Consultation on forms and areas of study

Hello Rabbi,
I am currently studying at the Hesder Yeshiva Yerucham and am finishing Shiur A this year.
I would be happy to know what the Rabbi thinks about this:
Hesitation regarding Shiur B in Yeshiva:
I came to the conclusion that I would probably be drafted for full service and not through the settlement framework, which increased my existing need to utilize the period in the yeshiva even more than before.
In the yeshiva, there is a clear intention and an accepted line of studying Gemara in detail, but unfortunately I did not find a connection to this study. When I look back, I do not feel that it was the morning sessions that made me grow, but rather the afternoon-evening sessions in which I also engaged in Halacha [with proficiency + with study], thought [with proficiency + with study], Tanakh, Gemara in detail, etc.
I spoke to several rabbis about this in a yeshiva. One of them said that although I may not feel the point right now – “a scholar ultimately develops from study” [of course, this was not said in a vacuum, but out of faith in the righteousness of the path and as personal advice]. The second rabbi I spoke to agreed with the statement that study is necessary to develop as a scholar, but not necessarily study of the Gemara in its current format. For that matter, one can study Halacha through study, thought through study, and the Bible through study – and also develop through these avenues as a person and as a scholar. He argues that Gemara is one area of ​​Torah that is important to engage in, but if there is a deeper connection and a sense of growth from another area of ​​Torah, and it is studied through study and “from the beginning” and not out of laziness – it is also an alternative to Takhilit.
A point for clarification – when I talk about studying another field in depth, for example Halacha for that matter, it can turn out that the form and even the type of sources will be almost identical to studying Gemara in depth [Gemarot, Rishonim, Acharonim, etc.], but all the motivation comes from a different place. The whole approach is different.
In my opinion, there is nothing more practical than studying thought, faith, philosophy [no matter what you call it] – for when one engages in this, one engages in setting goals for life – and those are individualized to practical life. This place is occupied by studying thought in detail – and studying Halacha in detail, from the sources, with opinions here and there – but it is not about studying “in order”, but according to issues that interest me and that force me to reach certain conclusions and take responsibility for my words, thus pushing me to uncompromising clarification. [As soon as it comes to practical Halacha rulings and not just opinions, the matter must be much more well-founded, not that opinions are not serious – but if I said incorrect opinion – “well, so be it”, in contrast to Halacha which must come from a complete and clarified place to the end].
There were external issues that emerged that might need to be considered:
A. The social aspect – not in the sense of changing my ways because of social pressure, but rather that there is something constructive in the fact that everyone is dealing with similar issues, that I share an issue and a world of learning with friends.
B. I may not find a group of people who want to learn this way. [I’m not sure I want to either].
C. There is no intention like there is in studying Gemara in detail [there are no source pages, or weekly lessons like in Gemara].
The answer I found so far to these things:
A. On the social side – there are other shared learning frameworks in the yeshiva [a faith lesson program, other lessons, and more importantly – if I study these things in the morning, I have plenty of time in the afternoon for the friendships I want to make]. In short – I think this is the easiest problem of the three.
B. Fellowship – In terms of holding myself to the morning routine, I’m less worried. Of course, I’ll have to face the reality test, but I’m optimistic. As for the downside of a second opinion and a live discussion, I don’t have a real answer, but there’s also something about being able to deal with the problems that concern me fully, except that I might choose someone to sit with as a fellowship outside of the morning routine, study the main points with him, and hear his opinion.
C. The issue of guidance – Regarding source pages, I think we can still manage, the more central problem is the missing lessons and supervision of effective and focused learning. I thought maybe talk to my supervisor and explain to him about the path I chose and ask him if he could guide me at one level or another.
The goals I set for myself in the meeting are:
To find a connection to Torah, to develop theoretical and proficient learning skills for a lifetime of study, and to be prepared in terms of knowledge [halakha, etc.] for the army and the first stages of my life as an adult and independent [both from a “dry” informational perspective, and in terms of forming a religious worldview].
I think that such learning meets these goals.
In our case – I think it is very possible that despite the above problems, given my current perception of things – there is an interest in moving on to study halacha and perhaps also thought in the morning study of Seder Boker instead of Gemara Iyun.
I understood from several people that you advocate studying Gemara in detail, and I wanted to ask you why Gemara in particular, and whether the alternative I suggested could be “for the beginning” as study in a yeshivah in preparation for life, both from the aspect of developing learning skills, both from the aspect of connecting to Torah, and also from the aspect of specific preparation for the upcoming periods of my life [the army and the initial stages of life as a graduate].
In addition to the fundamental question about the path itself, I wanted to ask if you think there are other external reasons that are worth considering.
Thank you very much,