Tag: Army

  • Un analist de fotbal universitar reproșează arbitrilor penalizarea stelei Marinei după cruciala TD vs Army

    Analistul de fotbal al colegiului CBS, Gary Danielson, s-a înfuriat în legătură cu un apel controversat din trimestrul al treilea în timpul victoriei uimitoare a Marinei împotriva Armatei de sâmbătă.

    Fundașul mijlocașului Blake Horvath a aruncat o pasă de touchdown de 52 de metri lui Eli Heidenreich pentru a pune echipa în avantaj cu 21-10, cu 6:34 rămase în cadru. Heidenreich a primit o penalizare pentru comportament nesportiv imediat după joc, când a aruncat mingea lângă piciorul fundașului armatei Elo Modozie.

    CLICK AICI PENTRU MAI MULTĂ ACOPERIRE SPORTIVĂ PE FOXNEWS.COM

    Eli Heidenreich aleargă

    Eli Heidenreich a alergat de către forța militară Max DiDomenico pentru un touchdown, sâmbătă, 14 decembrie 2024, în Landover, Maryland. (Foto AP/Daniel Kucin Jr.)

    Danielson a spus că a crezut că Modozie a intrat în vârf. Analistul de reguli CBS Gene Steratore a fost de acord cu evaluarea lui Danielson.

    “Apel groaznic. Avem războinici acolo și ei fac un apel așa. Stai în afara jocului”, a spus Danielson.

    PREȘEDINTELE ALESE TRUMP ÎN JOC ARMY-MARINA CU POWERHOUSE POSSE

    Blake Horvath sărbătorește

    Blake Horvath, fundașul Marinei, sărbătorește după ce a marcat un touchdown împotriva Armatei, sâmbătă, 14 decembrie 2024, în Landover, Maryland. (Foto AP/Daniel Kucin Jr.)

    Armata ar fi coborât pe teren și ar fi lovit un gol de câmp la următorul drum. Dar Navy a răspuns cu o aterizare grăbită a lui Horvath. Midshipmen au forțat apoi o schimbare de afaceri în al patrulea sfert, care a dus la un alt field goal, iar jocul s-ar fi terminat aproape de acolo.

    Marina a câștigat jocul cu 31-13.

    Horvath a avut 4 din 9 pase pentru 107 de yarzi și două atingeri de pase. De asemenea, a alergat pentru 204 de metri și a marcat două touchdown-uri.

    “Cred că sunt ca noi. Vrem să fim semnificativi”, a spus antrenorul principal al Marinei, Brian Newberry, despre victorie. „Cred că am fost amândoi anul acesta și cred că din cauza asta poate a existat puțin mai multă semnificație, poate un pic mai mult interes pentru acest joc”.

    Aspirații sărbătoresc

    Aspirații sărbătoresc în timpul meciului împotriva Armatei, sâmbătă, 14 decembrie 2024. (Foto AP/Daniel Kucin Jr.)

    CLICK AICI PENTRU A OBȚINE APLICAȚIA FOX NEWS

    Marina a trecut la 9-3 cu victoria. Cavalerii Negri au căzut la 11-2.

    Associated Press a contribuit la acest raport.

    Urmărește Fox News Digital acoperire sportivă pe X și abonați-vă la buletinul informativ Fox News Sports Huddle.

  • Army vs. Navy: Cum să vizionezi NCAAF astăzi, ora startului, canal și multe altele

    FOXBOROUGH, MA - 09 DECEMBRIE: Cavalerii Negri din armata Kanye Udoh (26 de ani), urmăriți de defensiv Midshipmen Mbiti Williams Jr. (7) în timpul celui de-al 124-lea joc de fotbal Army-Navy din 9 decembrie 2023, la Gillette Stadium din Foxborough, MA. (Fotografia de M. Anthony Nesmith/Icon Sportswire prin Getty Images)

    Cavalerii Negri ai Armatei se vor înfrunta sâmbăta aceasta cu Midshipmeni ai Marinei pentru un meci istoric al 125-lea, iată cum să urmărești. (M. Anthony Nesmith/Icon Sportswire prin Getty Images)

    Meciul de fotbal Army vs. Navy, care marchează de obicei sfârșitul sezonului obișnuit al colegiului, va avea loc în acest weekend. Rivalitatea pe teren dintre Cavalerii Negri ai Armatei și Midshipmen-ul Marinei este una dintre cele mai lungi din istoria NCAAF; meciul din acest weekend va fi a 125-a întâlnire dintre cele două echipe de la primul lor meci din 1890. Cele două echipe se vor întâlni sâmbătă pe Northwest Stadium, casa echipei Washington Commanders, pentru un meci care va fi difuzat pe CBS și Paramount+.

    Iată cum să urmăriți meciul Army vs. Navy în această după-amiază și să fiți la curent cu actualizările din ziua jocului aici.

    Data: Sâmbătă, 14 decembrie

    Timp: 3 pm ET

    Locaţie: Stadionul de Nord-Vest, Landover, MD

    Canal TV: CBS

    Streaming: Paramount+, Fubo, DirecTV, YouTube TV și multe altele

    Puteți urmări reflectarea meciului Army vs. Navy din acest weekend, începând cu ora 3 pm ET pe CBS.

    Vă puteți conecta la jocul Army vs Navy pe Paramount+ (numai cu planul Paramount cu SHOWTIME) și pe CBS, care este difuzat de mai multe platforme, inclusiv Fubo TV, DirecTV și YouTube TV.

    Paramount+ oferă abonaților acces la jocurile NCAAF și NFL pe CBS. În plus, platforma este excelentă pentru fanii fotbalului din Liga Campionilor, Star Trek, Survivor, The Challenge si multe altele.

    Spre deosebire de multe alte servicii de streaming în zilele noastre, Paramount+ oferă în continuare o perioadă de încercare gratuită de o săptămână – astfel încât noii abonați se pot înscrie pentru a viziona în acest weekend și a verifica restul bibliotecii Paramount+ complet gratuit timp de șapte zile.

    Încercați gratuit la Paramount+

    (Fubo)

    Fubo TV vă oferă acces la ESPN, Fox, ABC, CBS, NFL Network și la peste 100 de canale live. La 80 USD/lună, serviciul de streaming TV în direct este cu siguranță o investiție mare pentru fanii fotbalului, dar este una dintre cele mai cuprinzătoare modalități de a prinde tone de jocuri NCAA în acest sezon și vă lasă în continuare cu economii majore în comparație cu un pachet tradițional de cablu. Abonații Fubo beneficiază și de 1000 de ore de stocare DVR în cloud. Platforma oferă, de asemenea, o perioadă de probă gratuită, astfel încât să puteți prinde fără riscuri câteva jocuri de pre-sezon.

    Platforma oferă și o perioadă de probă gratuită, astfel încât să puteți prinde unele jocuri fără riscuri. În acest moment, puteți obține o reducere de 30 USD la orice nivel Fubo pentru prima lună.

