus unbeaten AF looking at us in the scope.

yeah....lets join a conference.

Here is a couple of my thoughts, Before we spend $98 - $172 million on new east stands, how about some waterproofing underneath the upper deck stands. It leaks worse than just sitting in the rain. And maybe some railings would be a little safer as well, That painted concrete gets pretty slippery. Are we even ADA compliant. or are we exempt ?? you can tell Bob Baretta is not around. I am beginning to sound like Rabble sorry.

rbmarmy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2023 3:28 pm Here is a couple of my thoughts, Before we spend $98 - $172 million on new east stands, how about some waterproofing underneath the upper deck stands. It leaks worse than just sitting in the rain. And maybe some railings would be a little safer as well, That painted concrete gets pretty slippery. Are we even ADA compliant. or are we exempt ?? you can tell Bob Baretta is not around. I am beginning to sound like Rabble sorry.

I believe we are "grandfathered" as far as railings are Built in 1924, nobody thought of railings and the seats were put together in the aisles that railings are almost impossible to put in at the moment. You could take a row of seats out to make room for intermitant railings all the way up from ground level to the top to make enough room for aisle railings but then you would lose seats all over the stadium.
Then again, you have steps leading to the aisles from each row. That is a tripper for many fans trying to get to the aisle.
look, I am a fan of improving everything you already have in bringing everything up to code for the convenience of the fans and for safety. Shore up the second tier deck from water dripping up from that deck from the fans sitting on the first deck. How about more concessions around the deck and ground level? How about a concourse behind the first deck to accommodate the deluge of fans at halftime? Oh, , I could pick some more things to make the Michie Stadium more enjoyable on game day.
My main point is this. Do we really need a Taj Mahal type of structure for the east stands to my way of thinking to gratify the egos of those who are in the process of making it happen/
Absolutely not. My idea is to make what you already have into an edifice that one will look with pride that will last for another 100 years. The other parts of the stadium are slowly going to pot.

Oh yes, Joining a conference will not improve our attendance one damn bit. It is the vcompetitive national schedule that will draw the interest of those who will want to come to West Point and watch the team compete and not some half-baked teams you will be forced fed to watch on a continual yearly basis. That will become damn boring to all of our younger generational fans and will continue to stay away in droves.

Almost a sellout for BC last week. Besides the AF game every other year, when was the last time you saw a sellout at our place? With a new Michie refurbished stadium, you will attract many new fans with increased seating by encircling the north stands with a second deck connecting it to the west deck.

Cost a ton of money? Sure but will pay off in better teams coming thru home and home games, larger stadiums. Use the existing funds to build these improvements, layoff the new east stands for 10 years and above all pester the US government like hell to build a new road from the Palisades Interstate Highway to the gates of the academy and parking lots to handle the expected new patronage not only the fans but those folks who would visit our national treasure called West Point..

Agree fix Michie overall areas not just east side I've been fighting this at least won't go quietly

Some good points for sure.

I disagree that offense didn't lose this game. 3 points in the first half. Failures to convert. Offense is our advantage. By chewing up clock effectively BC never gets the last possession.

Secondly, I think we have to grasp this idea, ULM, UTSA, and BC aren't very good teams. It's not that these games are close it's that the teams we played aren't good, they are close, and we still lost.

I'm not of the mindset that this is some sort of experiment that takes time. This isn't a rebuilding project. Army is not today where it was when Monken took over. Personally, I expect to win now. There are no free passes because of a supposed cut block rule change. That's no more than an excuse people are using to dismiss the lack of execution we see on our team and from our coaches. I think Monken knows that too.

I still don't know what this offense provides us as a differentiator. Are we better in the red zone? No. Are we better controlling the ball and clock? No. Are remarkably better passing the ball? Not likely. So what has this brought??? We need better players? Hell give me better players and the old offense too. What's the difference??

Here's my contention. This scheme has no real identity. It's not based on a fundamental play that can't be stopped. It's based on personnel groupings and trying to find the right matchups. An outcome of that is that we have 14 guys that have caught passes for around 750 yards so far through 5 games. Last year we had only 8 guys catch balls for 950 yards through 12 games. We rush for significantly less yards per game so far as well. But the increased passing isn't making the needed difference. More importantly more plays with more players mean more coordination and reps to perfect. In other words I believe it's harder to drive a high level of execution with this scheme than with the old scheme. And make no mistake the game is a game of execution first and foremost. Even talented teams that don't execute don't win.

The flexbone triple option is not based on personnel groupings. It's based on the midline, inside, and outside veer. At it's core it attacks bubbles in the defensive front and leverages angles, speed, and aggression at the line of scrimmage to ensure positive yards on its most fundamental plays that are many times unstoppable. When these bubbles are accounted for and the fullback is not an advantage a great QB has been coached to check the play and move to a trap, a counter, a double option outside in the "d" gap potentially. But make no mistake the Fullback as a weapon and the QB as the signal caller to get the offense in the right play based on the defense is critical. That's why the triple is a fullback / qb driven offense. Thatcher's system from my observation has no discernible unstoppable play that it's built off of. Though the QB run is central to it and when Daily gets that going is when things work for us.

Look every scheme is built on something, wing t is built on the dive, trap, and buck sweep, the I Formation was built on the dive/trap, power, and toss sweep and roll out passing, the Air Raid is built on stopping the "stick" route, the double wing is built on the qb wedge, dive and buck G sweep, and counter. What exactly is Thatcher's system built on? I don't see it. What I do see is a lot of inconsistency week to week against very average teams so far. Not that it can't work....only that it hasn't. Each week that goes by I become more concerned. I especially get concerned when we have 1st and goal and decide to start trying to throw it vs just powering it in. And why don't we just get under center inside the 10 and run the damn ball? We've got two 260 lb backs and one is apparently now a tight end. I mean just damn why don't we get Ali Villanueva back and put him at wide receiver while we are at it.

This is frustrating.

PD

Unfortunately, I still think our biggest problem lies within the O line, whether its coordination, execution or strength, I'm not sure, but quite often we simply aren't getting anything done in the middle. I absolutely think that 260lb back should be in the game most of the time for a multitude of reasons: running, blocking and scheming the D.

I agree with P&D. I feel like this offense does nothing for us that we need to do. Not ball control. We don't present anything that anyone has to worry about only having one week to prepare for. I have watched navy and air force a bunch of times this year and THEY still don't seem to have that much difficulty running the under center TO. We certainly cannot do worse running our old offense vs running this new thing. Hate the new offense. The rest of the team is doing what we do every year plus or minus some talent here and there. We won't win with this new offense. Mark my words. We will become a below average team that no one really worries about any more and I hate that.

I am not a fan of the new offense but it gives us a better chance at beating Navy and Air Force. On the flip side it makes it harder for us to beat every one else. We would probably be 4-1 in the old system.

It's certainly hard to imagine that with the size of this year's o line, Daily as tough as he's been at QB, probably Hayden Reed as an every down fullback, and Marshall or Robinson in at least one slot position that we couldn't make the old offense be really effective. Add Buchannan and Riley on short yards. And Short and Alston at WR? Or many of these other guys we've seen play? What we needed was increased execution. Probably a dedicated O line coach and not Viti. What's pretty clear to me is that we have no real advantage in this system and the cut block rule doesn't seem to be bothering Air Force.

PD