We’ve heard Army Head Coach Jeff Monken talk about overcoming physical disadvantages through effective teamwork and effort. The major reason that the service academies employ the triple option is to level the playing field. We’ve also noted that some "blue chip" athletes have no interest in playing in a triple option offense because it is not a good path to the NFL ... although many top college programs have some disguised version via the run and shoot offenses used across the nation.

Although not as obvious, the defense installed by former defensive coordinator Jay Bateman and adopted by John Loose provides a similar effect for the defense. In this article we take a look at how the system’s emphasis on teamwork and coordination can make it more difficult for individual players to garner national recognition.

The Triple Option Offense

One need only look at the offensive statistics generated by the Black Knight offense versus statistics generated by more conventional offenses to see how it might effect media perceptions of individual performances. Despite finishing second in team rushing in the NCAA, the leading rusher for Army, Kelvin Hopkins, finished 59th in individual rushing, and Hopkins ranked below 130 in individual passing yards. A few years back Larry Dixon finished among the rushing leaders, but with three senior fullbacks sharing all the carries that Dixon had no one running back finished high in the NCAA ratings. Was Army a better team for having 5 good fullbacks? Absolutely yes, but it leaves less opportunities for individual records. The Black Knights had 7 running backs with 200+ yards and 10 who rushed for 100 or more. That’s more running backs than many teams have on their roster.

The emphasis on team performance over individual performance can be heard in the post game interviews as well. The media loves heroes, but Hopkins invariably credits any achievements he had to his offensive line. That attitude is shared by all the members of the team, and it’s a good thing. The team shares fully in the success, and the team and coaching staff accept responsibility for their failures.

Probably the ultimate subordination of individual honors to team performance on offense comes from the wide receivers, a group that refers to themselves jokingly as wide tackles due to the heavy emphasis on downfield blocking for the running backs rather than receptions.

When members of the media evaluate candidates for individual awards such as the Heisman or the Biletnikoff Award, Army players don’t receive as much consideration because they don’t have impressive individual statistics. Of course we already know that the media tends to promote players from the Power 5 conferences, but even among the G5 conference players, the Army players are at a disadvantage.

Our recently published GoBlackKnights.com article about Kelvin Hopkins and his rise to stardom, and that he is likely to be remembered as one of the top triple option quarterbacks in Army history by loyal Army fans.

However, what are his chances in competing for awards like the Heisman or Davey O’Brien?

We posed this question to offensive coordinator Brent Davis. Is Hopkins just a good triple option quarterback or could he compete with quarterbacks in more balanced offenses.

GBK: Some would argue that the offensive and defensive systems that the Army Black Knights employs do not promote or rely upon individual performances that garner Heisman votes or All-American status. Yes, we have some players who could probably start for some of the best teams in the country, but the Army system spreads the load more on both offense and defense, which tends to depress the statistical performances of individuals that are essential to garnering votes from the media.

That being said, can you talk a little bit about Kelvin Hopkins, not necessarily what value he brings to the Army team, last year reflected that ... more comparatively speaking. Where do you see him fitting in on the national scale?

Davis:

Although I have never seen him in any other offense, but in my opinion I think he could play quarterback in a lot of different systems because he has a knack for the passing game, a knack for decision making and a knack for leadership and that will transcend any offensive system. That would make him effective in any style offense he would run.

He’s very effective running the ball in our offense because of what we do and because he’s really tough. I don’t know if he would run the ball as much in another system, but he would be able to make plays in any system that he was in.

He’s an outstanding ball handler and he’s outstanding at understanding defenses, passing game concepts. He’s extremely accurate and has a great release, as well as doing a great job at managing the game.

I can’t say enough about him as a quarterback in any system, but we think that he is a great fit in our system.

GBK: Also, was his 2018 performance overlooked by the outside world of college football?

Davis:

If you look through the history of college football, there have probably not been very many 1,000/1,000 guys in the history of Division I football. He belongs in (the) conversation with those guys for sure.

And just the fact that he has helped continue the success of Army football as a quarterback after taking over for a guy [Ahmad Bradshaw] who was already a record setter and he follows that up a 1,000/1,000 season, speaks a lot about him as a player and speaks to his make-up as well ... he’s a gamer.

Up Next On GBK - A Conversation about the Defense

**To chat with other Army fans about this article and more, please visit The 12th Knight message board**