    Încercați gratuit la Fubo

    Tot timpul estic

    vineri, 13 dec

    Idaho la Montana State (sferturi de finală FCS) | ora 21 | ESPN

    Sâmbătă, 14 decembrie

    Statul Carolina de Sud vs. Jackson State (Celebration Bowl) | ora 12 | ABC
    Cuvânt încarnat în statul Dakota de Sud (sferturile de finală FCS) | ora 12 | ESPN
    Minnesota State la Valdosta State (semifinalele DII) | ora 12 | ESPN+
    Bethel (MN) la Susquehanna (sferturi DIII) | ora 12 | ESPN+
    Mary-Hardin Baylor la Johns Hopkins (sferturile DIII) | ora 12 | ESPN+
    Springfield la North Central (Ill.) (sferturi DIII) | 13:00 | ESPN+
    Mount Union la Salisbury (sferturile DIII) | 13:00 | ESPN+
    Marina la armata nr. 22 (stadionul de nord-vest din Landover, MD) | ora 15 | CBS
    UC Davis la Dakota de Sud (sferturi de finală FCS) | ora 15 | ESPN+
    Mercer la North Dakota State (sferturile de finală FCS) | 15:30 | ABC
    Slippery Rock la Ferris State (semifinalele DII) | 15:30 | ESPN+
    South Alabama vs. Michigan de Vest (Salut Veterans Bowl) | ora 21 | ESPN

    Meciurile de fotbal NCAA sunt difuzate pe o gamă largă de canale, de la rețele de cablu comune, inclusiv suita completă ESPN (aceasta este și ESPN2 și ESPNU), Fox și FS1, ABC, NBC și CBS, la CBSSN, Big Ten Network, SEC Network, ACC Network si mai mult.

    Copleşit? Nu ești singur. Iată o detaliere a platformelor pe care vă recomandăm să le verificați înainte de sezonul de fotbal NCAA 2024, astfel încât, la momentul jocului, să vă conectați la jocurile echipei preferate va fi la fel de ușor ca pur și simplu să porniți televizorul…

    (DirectTV)

    Nivelul DirecTV Stream's Choice (în prezent 105,98 USD/lună cu taxe) vă oferă acces la toți suspecții obișnuiți de fotbal: NFL Network, ABC, NBC, CBS și Fox. În plus, nivelul Choice vă va oferi CBSSN, FS1, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, SEC Network și o mulțime de RSN-uri locale. Cea mai bună parte este că în prezent puteți încerca toate acestea gratuit. Deci, dacă sunteți interesat să încercați un serviciu de streaming TV în direct pentru sezonul de fotbal, dar nu sunteți gata să vă angajați, vă recomandăm să începeți cu DirecTV Stream.

    Veți primi, de asemenea, spațiu de stocare nelimitat Cloud DVR inclus în orice pachet DirecTV pe care îl alegeți.

    Pro

    • Pachet complet de încercare gratuită disponibilă
    • Multe RSN-uri locale incluse
    • Cloud DVR nelimitat
    Contra

    • Cost
    • ABC și ESPN nu sunt incluse momentan

    Încercați gratuit la DirecTV

    (Fubo)

    Fubo TV vă oferă acces la ESPN, Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC și la peste 100 de canale live. Începând de la 80 USD/lună, serviciul de streaming TV în direct este cu siguranță scump (dar cu siguranță nu este cea mai scumpă opțiune din această listă), dar oferă aproape toate canalele de care veți avea nevoie pentru a viziona atât sezonul de fotbal NCAA, cât și sezonul 2024 NFL. Abonații Fubo beneficiază și de 1000 de ore de stocare DVR în cloud. Platforma oferă și o perioadă de probă gratuită.

    Pro

    • Pachet complet de încercare gratuită disponibilă
    • 1000 de ore de stocare DVR în cloud

    Încercați gratuit la Fubo

  • why Assad’s army failed to fight in Syria

    By Maya Gebeily, Suleiman Al-Khalidi, Ahmed Rasheed and Timour Azhari

    DAMASCUS/AMMAN/BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Twenty-three-year-old Syrian military conscript Farhan al-Khouli was badly paid and demoralized. His army outpost in scrubland near the rebel-held city of Idlib should have had nine soldiers but it just had three, after some had bribed the commanding officers to escape serving, he said.

    And, of the two conscripts with him, one was regarded by his superiors as mentally unfit and not trusted with a gun, Khouli said.

    Trusted news and daily delights, right in your inbox

    See for yourself — The Yodel is the go-to source for daily news, entertainment and feel-good stories.

    For years, the Islamist rebels of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) had sat behind the nearby frontline, with Syria’s long civil war frozen. But on Wednesday, Nov. 27, Khouli’s commanding officer – at another post behind the frontlines – called his mobile phone to tell him a rebel convoy was heading his way.

    The officer said the unit should stand its ground and fight.

    Instead, Khouli put his phone on airplane mode, changed into civilian clothes, dropped his rifle and fled. As he walked along the road back south, other groups of soldiers were abandoning their posts too.

    “I looked back and saw everyone walking behind me. When they saw one person flee, everyone started to toss their weapons and run,” he told Reuters this week in Damascus, where he has found work at a horse stable.

    In a little less than two weeks, the rebels would sweep into the capital Damascus, toppling former president Bashar al-Assad as his army simply melted away. The rout abruptly ended a 13-year conflict that had killed hundreds of thousands of people.

    Reuters spoke to a dozen sources including two Syrian army deserters, three senior Syrian officers, two Iraqi militia commanders working with the Syrian army, a Syrian security source and a source familiar with the thinking of Lebanese group Hezbollah, one of Assad’s main military allies.

    The sources, along with intelligence documents Reuters found in an abandoned military office in the capital, painted a detailed picture of how Assad’s once-feared army had been hollowed out by the demoralization of troops, heavy reliance on foreign allies particularly for the command structure, and growing anger across the ranks at rampant corruption.

    Most of the sources asked not to be named because they were not authorised to talk to media or feared retribution.

    Since the war began in 2011, Assad’s army command had come to depend on allied Iranian and Iran-funded Lebanese and Iraqi forces to provide the best fighting units in Syria, all the senior sources said.

    Crucially, much of the Syrian military’s operational command structure was run by Iranian military advisors and their militia allies, they said.

    But many of the Iranian military advisers had left this spring after Israeli air strikes on Damascus, and the rest departed last week, said the Iraqi militia commanders, who worked alongside them.

    Hezbollah fighters and commanders had already mostly left in October to focus on the escalating war in Lebanon with Israel, the source familiar with Hezbollah thinking said.

    The Syrian army’s own central command and control centre no longer functioned well after the Iranian and Hezbollah officers left and the military lacked a defence strategy, particularly for Syria’s second city of Aleppo, a Syrian colonel, two Syrian security sources and a Lebanese security source familiar with the Syrian military said.

    By contrast, rebels in the northwest, on paper numerically far weaker than the army, had spent years consolidating under a single operations room that coordinated their groups and units in battle, an International Crisis Group report said after the fall of Aleppo.

    Reuters was unable to contact a current representative of the armed forces. Syria’s new most powerful figure, HTS chief Ahmad al-Sharaa told Reuters on Wednesday he would dissolve Syria’s security forces. Iran’s mission to the United Nations, the Iraqi militias and Hezbollah did not respond to requests for comment.

    ALEPPO

    As Aleppo came under attack in late November, army units were not given a clear plan but were told to work it out for themselves or to fall back to the strategic city of Homs to try to regroup, two Syrian security sources said.

    Aleppo fell without a major fight on Nov. 29, just two days after the offensive began, sending shockwaves through the military, three senior Syrian officers said.

    What was left on the ground was a Syrian army severely lacking in cohesion, all the sources said, describing multiple units that were undermanned because officers were accepting bribes to let soldiers off duty, or had told soldiers to go home and were collecting their salaries themselves.

    In 2020, the army had 130,000 personnel, according to think tank IISS’ Military Balance report, describing it as significantly depleted by the long civil war and transformed into an irregularly structured, militia-style organisation focused on internal security.

