Soylent

I don't care which branch is doing it or what has happened in the past. All types of special treatment (within reason) and alternative service need to stop.

USNA Dad&Grad

FWDAD:

For the record, I think Kyle Eckel's case was not appropriately handled by the Navy. I'd much rather see him in a Navy uniform than a Patriot's uniform. I didn't get asked my opinion about how to handle the case - obviously - but if I had been, I would have said that it was wrong to release him from his obligation. But I don't know why the Navy decided to do that, and neither do you. Presumably, the Navy decided that Mr. Eckel was not the type of Naval Officer that they wanted in the Fleet leading Sailors.

The rumor and innuendo surrounding his separation from the Navy have engendered strong feelings from his supporters and his detractors alike. Caleb Campbell appears not even close to the same kind of guy that Kyle Eckel is alleged to be, and from all accounts, Cadet Campbell is a standup guy.

I'm not rationalizing anything. I just believe that:
a) It's not appropriate to release someone fom a commitment because a "better offer" comes along. What about the Cadet who gets a job offer from Google - should he be released because he might be good for Army recruiting?
b) Caleb Campbell's contribution to the Army as an NFL football player will not be as impactful as his contribution as a 2LT in the Regular Army.

Please spare me the spurious "Disneyworld" comments. I live in the real world too, and have two sons at USNA who might be in Iraq as Marine officers in a couple of years.

I can understand that Shogun doesn't like the article; it doesn't paint a very flattering picture of the policy, and honestly the same scrutiny was given Eckel's release. It hurt, but the Navy deserved to be called out on it. I support telling all sides of the story - even the ones I don't like or agree with. It's not fair to wrap yourself in the flag and use the USMA grads who have paid the ultimate sacrifice to justify why Caleb Campbell should play in the NFL. I think that's more shameful and disrespectful than the article ever was. Recruiting? Retention? Ridiculous.

itlstallion422

Was he released from his obligation? I could be wrong, but for some reason I thought it was more of an administrative separation in which he had to repay some amount of money... Regardless of how it was handled with the pats, it looked like when he was trying out with the Dolphins that he wasn't going to be spending any time as an officer... until he was cut and the Navy called him back.

USNA Dad&Grad

Navy News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Navy Times

Eckel was involuntarily separated from the Navy and ordered to repay 96k for his education, according to this article.

What I disagree with is that some of the Army fans are characterizing the cases as "the same" and that Navy fans live in "glass houses". The simple fact is that these two cases are a "null set". No comparison.

The Navy did not separate Kyle Eckel so he could play football. The inference that one might draw from this is that the Navy separated Mr. Eckel because they didn't think he was fit to serve as an officer. Would it make sense that the Navy would cite "privacy reasons" for "no comment" if this decision was made to allow him to play football? I doubt it. The Navy would probably crow about it.

navy2010

shogun- thanks for the post.

No easy answers.
And recruitment isn't getting any easier these days.
And with all due respect, not sure I would classify one service as being "safer" than another.... I think the parents of anyone brave enough to put on a uniform faces a lot of lost sleep, no matter which service colors their kid is wearing.

I do believe athletes are under the same obligation to complete the committment made when selecting a service academy....having said that, I am not opposed to when the clock starts ticking, and if it starts after a season or two of play, so be it. Any way you slice it, the numbers will be small.... the number of college athletes that continue professionally are small indeed.

Ann

Troubled waters - The Boston Globe

"The Patriots saw enough football promise in Eckel to sign him as an undrafted free agent a month before he graduated from the academy and received his commission as an ensign. The team signed Eckel despite his obligation as a graduate of the service academy to serve five years on active duty, barring a waiver from the Navy."

"Graduation posed a dilemma for Eckel, however, because it triggered his active duty obligation while the NFL beckoned. He had asked the Navy several months earlier to release him from his service commitment, but the request was denied.
Navy regulations permit academy graduates to apply for a waiver after two years of active duty in exchange for serving an additional six years in the Navy Reserve. But a spokeswoman said the Pentagon has deferred action on all such requests "to support manning for the current war."

"Out of service
The Navy enabled Eckel to train with Patriots in 2005 by assigning him as an assistant to the athletic director at the Naval Academy Preparatory School in Newport, R.I. Authorized to play while off duty or on leave, Eckel rushed for two touchdowns in the preseason and impressed Belichick enough that he wanted to keep him.
But the Patriots hit a snag when they placed Eckel on waivers, hoping no team would claim him so they could sign him to the practice squad. In a surprise move, the Dolphins signed him and the Navy responded by suspending his football career and recalling him to active duty."

"A year later, Eckel was out of the service, having gotten little closer to military action than training missions in the Atlantic aboard the USS Kearsarge, an amphibious assault ship. The Pentagon said Eckel was involuntarily removed from the service through an administrative separation, a development first reported by the Baltimore Sun.'

Ann

“The simple fact is that these two cases are a "null set". No comparison.”

Well, one hopes the end result would be different, but there are some similarities worth noting.

The way I understand it, *if* Campbell is drafted, the Army will allow him to play after graduation while he is assigned to a recruiting role to fulfill his active service requirement.

The Navy allowed Eckel to play after graduation by assigning him as an assistant to the athletic director at the Naval Academy Preparatory School to fulfill his active duty requirement.

In both cases the service reserves the right to recall the athlete to full active service under certain preconditions (which is what the Navy did with Eckel before he was separated).

As with any case, a prorated share of academic costs must be repaid if the full service commitment is not fulfilled.

USNA Dad&Grad

Ann, I'm not arguing with you that the two cases don't "seem" similar, but I don't think they are similar if you look at the facts. Eckel was separated for administrative reasons. He's not talking about "why" it happened and neither is the Navy.

