Army's Problem is NOT the New Offense

[WrekDivr]

The new offensive scheme is NOT the cause of Army’s problems this season. The fact that we changed the Offense at the same time as our decline this year makes it an easy target, but ANY scheme would have had problems with the other issues we face. In fact, I was surprised to find that our average TOP is actually up this year vs. last year. While I am not fully sold that the new Offense will work and do miss the TO, I think focusing on that issue papers over several issues we have had this year, including:

Turnovers
Through 8 games, we’ve turned the ball over 20 times, 2.5 times per game. We’ve fumbled the ball but recovered 9 additional times, which can be drive killers as we say Saturday vs. UMass. Last year we had a total of 12 turnovers all year, an average of 1 per game. Perhaps changing our offense had an impact here, but several of our fumbles happened while someone was running the ball and not during an exchange. Even if the change had a significant impact, that is due to changing and not specifically due to the scheme. We had similar issues changing to the TO.

The D Can’t Get off the Field
Out D has a total of 16 3-and-outs for the season, 2 per game. That includes 4 vs. Delaware State; without that game it gets worse. Saturday vs. UMass we forced a single 3-and-out. Additionally, our opponent’s 3rd and 4th down conversions have gone up. The numbers are slight (3d down conversions went from 38.7% to 40.4% and 4th down conversions went from 47.6% to 50.0%) but combined equal another set of downs every other game.

Play Calling
We’ve been able to run the ball (mostly) and are averaging 4.1 yards per rush. Note that sacks are included in rushing yardage. While 4.1 yards is not great (last year was 5.6). However, as we saw yesterday, we called pass plays on obvious running plays and the result was bad. We said we would be a run first team, but go away from that at odd times. We are throwing the ball over 26% of the time. Perhaps some of this is due to playing from behind all the time, but that is WAY higher than I expected. It is also likely understated due to sacks being counted as rushing yardage.

Defense Not Getting Turnovers
Last year, our defense had an average of 2 turnovers per game. This year is at 1. Combined with the increase in our turnovers, this puts us in a difficult situation. Last year, we got 4 more turnovers than we committed; this year we are 12 worse. Some blame the D’s issues with being on the field too long. However, TOP is slightly higher this year at 31:54 vs. 31:38 last year.

At any rate, this year has been disappointing to date and we have many things to address and blaming everything on the new scheme hides a lot of issues.

[kfan12]

Much of our turnover problem (QB forced fumbles, fumbles in the backfield, and interceptions) is being driven by inexperience in the offensive scheme and associated line play.

I will say, as I noted in the UMass highlight thread, that first interception was caused by a bad play design, that I don't see having much success. It is a play that cannot be called on a fourth down and short.

[ARMORMAN]

Excellent post WrekDivr, but I would suggest that the title should have been:

"Army's Problem is not JUST the New Offense"....

"Cause the offense is definitely a huge part of the problem. But as you correctly point out, the defense has stunk up the place too. Cannot get a stop. Cannot get off the field. GASHED by every other team.

Finally, you missed "Special" teams. Aren't they special this year.....We have a head case punter who has absolutely, individually contributed to at least 2 of our losses. Verses BC he shanked his way into immortality, with the last one giving them a short field with 2 min left so their super QB could march down the field and win the game. A coffin-corner, or anything even decent, might have won the game.

Then he helped UMass win with more shanks, and a "you cannot believe this" choke on a fake punt when all he had to do was pick any one of THREE wide open receivers only 15 yards downfield and put the ball within 5 yards of any of 'em. Instead, he ate it.

Finally, there's the players. Sorry, not sorry, but every other game I watch has players with more hair on fire than ours, who seem to be sleep-walking by comparison....

So again, you're right. Offense sucks, but it ain't the only problem.

[WrekDivr]

Excellent post WrekDivr, but I would suggest that the title should have been:

"Army's Problem is not JUST the New Offense"....

"Cause the offense is definitely a huge part of the problem. But as you correctly point out, the defense has stunk up the place too. Cannot get a stop. Cannot get off the field. GASHED by every other team.

Finally, you missed "Special" teams. Aren't they special this year.....We have a head case punter who has absolutely, individually contributed to at least 2 of our losses. Verses BC he shanked his way into immortality, with the last one giving them a short field with 2 min left so their super QB could march down the field and win the game. A coffin-corner, or anything even decent, might have won the game.

Then he helped UMass win with more shanks, and a "you cannot believe this" choke on a fake punt when all he had to do was pick any one of THREE wide open receivers only 15 yards downfield and put the ball within 5 yards of any of 'em. Instead, he ate it.

Finally, there's the players. Sorry, not sorry, but every other game I watch has players with more hair on fire than ours, who seem to be sleep-walking by comparison....

So again, you're right. Offense sucks, but it ain't the only problem.

Many great points, Armorman. Two comments:

1. The offense has been bad, but I don’t want to see the discussion just focused on the new scheme.

2. Our punter has had some bad shanks. I was surprised to see that our average punt this year is better than last year. If he can get his act together, he could be a real plus for us.

[PrideandDream]

Just to be clear. The punter sucks.
But the goal is to never have him punt.
I might add another goal to never throw a pass. Remember that mentality?

I still contend the problem with the old offense was the interior O line play. That limited the fullback play and hence everything else stemmed from that.

One thing is clear. Cut block rules don't keep Service Academies from being successful!

[WrekDivr]

One nagging thing for me about the new offense: I wonder if it has had an impact on our team identity.

With the TO, our identity was as a tough, grind it out, and fight you to the whistle every play. Did we throw it on 4th and 2? No way. You knew what we were going to do and we did it anyway and got the 2 yards.

I think that bled into the defense as well. You can see it in the decline in our 3rd and 4th down stops.

[ArmyRoadFan7]

One nagging thing for me about the new offense: I wonder if it has had an impact on our team identity.

With the TO, our identity was as a tough, grind it out, and fight you to the whistle every play. Did we throw it on 4th and 2? No way. You knew what we were going to do and we did it anyway and got the 2 yards.

I think that bled into the defense as well. You can see it in the decline in our 3rd and 4th down stops.

The team has no identity. We have taken away everything that made the football program unique in less than a year.

[ArmyRoadFan7]

The new offense could work but Thatcher has to stop constantly chasing the big play.