    In the days ahead of the regime’s collapse on Sunday, the United States had information of broad levels of desertions and military forces changing sides, as well as some elements fleeing to Iraq, a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said.

    Reuters could not establish the overall manpower shortage in the military or current force strength.

    The Syrian army sources described officers and troops alike as demoralised by pay that was consistently low even after painful military victories earlier in the war and by reports, which Reuters could not verify, that Assad’s close family were growing immensely rich.

    On Nov. 28, the General Command of the Army and Armed Forces issued a telegram, ordering all troops to be on full combat readiness, according to a military document found by Reuters at an Air Intelligence office in Damascus.

    In a sign the regime was desperate, Syria’s Air Intelligence Directorate, a key agency close to the Assad family, accused its men of “laxity” at checkpoints throughout the country after one was overrun by rebels in the south on Dec. 1, and warned of punishment “without leniency” if they did not fight, the document seen by Reuters shows.

    Despite the orders and threats, increasing numbers of soldiers and officers began to desert, all the sources said.

    Instead of confronting the rebels, or even unarmed protesters, soldiers were seen by residents of Syrian cities, and in many videos that began circulating online, abandoning their posts, changing into civilian clothes and going home.

    Reuters journalists entering Syria on Sunday found army uniforms still strewn across Damascus streets.

    OFFICERS

    The corruption and poor morale went up through the ranks.

    Many midranking officers had been growing increasingly angry in recent years that the army’s sacrifices and successes during the war were not reflected in better pay, conditions and resources, two serving, one recently retired and one defected officer said.

    In 2020, Russia and Turkey agreed a deal that froze the frontlines after Assad retook all major cities and the main highway linking Damascus to Aleppo, further partitioning a country also split by Kurdish-controlled areas.

    But Syria’s economy continued to reel from U.S. sanctions and reduced foreign aid, said Aron Lund, a fellow at Middle East-focused think tank Century International. Rampant inflation ensued.

    “Things just got worse for everyone, except for the oligarchs and elites around Assad. That seems to have been incredibly demoralizing,” Lund said.

    While decrees in 2021 roughly doubled military salaries to keep up with inflation that topped 100% that year, buying power rapidly fell anyway as the Syrian pound crashed against the dollar.

    Col. Makhlouf Makhlouf, who served in an engineering brigade, said that if anybody complained about corruption they were called in for questioning at a military court – something that had happened to him more than once.

    “We were living in a scary society. We were afraid to say a word,” Makhlouf said. He had been stationed in Hama but deserted before the city fell to the rebels on Dec. 5, he said in an interview in Aleppo on Tuesday.

    Anger had been building particularly over the past year or so, a serving senior military intelligence officer said, saying there was “growing resentment against Assad,” including among core high-ranking supporters from his Alawite minority community.

    YEARS OF DECAY

    Khouli’s military experience illustrated the army’s problems – and helps explain his lack of loyalty.

    He was drafted for the obligatory 18-month service at age 19, after having paid-off an officer to delay his service for a year.

    When his service period expired, he was ordered to remain in the army indefinitely. He deserted but was later picked up by a patrol, put in prison for 52 days and then sent to the remote outpost near Idlib.

    He was paid 500,000 Syrian pounds ($40) a month. Army rations were often pillaged before arriving. Sometimes his entire pay went on buying more food, he said.

    Comrades with money would pay officers $100, which he lacked, to get out of service, Khouli said. Khouli’s brigade was supposed to have 80 soldiers, but in fact there were only 60, he said.

    He described bad treatment from officers, including being assigned heavy manual labour digging earth berms in both very hot and very cold weather and during nights.

    Reuters was not able to verify independently the details of his experiences.

    One former major described the use of forced conscripts as a “fatal mistake”.

    A former army logistics serviceman, Zuhair, 28, said in an interview in Damascus on Tuesday he had seen officers steal and sell electricity generators and fuel. “All they cared about was using their positions to enrich themselves,” he said.

    He had fought for Assad for years but he had cousins among the rebels and when they advanced, he cheered, he said. “I don’t know how to describe how happy I am,” he said.

    RELIANCE ON ALLIES

    To fight back the earlier opposition uprising, which began with protests in 2011, Assad relied on allies. Russia sent jets that bombed rebel positions, Iran sent military advisers and fighters from Hezbollah. Iran-backed militias from Iraq and another group it formed from Afghan Shi’ite fighters also came.

    Their fighting skill and well-being contrasted with Syria’s own soldiers. An Iraqi militia commander serving near Aleppo said he knew of a Syrian platoon meant to consist of 30 soldiers that had only eight present.

    The militia often invited those soldiers to eat with them out of pity at the poor condition of their rations, the commander said.

    Hezbollah and allied militias regarded the regular Syrian forces with little more than contempt, the Iraqi militia commanders and a source familiar with Hezbollah thinking said.

    They did not trust them for important operations and often would not fight alongside them, those sources added.

    OCT. 7 HAMAS ATTACKS

    Iran’s presence in Syria was curtailed in the months following the attack on Israel by Tehran-backed Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, the Iraqi militia commander based near Aleppo and an Iraqi military adviser based in Damascus said.

    Israel’s response to Hamas’ incursion included escalating strikes on Iran-linked targets, including in Syria.

    On April 1, a strike killed top commanders from Iran’s Revolutionary Guards at a building in an Iranian consular compound in Damascus. Israel has not confirmed or denied responsibility for the strike.

    The Iraqi sources both said the number of Revolutionary Guards commanders present in Syria dropped significantly after that. One said Syria’s military operations command became ineffective as a result, a situation exacerbated by the withdrawal of Hezbollah in October.

    Russia conducted air strikes on rebels as they advanced on Hama and Homs, both sides said at the time, but unlike in earlier phases of the war there were no effective ground forces able to benefit.

    By Saturday, Dec. 7, Russia was calling for a political transition. The Kremlin and Russia foreign ministry declined to comment for this story. Russia, the Kremlin said on Tuesday, had “spent a lot of effort” to help Assad during the civil war but the situation had then deteriorated.

    In Aleppo, Syrian forces had relied on Hezbollah to provide operational command, an Alawite Syrian army colonel said. Without Iranian advisers or Hezbollah, the army could not hold onto territory near the city, the colonel, the Iraqi commander and the Iraqi adviser said.

    Iraqi militias sent more fighters to Syria last week, but they found all the contact channels to Iranian military advisors had been cut, the Iraqi commander said.

    On Friday, after rebels had taken the city of Hama, the Iraqi groups were told to leave, he said.

    “The battle for Syria was lost from day one,” the Iraqi military adviser added.

    (Reporting by Maya Gebeily and Timour Azhari in Damascus, Suleiman al-Khalidi in Amman, Ahmed Rasheed in Baghdad, Laila Bassam and Tom Perry in Beirut; Writing by Angus McDowall; Editing by Frank Jack Daniel)

  • Army Secretary Fires 4-Star General Who Meddled in Promotion of Unfit Subordinate

    Army Secretary Christine Wormuth — in a dramatic and rare move — on Tuesday fired one of the service’s top generals following an Army inspector general investigation that concluded he improperly intervened in the process for selecting senior commanders.

    Gen. Charles Hamilton, who had been the head of Army Materiel Command, was removed after what officials described as a flagrant abuse of authority aimed at securing a leadership role for a subordinate officer who was found unfit for command and had an inappropriate relationship with the general, according to the IG report.

    The move marks the first time in nearly 20 years an Army four-star general has been outright fired and comes after a Military.com investigation in March detailed how he attempted to intervene on behalf of the subordinate officer. The publication’s report earlier this year immediately triggered both his suspension from the command leadership position and the inspector general probe.