I suppose a cynic might say that the Navy "cut him a deal" to allow him to play football and released him administratively to make that happen. More likely, it was an issue that the Navy felt his character was not what they were looking for in a junior officer. There have been reports to that effect in the press by people close to the case. I believe the reason for the separation was the latter and not the former, but I don't know the real story.

As far as him being "allowed" to play with the Patriots while he was stationed at NAPS goes...

It's pretty commom for graduates of the Naval Academy to be sent on temporary duty before follow on training. Some stay at USNA and work in admissions, or coach sports at NAPS or USNA, some work at the Pentagon, some go home and do "home town recruiting" before they go to flight school, submarine school, surface warfare school and the Marine Corps Basic School, etc. The follow-on schools can't handle the volume of all of the new ROTC and Academy grads all at once, so some are fortunate to get this type of duty. I was assigned to the Colombian Navy for six months before flight school. There's nothing nefarious, underhanded or sinister about those "stash assignments" before service school. It's simply the luck of the draw, and it makes sense to me that Eckel would have been sent to NAPS to coach football since he was a Navy football player.

As I've said before, I don't like the fact that he was released from his obligation, and I don't support the ASO policy for any graduate of any academy. It's not why the academies exist, and all of the arguments that it's good for the service seem fallacious to me.

JustAMomOf4

I don't believe that Eckel has had to pay back any money to this day -
The article on Nick Hill claims that after his two year stint he must serve in the Reserves for 6 years and during that time would be subject to being called up with his unit.
I think there are many similarities to the Eckel case, differences, too. The Navy ultimately refused to work with Eckel -at least on the surface. It appears that perhaps Eckel "took a dive" on his Navy career - just to end it. This is far more dishonorable than a cadet considering a option available to him that is supported by the Army - Campbell's case.


Dad&Grad:
This isn't about the NFL - it is about having an athletic opportunity available, whether it be Olympic or professional, swimming, baseball or football.
So for part "a": Why athletics -
Athletics is a HUGE part of the Army, Army training, ROTC and certainly West Point. The Army values very highly athletics, athletic endeavors, team sports, physical fitness. The whole analogy of - the playing field being an extension of the battlefield is embraced by the Army and Army culture.
Not making a personal judgment here - this is just the way it is.
As has been talked about on this board many times, West Point values athletes. Every cadet is an athlete and expected to perform at a high level. Team sport athletes are especially valued.

b. Maybe/ maybe not. On a personal and immediate level - I understand that he "should" be leading troops next year and the Army will be short one officer should he go to the NFL. However, when looking at the BIG picture and numbers - the Army is obviously gambling that he has the potential to expose West Point and the Army to many youngsters who may make this a choice. Were it not for this program he would have been lost to the Army anyway as he most likely would have transferred out of West Point.

Luigi59

Everything you wrote is true, but why does the value have to be placed on Division 1 athletics and Division 1 blue-chip recruiting, and all the abuses that come along with it?

The values and attributes you write about can all be achieved by going to D3, and the chance that a D3 Service Academy athlete getting to the professional level (yes, I know it happens) is extremely rare.

Other than money and alumni ego, there are no compelling reasons for both Army and Navy to stay in NCAA Division 1 sports.

Ann

“It's not appropriate to release someone from a commitment because a "better offer" comes along."

From the directive I posted earlier:

“Exceptional personnel with unique talents and abilities may be released
from active duty when there is a strong expectation they will provide the Department with
significant favorable media exposure likely to enhance national recruiting or public
affairs efforts. Personnel will be expected to use their talents in a manner that generates
interest for service in the United States Armed Forces.”

As you can see this directive does not only apply to athletes (although they seem to have been the only ones to benefited to date). Any cadet/midshipman that has the potential to generate favorable publicity for the “Armed Forces” can be considered for this program. This is not only “recruiting office” and “meet and greet” impact. DoD is thinking in broader marketing terms. Advertising is expensive. This is a way to get favorable coverage (hopefully!) for the Armed Services/ Academy/ ROTC program each time the person is covered in the media. No matter how unfavorable this program may seem to be, I have to think that DoD feels that the end justifies the means from a publicity and financial point of view. I have no doubt that like every policy, it gets reviewed periodically.

USNA Dad&Grad

I'm not sure how you've taken my statement that one should not be released from a commitment and tied it to the importance of athletics and team sports. Yes, fitness, teamwork and athletics are important to all of the services. What does that have to do with honoring a commitment?

I can't connect the dots between playing in the NFL and recruiting soldiers or potential West Point grads. I speak with a lot of candidates, and their desire to attend USNA has never been motivated by Staubach, Robinson, McCallum or McConkey. It's usually to be a Marine or fly fighters.

Eckel should have to pay back his tuition - I'm not arguing whether he has or not. *If* he "took a dive" on his Navy career, yes I would say that would be dishonorable. I don't believe that I ever characterized any of the WP cadets as dishonorable, either, so I hope you're not implying that I've said that.

They're playing by the rules. I happen to believe that those rules are inappropriate, but I don't bear any ill will toward the people taking advantage of them.

Hunt

Just a question for those who object to this program: would your opinion change if the delayed obligations were more extensive? Is it the delay, or the perceived lightness of the obligations, that is most objectionable?

USNA Dad&Grad

Ann, can you cite any examples where the policy has been applied for non-professional athletes? I'm not trying to be difficult, I just believe that the application of the policy has been almost exclusively exercised for the benefit of professional-calibre athletes.

Ann

"I can't connect the dots between playing in the NFL and recruiting soldiers or potential West Point grads."

I don't profess to be a marketing whizz, but from the directive DoD expects that media coverage and publicity of the athlete/"talented person" will often include media exposure and publicty to the branch of service and institution involved. That exposure hopefully sheds the service and institution in a good light and makes it more marketable to the public from a recruiting standpoint.