Go Navy!

Well I don't know about all that. What I could find on line is a service called Stephens-Sibley that ranked Navy as the #65 team playing the #117 schedule and Army as tied at #116 playing the #80 schedule. That seems pretty significant to me.

And you may very well be right and it's all coaching but Army sure did look outmanned against Navy last weekend.
 
Kudos to all the service academies!!

Having a son who played at Air Force
for the legendary Fisher DeBerry I for
one can speak volumes about the young
men who play for the service academies.

Paul Johnson has done a great job for
the Naval Academy and will do even better
when he recruits his own players. He has
been a winner every where he has coached.
 
Ahso, resume reading got us in this trouble in the first place. An in depth interview and reference check would have revealed what is needed - the proven ability to organize, lead and motivate at the collegiate level. Anyone on the inside, such as Navy, saw that Johnson could do this, which he has proven.

As for the committe, I also know that has what has led to alot of the division - it was a rubber stamp.
 
Army playing a #80 schedule is not the problem. Anybody at Army wouldn't mind playing a #1 schedule. Seriously, how difficult can a schedule be that's ranked #80?

I think it's more a comment on the "spectacular" season by Navy. Sure, they went 8-4, but they played a ridiculously easy schedule. Parkview could beat half the teams on Navy's schedule. That's not to say that PJ hasn't done a tremendous job breathing life back into this program. They hadn't won a CIC since 1981. A ridiculously long time. But he made great choices from a scheduling standpoint that supported the great coaching job he's doing.

Army was absolutely horrible and it was all due to coaching. The schedule strength that Army faces has not gone up since they've joined CUSA. The Todd Berry staff was terribly incompetent.

Bobby Ross will win a few games at West Point next year. He will win even more in '05 and coach them to a winning record and CIC in '06.
 
Father Wasp, sorry, you are wrong. It was not a rubber stamp. There were other coaches interviewed and brought before the committee and rejected (i.e. Robinson).

The resume has not gotten us into any trouble, so you are wrong again. Resumes have been proven to be the biggest ally of projecting successful candidates for jobs.

It is the successful history of resumes that has made them the major element in hires. A resume is nothing more than the record of a candidates past experiences. Gailey's resume far exceeded any that has ever been brought before any committee at Tech.

It was absolutely the correct decision. Mac, nor O'Brien, nor Roof, etal could even compare to the experience of Gailey. It was the easiest choice the committee and Braine could have possibly have made.

This is the truth. Only a very, very, very foolish person would have chosen any of the three mentioned over Gailey. You are wrong and don't have a leg to stand on. You could not be any more wrong than you are on this issue of the resume.

I should name you MsTA, you persist on bringing up the same item that has already been discredited. Someone on the board has already stated Johnson was headed to Navy before Tech even had a search committee.

Why would you want to enter Johnson's name when you know he could not have been considered for the Tech job?

Father Time
 
Don't discount the Air Force, as long
as Fisher DeBerry is the HC, they will
always be competitve. When my son was
a C4C at the USAF Academy, there were 125
Freshman recruits in his class. Some
went to the USAF Academy Prep School and
the others went to the Academy. Chance
Harridge was a product of the Prep School
as well as UGAG's starting FB, Jeremy Thomas.

Deberry's program is well-stocked with good
assistant coaches and a good offensive scheme
that suits his player's abilities.

I am glad to see that the Naval Academy is
on the rise to prominence. And if the USMA
hires Boss Ross, they too will be on the
rise to prominence.

As I have said before Kudos to all the service
academies!!!
 
Nobody's discounting Air Force, although things are changing in Colorado Springs. The PC police have taken over the Academy and one of their prime targets is the football program.

There have also been recent reports that AFA may drop to D-2 in all sports. I say no way in h*ll that happens, but it does give you an idea of the atmosphere out there.

Now that it's official, Bobby Ross will take Army back to where they belong.
 