    Read Next: Air Force Osprey Parts Failure Triggers Another Military-Wide Flight Pause for Troubled Aircraft

    “Based on the findings of a Department of the Army Inspector General investigation, the secretary of the Army has relieved Gen. Charles Hamilton of command,” Cynthia Smith, a service spokesperson, told Military.com in a statement.

    The IG investigation also found that the Army’s top uniformed leader, Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George, and Lt. Gen. Walter Piatt, who was assuming some of the duties as George’s No. 2 officer, acceded to Hamilton’s request to boost the subordinate lieutenant colonel toward a command position without pressing him for a justification, even after she was twice deemed to be unqualified.

    Piatt retired in January.

    “This was an abuse of authority, from Hamilton [to] the chief,” one general officer who was involved in the command selection process for the lieutenant colonel told Military.com on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation, referring to George. “It’s hard to imagine [Hamilton] didn’t know what he was doing. There was skepticism from some on this process, and now we’ve seen it’s open to cronyism.”

    “We had a renegade general … but I’m more disappointed that the highest levels of the chain of command let this happen without asking questions,” the general officer said.

    The Army’s relatively new process to select senior commanders, called the Battalion Command Assessment Program, or BCAP, was specifically designed to eliminate outside influence.

    However, Military.com found — and the IG investigation confirmed — that Hamilton orchestrated a complex lobbying campaign to undermine the process and boost a lieutenant colonel who worked under him, had a friendly relationship with him, and was seeking a battalion command post.

    The lieutenant colonel scored in the bottom 1% out of about 800 candidates for command, failing the initial BCAP panel in a 0-5 vote after being found to be an “ineffective” leader.

    After his subordinate failed the BCAP assessment, Hamilton sought and was successful in getting her an unusual second consideration by the panel — a situation that has never happened in the program’s history since it began in 2019, aside from instances involving technical or administrative snafus.

    Military.com is withholding the name of the subordinate lieutenant colonel because it found no evidence of wrongdoing on her part, though the Army’s inspector general report says she downplayed her relationship with Hamilton when interviewed by investigators.

    She also failed her second attempt but was placed on a list for command anyway, alongside other candidates who passed the program. Candidates who pass the BCAP are ranked by order of merit and then selected for various command posts.

    Hamilton’s subordinate was placed on the command selection list at the behest of George, who oversees the BCAP program. She was removed from the command selection list by Wormuth only after Military.com’s reporting.

    Hamilton’s Lobbying Campaign

    The BCAP includes a series of assessments of a lieutenant colonel’s command potential, including a physical fitness test, appraisals of communication skills, a blind interview with a panel of five randomly chosen generals, and a psychological evaluation akin to those done for special operations candidates.

    To avoid bias, panel members are provided minimal details about the candidates and conduct the interview with the applicant concealed behind a curtain. Adding another layer of impartiality, the generals are selected only hours before the panel to prevent any lobbying efforts.

    Ahead of the lieutenant colonel’s assessment panel on Oct. 30, 2023, Hamilton asked officials overseeing the BCAP whether he could review the peer and subordinate reports for her, making requests to Mike Arnold, at the time a civilian special adviser to the Army Talent Management Task Force who has since left the service; and Col. Robert O’Brien, who until last summer oversaw the command assessment program.

    O’Brien, who penned a memo last year establishing a timeline of the entire incident, said Hamilton’s request for documents was denied.

    Hamilton felt the lieutenant colonel received poor treatment in some of her previous assignments that could have colored her assessments. He asked to personally view her panel interview, a request that had never been made before, according to Army inspector general investigators.

    Generals are frequently invited to the BCAP to see the process, and commonly watch the panels for high and low performers. But those generals do not select which candidates they view, and Hamilton never expressed interest in viewing other candidates, the IG report noted.

    Ahead of the first panel, Hamilton contacted one of the BCAP staffers to discuss which generals would be on the lieutenant colonel’s review panel, the IG found, though he denied having done so when interviewed by investigators.

    The lieutenant colonel bombed the panel, something Hamilton blamed on a psychologist’s presentation to panel members, arguing it was inappropriate and set her up for failure. It’s unclear what the psychologist’s presentation on the woman entailed, and the Army IG’s report did not note any specific grievances Hamilton had with those findings. The psychologists on the panel have worked in that field for at least a decade and previously dealt with special operations.

    Hamilton immediately asked for a repanel, which was granted by O’Brien solely based on the request.

    Hamilton then called at least four generals who were on deck to panel the BCAP candidates. They included Maj. Gen. Jeth Rey, Maj. Gen. Trevor Bredenkamp and Maj. Gen. Hope Rampy.

    In those conversations, Hamilton asked them about voting philosophies and the BCAP process. That contact was reported to BCAP officials, with some of the generals saying Hamiton told them something to the effect that they might be grading someone he knew — a move Army investigators found to be him leveraging his rank.

    The lieutenant colonel then failed the second panel.

    “Gen. Hamilton’s action appeared focused on excusing [the woman’s] low rating at BCAP rather than identifying systemic issues with BCAP. At no point in his interview [with Army investigators] did Gen. Hamilton talk about [her] performance, potential or why she was qualified to be a battalion commander,” the Army inspector general wrote in the investigative report.

    Candidates who fail the BCAP are required to wait a year for a repanel, but the lieutenant colonel’s second panel happened within just two days. Hamilton sought to get an exception to that policy for her, first having her email him letters of recommendation. The two communicated almost exclusively through private email accounts, making obtaining records either by the press or Army investigators virtually impossible without their consent.

    Hamilton then went to George in early November of last year, about a week after the second panel. He emailed George that the lieutenant colonel was “not allowed to compete on an equal playing field,” but was scant on specifics of what led him to that conclusion.

    Friendly Relationship

    “Our investigation found a preponderance of evidence to support a finding that Gen. Hamilton and [the lieutenant colonel] shared a prohibited relationship that caused an actual or perceived partiality or unfairness,” according to the IG report. “Despite all the circumstantial evidence, we were unable to determine conclusively that Gen. Hamilton and [the lieutenant colonel] were involved in a sexual relationship.”

    Both of them downplayed their relationship to investigators, according to the IG. In reality, they frequently communicated outside of official Army communication tools, traveled on official business together, and worked together for years.

    Hamilton also seemingly made efforts to inflate the lieutenant colonel’s record, including awarding her the Legion of Merit when she was a major, listing the same achievement as one cited for another, lower award — in violation of Army regulations. The award is traditionally reserved for more senior officials and is effectively the top non-valor award in the service.

    Army investigators also found that Hamilton extended the period of time he oversaw her yearly job evaluations, breaking service norms, and gave her the highest marks authorized, presumably to set her up for the BCAP.

    George’s Role

    Investigators say Hamilton presented George and Piatt “incomplete information” when he argued that the lieutenant colonel had been unfairly assessed and deserved to be certified for command regardless of her evaluations, when in fact she ranked in the bottom 1% out of 811 candidates up for command that cycle.

    George told another official, whose name was redacted from the Army IG investigation, that he did not want the lieutenant colonel to go back for a third BCAP evaluation and that he “wanted it fixed.” He directed that she be allowed to slide into the command selection list through a complicated series of administrative moves.

    A spokesperson for George did not respond to a request for comment.

    Senior Army staff went through a lengthy series of steps to make that happen, including an entire briefing on the risks, and what could happen to the BCAP’s integrity if it were publicized that a clearly unqualified officer was placed in command. She was finally ranked 100 out of 811 candidates for command, presumably being scored ahead of candidates who passed the selection process.

