Kevin Wilson Interview

[brown town sooner]

Listened to the Sports Animal on the way home tonight after the game and heard an interview of Kevin Wilson about last week's game with Tech. Wilson said Patrick was benched after the fumble early because "That's our thing...we tell them that if they fumble then the next guy in line gets the call and your done." I understand the logic but my question to everyone on here is this: At what point do you swallow pride and give your senior running back a chance to win the game once your starting QB goes down? Not saying it would have made a difference but my thinking is that if Patrick had gotten a second chance last week to rectify himself after the fumble it likely could have been a different outcome. Taking nothing away from Halzle but I feel like he was asked to do too much. Running attack definitely was working today against the Pickenokes. Any thoughts?

[ocsooner]

Last week, we had Murray in the lineup. In this case, it worked because Murray took the game over (when they gave it to him)

[rubyspirit]

Time out for a fumble is dumb.

[brown town sooner]

I'm not trying to criticize the coaching staff but in my opinion if your starting QB goes out and it becomes apparent that your going to be having a backup QB for the rest of the game then all bets are off and you use all of the fire power you can get....including AP who was an animal last year when AD went down. He had a great game on special teams and was obviously "p.o'd" because he put the ball on the ground. Give the guy a chance to rectifiy himself against the leagues #11 team defense against the rush. I think they thought they could still beat the Red Raiders with the game plan they went in with and it came back to bite them in the form of NOT PLAYING FOR A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

[sooneron]

I'm not trying to criticize the coaching staff but in my opinion if your starting QB goes out and it becomes apparent that your going to be having a backup QB for the rest of the game then all bets are off and you use all of the fire power you can get....including AP who was an animal last year when AD went down. He had a great game on special teams and was obviously "p.o'd" because he put the ball on the ground. Give the guy a chance to rectifiy himself against the leagues #11 team defense against the rush. I think they thought they could still beat the Red Raiders with the game plan they went in with and it came back to bite them in the form of NOT PLAYING FOR A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
Don't you read the threads around here? AP sucks and fumbles ALL TEH RTIME!!!

:pop:

[StoopTroup]

What was the question again?

[bluedogok]

Not playing Patrick after the fumble is not why OU lost to Tech.

[sooneron]

Not playing Patrick after the fumble is not why OU lost to Tech.
I'm not saying that I agree with him, but you really can't say unequivocally that your statement is true, as we will never know.






I really wanted to use unequivocally today!:texan:

[okcusooner]

In part, OU lost to TT because they had not given Halzle adequate snaps in the blowouts earlier in the season.

I was at tonight's game and wondered why Bradford was still in with over 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter, when the game was already in hand as well as the passing record.

[OU-HSV]

Not playing Patrick after the fumble is not why OU lost to Tech.
And I'll add...not playing Patrick after the fumble kept Patrick from fumbling again. ;)

[bluedogok]

I'm not saying that I agree with him, but you really can't say unequivocally that your statement is true, as we will never know.
I would say the defense and lack of passing game for 3 quarters had much more to do with it. It seemed the Murray and Brown moved the ball at times and then inexplicably they would go pass crazy and kill a drive.





I really wanted to use unequivocally today!:texan:
Congrats, I just wanted to use inexplicably in this response :D

[rainiersooner]

It probably didn't matter who we had in at running back because for some strange reason, Wilson kept calling pass play after pass play on one of the worse run defenses in the NCAA. But what do I know?

[BoulderSooner79]

I think AP has been ineffective the last few games even ignoring the fumbles. He seems to be pressing and hitting the line too fast and not letting anything develop. I've seen him bolt into the back of an O-lineman a few times or miss an obvious hole. The contrast is very obvious when Chris Brown comes in who is very patient - but doesn't have the burst for the long gainer. I thought AP looked more patient today against OSU. I'm sure OSU's bad run D made him look better, but the success should help his confidence next week.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

FIRE HIM! FIRE VENRABLES! FIRE SHIPP! FIRE CASTEGLIONE! FIRE URRBODY!

[brown town sooner]

AP didn't have trouble fumbling the ball against OSWho. Do any of you remember this guy from last year? When he's ticked off he's an animal. I'm not saying it would have been a different outcome. Read the post...I said, wouldn't you want to use all of the firepower you've got in your arsenal when you lose the nations #1 passing efficieny QB to injury? Remember, Tech is only 1 notch better than Baylor against the run. OSU, who OU smashed in the mouth for 300 plus yards yesterday, is a better run defense that Tech is. I just think in that situation...pride got in the way of willingness to try ANYTHING to win...including putting your senior tailback in after dropping the first handoff of the game. Stoops himself said that the fumble wasn't entirely AP's fault....blown assignments in the line on the play allowed for a defensive lineman to shoot the gap and get in the backfield at almost the point of handoff.

I just hope AP has a great game against Mizzou and that the entire team doesn't disappear on the road again like it has tended to do all season.