Wow wee! What in the name of Blanchard and Davis, Staubach and Bellino! Army vs. Navy (and the Grand Canyon Flyboys, the Air Force). Academy football is marching back to the limelight and I am damn glad to see.

Go Middies!
 
Ahso, you are partially right when perusing resumes. Gailey has strong character and has alot of experience at different levels.

However, two years into this would give us hindsight to know that a wiser choice would be one who is familiar with the challenges of dealing with today's NCAA regs, the unique pressure Tech puts on it's athletes, and the ability to motivate and prepare.

Gailey was at a disadvantage in these areas which, coupled with Braine's lack of help and meddling, led to us losing 10 players, not signing our full allotment for two years in a row, and being very inconsistent on the field.

So, as it turns out, I am right.

The facts back me up.
 
You state some of the assistants are second rate. Again, only an opinion.

My personal opinion is the first second rate assistant was canned at the end of last year. My second opinion is to can another assistant that most think is tops. So, I have opinions that differ from your opinions.

That does not make either of us right or wrong at this time. Only more time and more measurements will decide who is right and wrong on the assistants.

The first year recruits were not really Gailey's. Most of the recruits came from O'Brien and the staff. There were some good recruits from that group.

This year's recruits will be Gailey's real first class. He has picked up some impressive players. Since Gailey is one of the best at recognizing talent, it would be foolish to measure the recruits by stars.

And, no, it appears Gailey had no choice or knowledge regarding the impact of flunkgate. I say he was completely innocent in flunkgate.

No, Gailey probably had no clue the players were were lacking in strength until the first season came along. After the first season, he saw first-hand the players lacked strength. He immediately corrected that with a strong weight program in the off season.

So, you cannot lay that on Gailey. It can only be laid on the previous coach for the players to be weak. It was the previous coaches who neglected the weight training that caused the weakness in Gailey's first year.

Now, I have ceded long ago Gailey needs to step out of the offense and turn it over to Nix. If one person is in charge of the offense, he can make the necessary changes. All offensive problems come back to the OC and he is responsible for correcting the situations.

You have not heard anyone say all is well and good. That is just one of the phrases you like to use against other fans.

With additional recruits loyal to Gailey, this coming year should see more stability and consistency with the team. I am looking for some more coaching changes among the assistants this coming year. I think we should expect some improvement in 2004.

Father Time
 
No, FW, you are still wrong. Braine and the committee made the only logical choice. Your premise was they made the wrong choice, and that is not true.

Now the possibility exists that Gailey might not work our at Tech, but that has nothing to do with the choice. We all make choices, and, at the time, the choices are correct if we have the data to back it up. That does not mean the final results of our choices turn out the way we intended.

As I said, anyone would have made that choice because it was the correct choice.

We all have a 50% chance of making a prediction and getting it right or getting it wrong.

At this time, you don't know how Gailey will fare at Tech in the long run. You can only make a 50% guess. Either he will or he won't. The story has not been completed, so the final results are not in.

There is no way you are right at this time. You only have an opinion at this time like all the rest of us.

Father Time
 
I think we are arriving at the same point. I agree he was a good choice.

Where we differ is what happened from there.

Early on there were indications trouble was brewing. Without naming names, some of the assistants named have been second rate. Recruiting has been subpar on both quantity and quality. The academic blunder may have rested with Braine but shouldn't Gailey have a had a clue? We suffered through the first season with a clear disadvantage in strength and conditioning. As for pure management and organization, we appear lacking in both sideline communication (late plays coming in to the QB) as well as clock management (inappropriate use of timeouts). Motivation is a roller coaster. We are highly motivated on some days (Auburn,NC State) but Clemson and others come to play and we look like we would rather be somewhere else.

The question is - what course of action does one take when faced with the facts?

It is one thing to hitch our britches and get some resolve about making needed improvements - but the official line is everything is all well and good, we are successful and should be happy. That was declared by Braine and Gailey while they shopped for bass prior the Georgia game.
Those of us who would like to see an improving trend wait for the next shoe to drop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top