    Because the command selection process is exclusively an Army program with no oversight from the Department of Defense, George has ultimate authority over how that list is constructed. However, numerous staffers in George’s office had concerns over him subverting the process, according to multiple Army officials with direct knowledge of the situation.

    Some also described George as having a lackadaisical approach to management, or having too much trust in his staff and, by extension, his subordinate commanders — in this case, Hamilton.

    The investigation found that neither George nor Piatt asked notable follow-up questions to Hamilton’s request, despite no known precedent for such a move.

    “The focus was to find a way to ‘get to yes’ and the staff worked to meet that objective,” the IG report noted.

    By the time George and Piatt got involved, it was already clear the lieutenant colonel was a low performer. The memo from O’Brien inventorying Hamilton’s attempt to subvert the process had also been written. It’s unclear whether George’s staff ever made an attempt to contact O’Brien.

    Gravity of the Firing

    Historically, removing a four-star general from service is a move reserved for presidents or defense secretaries, and extremely rare, underscoring the severity of the allegations against Hamilton.

    “It was my honor to serve our nation, and I’ve been blessed beyond what I’ve deserved to lead our troops for the past 43 years,” Hamilton said in a statement to Military.com. “While I wish I was able to complete my command, we all take the uniform off and we don’t always control the timing. I look forward to continuing to serve our nation in new ways.”

    Wormuth spent weeks meticulously weighing the decision, and it will likely be her last significant act as secretary amid a new incoming administration. She also took an in-person meeting with Hamilton in the Pentagon in recent weeks at his request, something she is not obligated to do.

    Those in the senior ranks are typically offered opportunities to quietly resign — and their conduct is also rarely made public in detail.

    The last Army four-star general known to have been outright fired was Gen. Kevin Byrnes, then the commander of the Army Training and Doctrine Command, in 2005. Byrnes’ removal stemmed from an extramarital affair with a married woman. Gen. Stanley McChrystal was forced to resign in 2010 after a scathing Rolling Stone article revealed him and senior aides mocking then-Vice President Joe Biden and other key Obama administration officials.

    It wasn’t immediately clear what rank Hamilton will retain. The decision was forwarded to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

    It’s unclear whether George will face any disciplinary action. His spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Related: Suspended Army 4-Star Asks for Command Back After Pressuring Panel to Prop Up Career of Unfit Subordinate

  • Could a young Army pilot have prevented the Pearl Harbor attack?

    First Lt. Kermit A. Tyler was the next man up on the squadron duty roster, so he resigned himself to spending the coming Sunday morning, 4 to 8 a.m., at the Aircraft Information Center at Fort Shafter on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. At 3 a.m. on that day, Dec. 7, 1941, the 28-year-old fighter pilot drove south from his house on Oahu’s North Shore to Fort Shafter, listening to Hawaiian music on his car radio.

    The Information Center was the hub of a cutting-edge system designed to warn of air attacks aimed at Hawaii. A half-dozen radar stations were located throughout Oahu, the site of several military bases including the naval base at Pearl Harbor. The radar operators’ job was to detect approaching planes and report unusual contacts to the center. Center personnel would evaluate the information and determine if the aircraft might be hostile, in which case they would scramble pursuit planes to intercept them.

    The idea was sound, but the system was not yet a smooth-running operation. Pilots were randomly sent to man the center, serving as little more than warm bodies. Tyler, for example, had no training in radar — and no idea what he was supposed to do at the center. A few days earlier, he had asked his superior, Major Kenneth P. Bergquist, about his role. Bergquist only suggested that if a plane crashed, Tyler could help with the rescue operation. Even the center’s location was makeshift: a room above a warehouse, pending construction of a permanent home.

    The first three hours of Tyler’s Sunday shift were uneventful, even boring. Only a skeleton staff was on duty. The officer whose job it was to identify approaching aircraft wasn’t scheduled to be there that morning, but it didn’t seem to matter because there were few planes in the air. Tyler passed the time writing letters home and thumbing through a Reader’s Digest. But at 7:20 a.m., fate intervened to ensure the young pilot an unwelcome and enduring place in history, branded as the man who had a chance to thwart the Pearl Harbor attack — but didn’t.

    Pilot Kermit A. Tyler, shown here as a lieutenant colonel in 1944.  (U.S. Signal Corps/U.S. Army)

    Pilot Kermit A. Tyler, shown here as a lieutenant colonel in 1944. (U.S. Signal Corps/U.S. Army)

    Born in Iowa in 1913, Tyler grew up in Long Beach, California. After two years of college, he joined the Army Air Corps in 1936 and earned his wings the next year. In February 1941, Tyler was assigned to the 78th Pursuit Squadron in Hawaii. For a young airman, life in idyllic Oahu was “very pleasant indeed,” he said. He and future ace Charles H. MacDonald shared a beach house on the North Shore, splitting the $60 monthly rent, and Tyler took up surfing, an avocation he pursued for the next 50 years.

    While Tyler and his fellow pilots honed their flying skills with aerobatics and mock dogfights in their P-40 Warhawks, other officers studied technological advances that would help win the next war. One of the most promising was known as “radio detection and ranging,” or radar. When high-frequency radio waves hit an object, like an airplane, they deflect back, producing an image on an oscilloscope screen pinpointing the object’s location. The British had pioneered important advances in the field; the previous year, radar had proved pivotal in the Battle of Britain, alerting the Royal Air Force to approaching German bombers and enabling its fighter planes to intercept them.

    The advent of aircraft carriers had made even island outposts like Hawaii vulnerable, so radar became the linchpin of Hawaiian air defense. Operating at the upper end of the present-day FM broadcast band, the radar sets in use at the time, called SCR-270Bs, could detect planes more than 100 miles away. Still, they had limitations. Foremost, they could not distinguish between friendly and enemy planes. The British had technology to do that — a system called Identification, Friend or Foe — but the U.S. Army Signal Corps was still developing an American version. The SCR-270B also couldn’t discern the number of planes in a contact.

    Many junior officers had embraced radar, but the higher-ups showed little interest, noted Major Bergquist, who was setting up the Hawaiian radar system. Cmdr. William E. G. Taylor, a navy officer then working on radar in Hawaii, observed that radar was “sort of a foster child at that time, we felt.” Turf battles between the Signal Corps and the Air Corps didn’t help either, Bergquist said; the result was bureaucratic inertia, a shortage of trained personnel, and a lack of spare parts, which limited radar station operating hours to 4 to 7 a.m. each day. Even when they were active, the sets weren’t used to detect hostile aircraft. Instead, radar was used more to train for hypothetical future threats rather than for “any idea it would be real,” explained Lieutenant General Walter C. Short, the army commander in Hawaii.

    By late 1941, American relations with Japan had reached their breaking point. U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. George C. Marshall issued a war warning to General Short on Nov. 27, alerting him to “hostile action possible at any moment.” Marshall also ordered Short “not, repeat not, to alarm the civil population,” so Short confined Marshall’s warning to officers he deemed to have a need to know. Short placed his command on alert — but at the lowest possible alert level, one that warned only against “acts of sabotage and uprisings within the islands, with no threat from without.”

