Thursday, July 29, 2010

This was originally going to be an add-on to the latest Army preview, but it ended up being the bulk of that update, so I gave it its own post here. I wanted to link to the Birddog's state of academy football and I agree with 95% 90% of what Mike from the Birddog wrote about the direction and state of West Point football, it was the other 5% 10% that I ended up going on about, but really that's neither here nor there, most of his thoughts are dead on. Head over there and read his take.


Another item that is pretty much must-read is Mike's write up of Army in Birddog's latest state of academy football.

I can't say I disagree with his take on what the goal should be in getting West Point football to where it can be... the goal should be a bowl - and a bowl game win. Lightening the schedule and gaining some stability for the program are steps in the right direction. While the jury is still out on Rich Ellerson, he has certainly made some progress.

Some of the other stuff; the circular argument that most Army fans lament the recruiting/talent gap, but also blame the recent disparity between Navy and Army solely as a product of Army's coaching - I just can't get on board with.

While it might not be true of all of them, the average Army fan believes two things.
First, they believe that they haven’t been able to beat Navy because they can’t recruit against them...

The second thing that Army fans believe is that there really isn’t much of a talent difference between Army and Navy; Navy might have one or two better players, but for the most part, they’re pretty much the same. The difference between Navy’s success and Army’s failure has been coaching, they say, and not talent.

Firstly, I have never heard any Army fan say both things at once. Secondly - instability at the coaching spot effects a program in more areas than just talent development. There is the issue of continuity of scheme... Army had 3 head coaches in the last 10 years. That means no class in the last 10 years has finished their 4 years under the same head coach they were recruited by. It's that kind of instability that just crushes a college football program. It's not that the coaches can't coach talent, it's that Army's program as a whole hasn't had a chance to gel in over a decade.


I'm not trying to get involved in the debate for a number of reasons, the main one being that I couldn't care less about college football recruiting and with that I feel like I am insulated from that part of the assertion. I have no idea where Mike got those characterizations of the average Army fan, but it seems like the kind of thing one could aggregate from a small selection of fans on college football message boards. Again, not trying to get involved, but I every college football message board I have ever seen has been loaded with equal parts stupidity and venom.

Anyway, check the Birddog out, it's worth the visit.



Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Subscribe in Bloglines

Subscribe in a reader