<p>Army</a> orders Lions draft pick Campbell to withdraw - NFL - Yahoo! Sports</p>
<p>I know a lot of you here have been following this story since it first came up, so here is the latest on the situation. He will not be allowed to play for the Lions due to the 2005 DoD policy having been suspended.</p>
<p>I never thought he should be allowed to play. He made a committment to the Army. 5 years!</p>
<p>News sources say that he may still be allowed out in 2010. Sorry I don't think he should be allowed out of his committment.</p>
<p>He isn't the only one -
Army</a> denies West Point grad a shot at NFL - Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Army Times</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also ordered to Officer Basic Course is Michael Viti, a classmate and teammate of Campbell’s who was drafted by the Buffalo Bills. In addition, 1st Lt. Brad Roberts of West Point’s Class of 2006 will no longer play hockey and report to duty as an armor officer at Fort Hood, Texas.</p>
<p>Second Lts. Milan Dinga and Nick Hill, 2007 West Point graduates who play for minor league baseball teams, will be placed on excess leave until their seasons end in September. They will then be ordered to complete OBC and report to units.</p>
<p>Dinga and Hill are being allowed to finish the season to minimize the litigation risk that may arise from breaching their existing players’ contracts by reporting immediately for active-duty service, Geren wrote in the memo.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i dont agree with cadets/mids going to pro sports after graduation form any SA. no offence to those who do. but, i believe that they all have a commitment and they should fulfill their duty. i think they (SA's) are "somewhat" just trying to get better at sports instead of better officers in SOME -not all (maby a few a year)- cases, which i have to say that it isnt a bad idea because they dont have to worry about them even becoming officers b/c they will be recruted to pro.</p>
<p>Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!! The Army has partially come to their senses. Now they just need to make it five years instead of two.</p>
<p>Given the current ability of the Army to meet the needs of it's current missions, probably a good decision. Now we just need a draft and/or reassignment of additional personnel from other branches to the Marines and the Army so we can finally put enough troops on the ground where it counts.</p>
<p>I for one can feel for their disappointment. After all they were only following the options presented to them by the Army. They didn't make or interpret the policy and I hardly think it appropriate to insinuate their desire was to shirk their duty. In the end, their duty is whatever the Army tells/allows them to do. Seems to me they are, and always have been, doing just that.</p>
<p>I totaly agree with both of you all the way!!!</p>
<p>Why is it two years instead of five????</p>
<p>I think the Army did the correct thing in rescinding this policy. The policy is a bad policy and sends the wrong message about commitment. I think the Army did the wrong thing by not grandfathering these young men into the previous accounting of the policy.... This affects the sports clubs that took the Army at their own policy and invested in these young men. This can affect morale when young officers and cadets see the Army go back on their word... Caleb Cambell was offered the opportunity to go to another school after YUK year and did not.... West Point, the Army, and the coaching staff used this previous reading of the policy to encourage him to stay.... Now, I do not know if he stayed because of the policy or not, but he could have left and was encouraged not too. Yeah to the end of a bad policy... Boo to the way the Army bungled the handling of it from the very begining.</p>
<p>I agree with knightsdad. The policy was probably not a good policy in the first place, but it was an Army and DoD policy nonetheless. Several athletes were no doubt told that the Army and/or the DoD was going to interpret the policy in such a way as to allow them to play professional sports. If they relied on what they were told as to the way the policy was going to be implemented, and the Army and/or the DoD is now doing a 180, shame on the Army. Bait and switch tactics are no more acceptable in the Army than they are in the civilian world. It is just wrong to say one thing and do another. If the Army can do a 180 on this, who is to say that they won't do a 180 on policies that affect length of service issues, choice of branch issues, post graduate promises, etc. </p>
<p>I don't know anything about Lt. Campbell other than he was a good ball player and seemingly a well liked cadet. I hope he, and the others affected by the re-interpretation/suspension or what is called a FLIP FLOP in the real world, of the policy by the Army and/or the DoD have a successful military career.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If the Army can do a 180 on this, who is to say that they won't do a 180 on policies that affect length of service issues, choice of branch issues, post graduate promises, etc.
[/quote]
it's already been done - you could say Stop-Loss or activating the IRR would be examples.
It continues to happen after retirement as well - my father was promised a lifetime of medical care for himself and his dependents - Congress repeatedly tries to erode this earned benefit.
To quote Forrest Gump - "It happens".</p>
<p>Discussing this with my recent grad (one of Campbell's classmates) he said "shame on him if he stayed after yuk year just because he was told he could still go play in the NFL. If he primarily wanted to serve as an officer, stay after yuk year; if he wanted primarily to go play in the NFL he should have gone with the other college program chasing him then no matter what they were telling him". I think he said it pretty well...</p>
<p>i think your son stated it perfectly.</p>
<p>people should go to the academys to become officers, NOT pro sports players.</p>
<p>Shame of all this is that the Navy started this process many years ago. The first Navy grad I remember being allowed to skip their duty and go pro was Napolean McCallum, then David Robinson. They always say they allowed Robinson to play in the NBA because he grew too tall to serve on a submarine - as if the Navy only has posts on subs. </p>
<p>Let's hope this causes some new thinking in the DoD - why not have both Navy and Army stop competing in Div. 1 football. They should be playing in the Ivy League.</p>
<p>This program was inititiated by LTG Lennox in 2005 as a means to bring attention to the Academy in ways that they normally would not; through the few special cases good enough to play professional sports. I do not think it is that bad of an idea as it is so hard to make it at that level and you would be dealing with such a minority. Honestly, as someone who went through USMA and has spent the last 10 months in Baghdad, I think Campbell could do a lot for the Army playing in the NFL; I know I was rooting for him and it gave something to pull for outside of the daily grind of this place.