    Original radar plot from the morning of Dec. 7, 1941, showing the track of Japanese planes en route to attack Pearl Harbor. (National Park Service)

    Original radar plot from the morning of Dec. 7, 1941, showing the track of Japanese planes en route to attack Pearl Harbor. (National Park Service)

    At the same time that Tyler started his shift on Dec. 7, Private Joseph L. Lockard, 19, and Private George E. Elliott Jr., 23, fired up the radar station on Opana, some 30 miles north of Fort Shafter, on the upper tip of Oahu. Of the two, Lockard was the more experienced, although he had no formal schooling in radar. He operated the SCR-270B, and Elliott plotted radar contacts on a map. It was a “rather dull morning. There was not much activity,” Lockard recalled. At 7 a.m., with the day’s scheduled radar operations completed and an hour remaining in Tyler’s shift, Lockard and Elliott prepared to shut down. But the truck scheduled to bring them back to their camp was late to arrive; in the meantime, they kept the radar on to give Elliott practice operating it.

    At about 7:20 a.m., Elliott reached the center’s switchboard operator, Private Joseph P. McDonald, and gave his report: “Large number of planes coming in from the north.” McDonald thought that he was alone and didn’t know what to do. When he saw that Tyler was still on duty, he had Tyler speak with Lockard. Lockard told Tyler about the contact, which was now 20-25 miles closer to Oahu, deeming it the most substantial reading he had ever gotten.

    Tyler remembered the Hawaiian music he had heard on his car radio earlier that morning. He knew that the radio station, KGMB, broadcast overnight only when American heavy bombers flew in from the mainland. The Air Force wanted the station’s signal available as a navigation aid. That must be it, Tyler thought, and he concluded that the radar contact was a flight of friendly planes. He told Lockard not to worry about it and decided against disturbing his superior, Bergquist, who was at home. In the peacetime military, Tyler knew, lieutenants did not drag majors out of bed on a Sunday morning without good reason. That this contact might be Japanese planes was the farthest thing from Tyler’s mind because he, too, was unaware of Marshall’s war warning. In fact, from the news accounts he had read, he thought the United States’ relations with Japan had actually improved over the previous few weeks. Lockard and Elliott continued to track the planes until 7:39 a.m., when they lost them 22 miles from Oahu once the island’s topography interfered with the radar beam.

    At 7:02 a.m., his eyes popped at what he saw on his screen: a large blip 132 miles north of Oahu. Lockard was surprised, too, as it was the largest contact he had ever seen — so large he initially thought the radar had malfunctioned. After verifying that his equipment was working properly, he told Elliott that it looked like a large flight of planes. The SCR-270B, however, could not ascertain how many planes were there or whether they were American. Lockard and Elliott were curious, but not alarmed. Neither had been privy to Marshall’s war warning, and neither suspected that the planes might be Japanese. Nevertheless, the contact was so unusual that Elliott thought they should report it to the Information Center. Lockard laughed and told him he was crazy; after some prodding, he relented, and Elliott made the call.

    Private Joseph L. Lockard was part of the team that picked up radar warnings of incoming aircraft, like this Aichi D3A carrier dive bomber  (U.S. Navy/Naval History and Heritage Command).

    Private Joseph L. Lockard was part of the team that picked up radar warnings of incoming aircraft, like this Aichi D3A carrier dive bomber (U.S. Navy/Naval History and Heritage Command).

    A flight of 12 B-17 Flying Fortresses was, in fact, coming in from California that morning. But what Opana had picked up wasn’t American bombers, but the first wave of Japanese planes bound for Pearl Harbor. They struck at 7:55 a.m. — 35 minutes after Elliott’s call. Tyler sensed an inkling of trouble at 8 a.m. when, his shift over, he stepped out of the center for fresh air. Glancing toward Pearl Harbor, five miles away, he saw antiaircraft fire and diving planes but thought it was a drill. Five minutes later, he learned the truth when nearby Wheeler Field called to report that it was under attack.

    The Japanese had achieved complete surprise. Their attack killed 2,335 American servicemen, sank or damaged 19 ships, and damaged or destroyed 328 army and navy aircraft. Since General Short’s alert had warned only against sabotage, the planes at the Hawaiian airfields had been lined up wingtip to wingtip — making the planes easier to guard against interlopers but easy prey for the Japanese attackers.

    The Pearl Harbor attack was a seismic shock, and Americans could not grasp how the army and navy could have been caught so flat-footed. The tragedy became one of the most thoroughly investigated events in American history, with a presidential commission, an Army board, a Navy court of inquiry, and a congressional committee all trying to figure out what had happened and who was to blame. These panels focused on the commanders — Short and the Pacific Fleet commander, Adm. Husband E. Kimmel — but Tyler’s dismissal of the Opana radar contact did not escape scrutiny.

    In 1942, the Roberts Commission, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and chaired by Supreme Court Justice Owen J. Roberts, took testimony and cleared Tyler, noting he had firm reason to believe that the approaching planes were American. Tyler’s commander, Brig. Gen. Howard C. Davidson, backed Tyler, telling the commission that Tyler would have needed “prescience beyond the ordinary person’s capacity” to recognize the radar contact as Japanese planes.

    Members of the Navy court of inquiry during a session of their examination of the circumstances of the attack. In the center is Adm. Orin G. Murfin, with Adm. Edward C. Kalbfus at left and Vice Adm. Adolphus Andrews at right. (U.S. Navy/Naval History and Heritage Command)

    Members of the Navy court of inquiry during a session of their examination of the circumstances of the attack. In the center is Adm. Orin G. Murfin, with Adm. Edward C. Kalbfus at left and Vice Adm. Adolphus Andrews at right. (U.S. Navy/Naval History and Heritage Command)

    Two years later, a Navy court of inquiry likewise excused Tyler’s failure to heed the Opana contact due to the SCR-270B’s inability to identify hostile planes and Short’s failure to disseminate Marshall’s war warning. That same year, however, the Army Pearl Harbor Board was more critical, chastising Tyler for failing to call Maj. Bergquist. Tyler “had no knowledge upon which to base any action,” the board noted, “yet he assumed to give direction instead of seeking someone competent to make a decision.” The board’s presiding officer was more understanding. Upon hearing how Tyler had arrived at the center without orders or a defined role, Lt. Gen. George Grunert, a soldier since 1898, noted, “It seems all cock-eyed to me.”

    The final investigation, conducted by a congressional committee from 1945-46, placed the blame squarely on Gen. Short. Tyler’s failure to alert Bergquist would have been inexcusable had he known of the war warning, the panel concluded, but he didn’t. “The real reason … that the information developed by the radar was of no avail was the failure of the commanding general to order an alert commensurate with the warning he had been given by the War Department that hostilities were possible at any moment,” the committee concluded.

    For more than a half-century, history enthusiasts have debated whether Tyler could have changed the course of history by passing the Opana radar contact up his chain of command. Would the Army and Navy have been better prepared to meet the attack? Navy Secretary Frank Knox thought so. In a report issued on Dec. 14, 1941, he asserted that if the Opana radar contact had been “properly handled, it would have given both Army and Navy sufficient warning to have been in a state of readiness, which at least would have prevented the major part of the damage done, and might easily have converted this successful air attack into a Japanese disaster.”

    Other factors, however, dispel the Navy secretary’s conclusion. Nothing Kermit Tyler could have done would have been likely to have made a difference.

    The main impediment was American complacency — what Chief of Naval Operations Ernest King later called “the unwarranted feeling of immunity from attack that seems to have pervaded all ranks at Pearl Harbor — both Army and Navy.” Japan had been viewed as a second-rate power whose planes and ships were inferior to their American counterparts. Few imagined that Japan would have the audacity to attack heavily defended Pearl Harbor — and it’s hard to be ready for an attack believed to be impossible. It took defeats at Pearl Harbor, Guam, Wake Island and the Philippines to show the United States that Japan was indeed a formidable foe.

