What has Navy done that Army can't?
- Thread starter RUSK97
- Start date
Air Force is like a country club compared to West Point. Navy is an easier experience than Army, too. Just easier to get players there.
never heard of this before - max weight? How the heck do their linemen make weight?
Army's problems began with a bad "construction AD" who took Army away from option coaching and put them in the CUSA at same time. They couldn't get the players for a pro set, and they got beat up physically in CUSA (it helps them to play a Stony Brook after a Northwestern and not 4 or 5 bigger teams in a row). Then there was a string of weak coaches like Bobby Ross who actually said during interview that he had a hard time getting excited about games at his age. Recruiting went all over the map as west coast Ellerson knew CA players while Navy gets a lot of players from south (Navy usually has around 25 players just from Fla and Ga. where Army will have maybe a couple from FL.). Monken finally got guys from Ga but they are still young. The shelves were pretty bare the last couple years. Army is small and usually never have a 300+lb player where Navy always seems to have a half dozen or so. Navy has had good coaches in Ken N and Paul Johnson. At Army some coaches have been intimidated by SA side of things. Interestingly the coach (Todd Berry) during dawn of 9-11 era said wars weren't a recruiting issue. He said recruiting got easier because players wanted to join. Army does lose a lot of guys after prep school period. Not sure how Navy does there. Army got caught in a spiral of demise thats been hard to break.
Last edited:
I think it has more to do with passes the fitness tests. I'm not exactly how fast they have to run but I know that they still have to be able to run fast enough to pass the tests even during the season.
Many of their linemen actually have to lose weight to be eligible to graduate in their senior year.
This is no longer true. All the Academies have relaxed the height and weight restriction with the exception of body fat limits. There are however, physical test requirements each cadet must pass. Sit-ups, pull-ups, push-ups, shuttle and throwing from a kneeling position have minimum quantity and times that must be met that are difficult if you're too tall or heavy, but not impossible.
Navy has been less stringent with their academic guidelines. Army is tired of getting their butts kicked and has adapted the same rules. They will be better soon.
Very interesting thread on the Army message board addressing this issue (from TOS)
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=239&f=2423&t=14308151
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=239&f=2423&t=14308151
Lots of wrong in this thread.
1. There are no relaxed weight requirements for Navy or Air Force. Every Middie, Zoomie and Cadet has to pass a PT test in the Spring. Your PT Test results factor into your class rank (which is the predominant factor in getting your Service Assignment when you graduate). Back in the day, there was a max weight. It varied between 280-285. Guys would have to cut in the Spring semester to get under. That has been swapped out for body fat percentages--at all academies, including Coast Guard.
2. I'm not sure how Navy relaxed academic standards, but Army hasn't. Nearly every football player goes to the Prep school for both programs. Lots of guys who otherwise wouldn't have been NOMINATED--you aren't just offered a scholarship, you still go through a process--end up at both Prep schools.
Army's football woes come down to a handful of things, some of which Saran gets right above.
On the field, the most noticeable difference is Navy is better coached. Paul Johnson was on the staff when I was there--he coached the fullbacks (yes, they had their own position coach). Buddy Green has been on the staff 14 years Johnson coached Ken at Hawaii. There has been consistency of the staff for close to two decades.
The idea that the Army experience is more difficult than the Navy experience is dumb. There is no institutional culture that makes one harder than the other. Any plebe experience is 100% dictated by the upperclass leadership (cadre). If your cadre sucks, your plebe year will suck.
Army being "harder" than Navy is a myth propagated since US Grant was a plebe. Academically, it's not really close. Go look at the list of majors. Lots of majors you can go "hide" in at Army. No sociology, psychology majors or art history majors at Navy. The core requirements of every student are also much different. Every student at Navy is a STEM student, regardless of major. That means math through Calc 4. It means multiple lab sciences. It means mandatory engineering courses. Additionally, if there is a deficiency in the fleet in certain specialities, you can have your major changed to meet the needs of the Navy--pretty much no questions asked. You want to major in Economics? Yeah, well we need electrical engineers--have fun. Pretty sure that doesn't happen at Army.
Army's biggest issues are a failed experiment in C-USA and about 10 coaching changes in the last 25 years.
1. There are no relaxed weight requirements for Navy or Air Force. Every Middie, Zoomie and Cadet has to pass a PT test in the Spring. Your PT Test results factor into your class rank (which is the predominant factor in getting your Service Assignment when you graduate). Back in the day, there was a max weight. It varied between 280-285. Guys would have to cut in the Spring semester to get under. That has been swapped out for body fat percentages--at all academies, including Coast Guard.
2. I'm not sure how Navy relaxed academic standards, but Army hasn't. Nearly every football player goes to the Prep school for both programs. Lots of guys who otherwise wouldn't have been NOMINATED--you aren't just offered a scholarship, you still go through a process--end up at both Prep schools.
Army's football woes come down to a handful of things, some of which Saran gets right above.
On the field, the most noticeable difference is Navy is better coached. Paul Johnson was on the staff when I was there--he coached the fullbacks (yes, they had their own position coach). Buddy Green has been on the staff 14 years Johnson coached Ken at Hawaii. There has been consistency of the staff for close to two decades.
The idea that the Army experience is more difficult than the Navy experience is dumb. There is no institutional culture that makes one harder than the other. Any plebe experience is 100% dictated by the upperclass leadership (cadre). If your cadre sucks, your plebe year will suck.
Army being "harder" than Navy is a myth propagated since US Grant was a plebe. Academically, it's not really close. Go look at the list of majors. Lots of majors you can go "hide" in at Army. No sociology, psychology majors or art history majors at Navy. The core requirements of every student are also much different. Every student at Navy is a STEM student, regardless of major. That means math through Calc 4. It means multiple lab sciences. It means mandatory engineering courses. Additionally, if there is a deficiency in the fleet in certain specialities, you can have your major changed to meet the needs of the Navy--pretty much no questions asked. You want to major in Economics? Yeah, well we need electrical engineers--have fun. Pretty sure that doesn't happen at Army.
Army's biggest issues are a failed experiment in C-USA and about 10 coaching changes in the last 25 years.