As far as leveling the playing field, which is what I believe DoD was doing with this decision, attempting to make all academies run by the same rules, I think there are some issues there. Like it or not, and I know I'll take heat for this, USNA and USAFA offer something to prospective cadets the USMA does not; the chance to serve their country in a position where the danger can be mitigated much more (I'm not trying to make this be a dig at any other service, but the Army has bore the brunt of the casualties for this war, the Marines being the exception, so please dont interpret what I'm saying as an attempt to say the Army is the only one doing anything in this war. That is not what I'm saying, what I'm trying to say is that, anyway you look at it, this is primarily a ground war that is being fought by the Army. The Sailors and Airmen of the Navy and Air Force do an incredible job and have in many cases changed from their trained jobs to do whatever they can to help out, which is exactly what we need, and many of them have made the ultimate sacrifice. That does not change the fact the the branch of the service taking the brunt of this war is the Army. That is something that a young athlete wanting to serve his/her country might take into consideration. Again, I do not mean to offend any of the other services and I'm sorry if I came across that way, I'm trying to simply be objective here). </p>
<p>Sadly, that policy was not in line with DoD's policy. These things happen. What I am interested in is the case of Kyle Eckel, USNA 2005. He was drafted by the New England Patriots and he was playing right after he graduated. Does anyone have the details of his circumstances? Its seems to be very similar to LT Campbell's here, and I'm quite interested in how it was okay for him but it's not for Campbell.
I've been a staunch advocate on this site of not attending the Academy if you are not 100% dedicated to serving your country and leading Soldiers in battle. I know my support of the alternative service option deviates significantly from how I usually feel regarding the issue, and I'm trying to figure out myself just why that is. However, I feel that in the case of these FEW exceptionally talented athletes, an exception should be made. They can still serve, they can do their part trying to bring more prospective candidates into the Academy, and they can show America just how amazing USMA (or USNA or USAFA or whoever) grads really are. They can also serve as an inspiration to those on active duty who follow sports. What needs to be remembered here is that this program wasnt devised as an "out" of your contract, it was an alternative for a select few who possesed truly great talent. Anyone who wants to play professional sports would be a fool to go to an Academy if playing sports is all they wanted to do. But every once in a while, when an incredible talent comes through, I, personally, think that an exception might be in order.
Wow, that was long, sorry about that.</p>
<p>Thank you for posting that, Screaming Eagle---we need more input from peple who have "been there" ("are there", in your case), and done that. The sacrifice borne by academy grads and their families in this war has been tremendous. THANK-YOU.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds to me like you are making a very dangerous rationalization that Army grads are taking the brunt of this war so other grads can play professional sports. I wonder if the families of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice buy that. I doubt it and, therefore, don't buy your rationalization.</p>
<p>During the height of Vietnam when Naval Academy grads were "taking the brunt" of that war, Roger Staubach served a full commitment.</p>
<p>Also, Kyle Eckel bears no comparison in this discussion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
why not have both Navy and Army stop competing in Div. 1 football. They should be playing in the Ivy League.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The Ivy League IS DI.</p>
<p>And I remember reading awhile back that the reason Army (and I would guess Navy) remain as DIA Independents is so they can pick and choose their schedule to help with recruiting prospective candidates to apply to the Academy.</p>
<p>I wonder if the Army felt pressure from the Navy and the Air Force about this.. Army was the only one that had the pro sports option. The other two did not and Navy had a couple baseball players drafted this past year. I believe Air Force has one former baseball player who is currently serving in the Air Force and playing minor league baseball in the Phillies farm system.</p>
<p>"Sounds to me like you are making a very dangerous rationalization that Army grads are taking the brunt of this war so other grads can play professional sports."</p>
<p>I don't think Screaming Eagle was "rationalizing" anything---just making some pretty obvious observations. I for one was happy to hear the opinion of an actual West Point grad who is in Iraq today about the whole issue. For me it holds a bit more weight than those of us (including myself) with the luxury of opining about how others should feel and act based on whether someone's definition of "duty" matches our own. I certainly can't think of anything factually wrong with his comments about the war and the relative sacrifices of the Army to that of the other services.</p>
<p>My intent was not to rationalize. I was trying to make an observation, that, like it or not, is true. As I said, this war is primarily a ground war and is therefore fought in its majority by the Army and the Marines; we didn't chose for it to be this way, it's just the way it is. I'm not trying to say that the Air Force or Navy have no place and are not involved at all; as stated before, members of both branches have gone out of their way to bring their skills, someties changing from their trained duties, to lend the Army a hand. Everyday I see AF EOD specialists and JTACs, as well as Navy EWOs and Civil Affairs officers. Both have had plenty of fine young Americans who never came home. My argument was not for the sake of allowing other grads to play professional sports while the Army takes the brunt of it; I was simply speaking of the few exceptional cases who may have that opportunity.</p>
<p>I did some research on Kyle Eckel and you're right, it does bear no weight in this argument as he was separated from the Navy. I was not aware of that. I had no idea of any of the negative events that surrounded him after his graduation and I apologize for ignorantly bringing hime up as somewhat of a "***, the Navy has guys do it, why cant we?" issue.</p>
<p>USNA69, I knew there was no way I could make my last post without causing some controversy. As I said, I'm not trying to lower the accomplishments of any other service; they've done a remarkable job adapting and allowing us to fight as a combined team over here. My attempt was not to rationalize anything for the sake of sports. Again, I apologize if I came across like that. Thank you sir for your service to this Nation and for your continued efforts to aid those looking at pursuing a career in this, the most sacred, of professions. We are all one team.</p>