    If Tyler had acted, he would have called Bergquist, who was home in bed and also unaware of Marshall’s war warning. For that call to have had any impact, Bergquist would have had to have believed the contact might be hostile planes and passed a warning to his superiors. Furthermore, Bergquist’s superiors would have had to have promptly issued a full alert and notified the navy. Given the hubris of which Adm. King had complained, none of these actions was likely, as another incident that December morning shows.

    At about 6:45 a.m., the destroyer Ward sank a Japanese mini-submarine near the mouth of Pearl Harbor. The Ward’s skipper reported this action to his superiors at 6:51 a.m., but naval commanders did not take the report seriously enough to issue an alert. There is no reason to believe that an ambiguous radar contact would have led army commanders to act any more decisively than their navy brethren had. Time was also short: Lockard spoke to Tyler at 7:20 a.m., just 35 minutes before the attack. Even with a prompt alert, there was too little time for ships to get underway or warplanes to get off the ground.

    The most tantalizing “what if” involves an omission that cannot be laid solely at Tyler’s feet. After the attack began, more experienced officers like Bergquist and Maj. Lorry N. Tindal, an Air Force intelligence officer, took over for Tyler, although Tyler stayed on duty at the center. Due to “the shock of the attack,” the center was in “quite a turmoil,” Tindal said. No Navy liaison officer was present, and no one from the Army thought to tell the Navy about the Opana radar contact until two days later — a lapse that Adm. Kimmel called “incomprehensible.” The Opana station’s radar plot showed the path the Japanese planes had taken to Oahu, a valuable clue to the location of the carriers that had launched them. If the navy had had that information on Dec. 7, it might have found and attacked those carriers, Kimmel believed — but without it, the Navy chased its tail, searching to the west and southwest instead of to the north.

    Along with Gen. Short, Adm. Husband E. Kimmel, center, was assigned most of the blame for the debacle. On the right is Kimmel's chief of staff, Capt. William W. Smith, and on the left is his operations officer and assistant chief of staff, Capt. Walter S. Delany. (U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command)

    Along with Gen. Short, Adm. Husband E. Kimmel, center, was assigned most of the blame for the debacle. On the right is Kimmel’s chief of staff, Capt. William W. Smith, and on the left is his operations officer and assistant chief of staff, Capt. Walter S. Delany. (U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command)

    There was a war to be fought, and Tyler moved on. In September 1942, he was promoted to captain and given command of the 44th Fighter Squadron, flying combat missions in the Solomon Islands. Tyler was later promoted to major, named operations officer for the 13th Fighter Command in May 1943, and promoted to lieutenant colonel in November of that same year.

    The Opana station’s Private Lockard emerged from the Pearl Harbor attack as a minor celebrity. On Feb. 10, 1942, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal for detecting the Japanese planes. The press portrayed him as one of the few people on the ball on Dec. 7, unaware that he had laughed off the radar contact until Private Elliott prodded him to report it. Lockard was commissioned a lieutenant and spent the war as a radar officer in the Aleutians; Elliott stayed out of the spotlight and served as a radar operator in the states for the war’s duration.

    Radar had done its job in detecting the Japanese planes, and the brass took notice. The attack unlocked a cornucopia of resources for radar operations.

    “After the 7th I just had to snap my fingers and I got what I wanted,” Major Bergquist said.

    But Pearl Harbor followed Tyler for the rest of his life. He remained in the Air Force after the war, but a postwar effectiveness report questioned his ability to react in a crisis — the kiss of death for advancement. He retired from the service in 1961 as a lieutenant colonel, the same rank he had held since 1943. Books and films have portrayed Tyler as asleep at the switch that fateful morning, and for the rest of his life, he received occasional angry letters at his home from people second-guessing his performance at Pearl Harbor. When he died in 2010, newspapers across the country ran his obituary, calling him the man who had ignored the approaching Japanese planes.

    Why had fate singled him out? Tyler had often wondered. He agonized over whether he should have done more, but in his heart of hearts, he knew the answer: “I could have done the same thing a hundred times, and I would have arrived at the same conclusion, given the state of alert, or lack of alert, that we were in,” he reflected in 1991. In the end, Tyler accepted that he was simply the unlucky man thrust into an impossible situation at what had unexpectedly become a pivotal moment in history, and he made his peace with it.

    This story originally appeared on HistoryNet.com.

  • Cote Tulane vs. Army, pronostic, linie de pariuri: alegeri ale jocului campionatului AAC 2024 după model dovedit

    Campionatul American Athletic Conference din 2024 va fi în joc atunci când Cavalerii Negri ai Armatei, clasați pe locul 24, se vor lupta vineri cu Valul Verde Tulane în meciul de campionat AAC 2024. Tulane vine dintr-o înfrângere cu 34-24 în fața Memphis de Ziua Recunoștinței, în timp ce Army a învins UTSA cu 29-24 sâmbătă. The Green Wave (9-3, 7-1 AAC), care s-a clasat pe locul al doilea în AAC, caută să câștige primul lor campionat de ligă din 2022. Black Knights (10-1, 8-0 AAC), care s-au clasat pe primul loc în liga în timpul sezonului regulat, își caută prima lor coroană AAC.

    Kickoff-ul este programat pentru 20:00 ET pe Stadionul Michie din West Point, NY. Valul Verde sunt favoriți cu 5 puncte în cele mai recente cote Tulane vs. Înainte de a face alegeri între Army vs. Tulane, consultați previziunile de fotbal universitar din Modelul de proiecție SportsLine.

    Modelul simulează fiecare joc FBS de 10.000 de ori. De la înființare, a generat un profit la pariuri de peste 2.000 de dolari pentru jucătorii de 100 de dolari la alegerile sale de fotbal din colegiu de top cotate și are un puternic 30-19 la toate alegerile de top din ultimele 10 săptămâni ale acestui sezon. Oricine urmărește la casele de pariuri sportive și la aplicațiile de pariuri a înregistrat randamente impresionante.

    Modelul și-a pus ochii pe Tulane vs. Army. Puteți merge la SportsLine pentru a vedea alegerile sale. Iată câteva linii de pariuri și tendințe pentru fotbal universitar pentru Army vs. Tulane:

    • Răspândirea Tulane vs. Armată: Tulane -5
    • Tulane vs. Army over-under: 45,5 puncte
    • Linia monetară Tulane vs. Armată: Tulane -209, Armată +172
    • TUL: The Green Wave a acoperit răspândirea în ultimele lor cinci jocuri de drum (+5.00 unități)
    • ARMATA: Cavalerii Negri au lovit linia de bani în 10 dintre ultimele 11 jocuri (+9,00 unități)
    • Alegeri Tulane vs. Army: Vezi alegerile la SportsLine
    • Tulane vs. Army streaming: FuboTV (Încercați gratuit)

    De ce ar trebui să-l sprijini pe Tulane

    Primul fundaș Darian Mensah conduce atacul. În 12 jocuri, a completat 172 din 262 de pase (65,6%) pentru 2.514 de metri și 20 de aterizări cu cinci interceptări și un rating de 167,6. În înfrângerea cu Memphis, el a completat 21 din 33 de pase (63,6%) pentru 317 de metri și două touchdown-uri cu o interceptare. El a aruncat pentru două touchdown-uri și a alergat pentru altul într-o victorie cu 35-0 în fața Navy pe 16 noiembrie.

    Cel de-al doilea alergător Makhi Hughes alimentează atacul rapid. El s-a grăbit pentru 100 de metri sau mai multe în șapte jocuri, inclusiv o performanță de 23 de purtare, 166 de metri și o performanță de un touchdown într-o victorie cu 41-33 asupra Louisiana pe 21 septembrie. și două aterizări într-o victorie cu 52-6 asupra lui Temple pe 9 noiembrie. În 12 meciuri în acest sezon, Hughes a efectuate de 243 de ori pentru 1.306 de yarzi (5,4 în medie) și 15 touchdown-uri. El are, de asemenea, 16 recepții pentru 154 de yarzi și două touchdown-uri. Vezi ce echipă să alegi aici.

    De ce ar trebui să sprijini armata

    Fundașul senior Bryson Daily este liderul de trecere și grabnic al Cavalerilor Negri. El a efectuat de 240 de ori pentru 1.348 de yarzi (media 5,6) și 25 de touchdown-uri. El a completat, de asemenea, 43 din 76 de pase (56,6%) pentru 860 de metri și opt touchdown-uri cu o interceptare și un rating de 183,7. Într-o victorie cu 45-28 în fața Carolinei de Est pe 19 octombrie, el s-a repezit de 31 de ori pentru 171 de yarzi și cinci touchdown-uri.

    Kanye Udoh este o altă armă ofensivă. În 12 jocuri, a efectuat de 145 de ori pentru 906 de yarzi (media de 6,2) și nouă touchdown-uri. El s-a repezit pentru mai mult de 100 de metri în patru jocuri, inclusiv un efort de 22 de purtare, 158 de metri și două aterizări într-o victorie cu 20-3 asupra Air Force pe 2 decembrie. Într-o victorie cu 49-7 la Tulsa în octombrie 5, a efectuat șase ori pentru 137 de yarzi și două touchdown-uri. Vezi ce echipă să alegi aici.

    Cum să faci alegeri Tulane vs. Army

    Modelul SportsLine se aplecă asupra totalului, proiectând 52 de puncte combinate. De asemenea, spune că o parte a spread-ului atinge mult peste 50% din timp. Puteți obține alegerea doar la SportsLine.

    Deci, cine câștigă Tulane vs. Army și care parte a răspândirii lovește mai mult de 50% din timp? Vizitați SportsLine acum pentru a vedea pe ce parte a răspândirii să sari, toate de la modelul avansat, care depășește cu mult peste 2.000 USD la alegerile sale de fotbal pentru colegiu FBS de la începuturi și află.

  • 2024 Army vs. Navy Game stream live, unde să vizionați, canal TV, meci de fotbal, ora startului pe CBS

    Cea mai mare rivalitate în sport își va scrie ultimul capitol sâmbătă, 14 decembrie, pe stadionul Northwest din Landover, Maryland, în timp ce Armata și Marina se confruntă în ultimul joc al sezonului regulat 2024, cu drepturi de lăudare în joc. Spectacolul jocului Army-Navy este de neegalat în sport, iar CBS va avea toată acțiunea în acea sâmbătă după-amiaza din decembrie.

    Deși această rivalitate a devenit mai aprig contestată în epoca modernă, fiecare echipă a avut propriile sale striuri de dominație. Cavalerii Negri, de exemplu, au ieșit pe primul loc de cele mai multe ori în ultimul deceniu. Ei au câștigat șase din ultimele opt concursuri împotriva Navy și, cu o victorie în acest an, s-ar egala cu cea mai lungă serie de victorii (trei jocuri din 2016-18) din 1996 din 1996.

    Totuși, înainte de asta era totul Navy. În special, Midshipmen au câștigat 14 jocuri consecutive în perioada 2002-2015, care este cea mai lungă astfel de serie din istoria acestei rivalități. Navy deține, de asemenea, avantajul din toate timpurile, cu un record de 62-55-7 și a câștigat cel puțin cinci jocuri la rând în trei ocazii separate. Cu modul în care au trecut ultimii trei ani — nicio echipă nu a câștigat cu mai mult de șase puncte în acea perioadă — Jocul Army-Navy din acest an promite să fie un thriller.

    Mai ales că Trofeul Comandantului-Șef va fi pe linie. Atât Armata, cât și Marina și-au asigurat deja victorii împotriva Forțelor Aeriene, ceea ce înseamnă că jocul lor unul împotriva celuilalt va fi pentru toate bilele.

    La ce ar trebui să vă așteptați pe 14 decembrie? Să aruncăm o privire.

    Armată vs Marina: Trebuie să știu

    Fără implicații pentru playoff de fotbal universitar: Jocul Army-Navy are o mulțime de mize de unul singur, dar chiar dacă Black Knights sunt chiar în plină cursă pentru Playoff-ul de fotbal colegial cu 12 echipe, rezultatul acestui concurs nu va fi luat în considerare în decizia comitetului de selecție. De fapt, setul final de clasamente va fi lansat cu șase zile înainte ca Cavalerii Negri și Midshipmen să se confrunte. Acestea fiind spuse, Army are încă destul timp să facă impresie. Cavalerii Negri și-au blocat deja un loc în meciul de campionat AAC, care are loc cu două zile înainte de duminica selecției.

    Puncte (ar putea fi) din belșug: Atât Armata, cât și Marina au trecut printr-o renaștere ofensivă, de felul acesta, în acest sezon. Cavalerii Negri ocupă în prezent locul patru în AAC cu 35,3 puncte pe joc, în timp ce Midshipmen nu sunt prea departe pe locul șapte, cu o medie de scor de 32,1. La un moment dat, Marina a avut o abatere de top 10 la nivel național, dar s-a lovit puțin de o pauză în ultima lună (mai multe despre asta mai jos). Între timp, armata a înregistrat o producție destul de constantă. Cavalerii Negri au avut cinci meciuri consecutive între 21 septembrie și 19 octombrie, unde au marcat cel puțin 30 de puncte.

    Toate acestea înseamnă că am putea vedea unul dintre jocurile armate-marine cu cele mai mari scoruri de ceva timp. Cei doi nu s-au combinat pentru a marca mai mult de 40 de puncte din 2013, când Navy a câștigat cu 34-7. Au eclipsat doar 30 de puncte împreună de trei ori în anii intermediari.

    Marina încearcă să spargă o spirală: La un moment dat, Navy avea 6-0 cu aspirațiile proprii ale AAC Championship Game și College Football Playoff. Dar o înfrângere cu 51-14 împotriva lui Notre Dame pare să-i fi deturnat cu adevărat pe Midshipmen. Au urmat o înfrângere cu 24-10 împotriva lui Rice la cinci zile după ce Rice l-a concediat pe antrenorul Mike Bloomgren, obținând ceea ce era la acel moment un nivel scăzut de puncte în acest proces. Asta până la înfrângerea cu 35-0 a Navy în fața lui Tulane în săptămâna 12. După ce au marcat mai mult de 30 de puncte în fiecare dintre primele șase meciuri, Midshipmen încă nu a atins din nou acest punct. Ei joacă într-adevăr o echipă învinsabilă din Carolina de Est în Săptămâna 13, ceea ce le oferă o oportunitate excelentă de a îndrepta nava – joc de cuvinte – înainte de a înfrunta Armata.

    Cum să urmăriți în direct Army vs. Navy

    Data: Sâmbătă, 14 dec. | Timp: 3 pm ET
    Locaţie: Northwest Stadium — Landover, Maryland
    TELEVIZOR: CBS | Stream live: Paramount + cu Showtime, CBSSports.com, CBS Sports App (gratuit)