[usmc-sooner]

I've thought we've mismanaged Patrick and the rb's all year. not saying fire someone just I think a three man platoon was too much, no rb gets in rhythm.

[insuranceman_22]

I've thought we've mismanaged Patrick and the rb's all year. not saying fire someone just I think a three man platoon was too much, no rb gets in rhythm.

All three of them are capable and at times very good backs. That being said, I feel the same way you do, just didn't want to be the first one to say it. If one guy takes you from 20 to 20 and is tearing off chuncks of yards when he gets the ball, don't put someone else in. They are college athlete's and I'd guess they're in good enough physical shape to at least finish a drive. But still, in Bob I trust......

[rhombic21]

The answer last week wasn't to give Patrick a bunch of carries. The answer was to keep feeding Murray, who was gashing Tech for 7 and 8 yards per carry.

Nothing against Allen, who had a great game yesterday, but Murray is the better player and probably runs for over 250 on that OSU defense with the way our OL was blocking. Murray makes yards after contact, is a lot better at making people miss, has a better feel for cutback lanes, and has better breakaway speed. He's just an all-around better back than Patrick is. Frankly, we should have been getting Murray more carries throughout the year when Allen was struggling.

[soonerhubs]

In part, OU lost to TT because they had not given Halzle adequate snaps in the blowouts earlier in the season.

I was at tonight's game and wondered why Bradford was still in with over 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter, when the game was already in hand as well as the passing record.
I often wondered that, but then the thought occurred... Is it not possible that Bradford has so much upswing that he's getting even better each week with more playing time?

Does it not make sense to give the starter tons more experience, especially when he's a freshman? Bad luck happens, and perhaps more snaps should be taken by the back up, but I'm struggling to see the bad side of giving our Freshman leader more game time experiences.

[rhombic21]

I thought it was stupid to leave him in the game as well. We had the game in-hand, he's coming off a concussion, and our backup has struggled in the only meaningful experience he's had.

Get Sam out, make sure that he's healthy for the conference title game, and then get Halzle and maybe even Nichol some snaps. Also would have been nice to see Madu get some carries with the first team OL. With Murray out for the year, Madu is one injury away from seeing a lot of the field.

The last thing that we needed was for Sam or Allen to take a big hit and get hurt during garbage time. This type of mentality is exactly why we didn't have a backup QB ready to go against Tech.

[Egeo]

The answer last week wasn't to give Patrick a bunch of carries. The answer was to keep feeding Murray, who was gashing Tech for 7 and 8 yards per carry.

Nothing against Allen, who had a great game yesterday, but Murray is the better player and probably runs for over 250 on that OSU defense with the way our OL was blocking. Murray makes yards after contact, is a lot better at making people miss, has a better feel for cutback lanes, and has better breakaway speed. He's just an all-around better back than Patrick is. Frankly, we should have been getting Murray more carries throughout the year when Allen was struggling.

he's a better athlete than allen, but not necessarily a better back
murray is only averaging .3 yards per carry more and the td's are largely a disparity of north texas

[Leroy Lizard]

Wilson said Patrick was benched after the fumble early because "That's our thing...we tell them that if they fumble then the next guy in line gets the call and your done."

I find that a very odd policy. I'm not sure what it accomplishes.

[Curly Bill]

I find that a very odd policy. I'm not sure what it accomplishes.

It tells them: if you want to play hang on to the ball.

[goingoneight]

Time out for a fumble is dumb.


So what would you rather do? Feed him chicken and put him back in there? We have three guys who can take over a ballgame when called upon... how else are they going to learn not to play sloppy football?

D.J. Wolfe, Keenan Clayton, Paul Thompson, Will Peoples and Nate Hybl among many others have experienced just the same. Not like they can't get back in there and light it up later on.

[rhombic21]

he's a better athlete than allen, but not necessarily a better back
murray is only averaging .3 yards per carry more and the td's are largely a disparity of north texas
If Murray had played against Oklahoma State, he probably would have increased his YPC as well. Murray was consistently the better runner in games that they both played in.

[Curly Bill]

If Murray had played against Oklahoma State, he probably would have increased his YPC as well. Murray was consistently the better runner in games that they both played in.

true dat

...and the .3 YPC Murray is averaging better then AP is not some piddly little amount in the football world either.

[EstablishedSooner1967]

OU did not lose to TT because of AP... I would think if Bradford does not get hurt... OU wins by 7

[brown town sooner]

Again....I never said that OU lost because AP got benched and we've kind of strayed from the topic. The original thread had to do with Wilson saying that once a guy fumbles he's done. My comment and belief is that once your starting QB goes down then all bets are off. Give AP a chance to gash TT. Last season after AD went down all Patrick did was come in and average 8 yards per carry and totally dominated A&M. Anyway, moot point now but thought it was interesting to hear Wilson come out with that policy.

On another topic....since when did Halzle become the backup? Havn't we been led to believe all pre-season long and into the season that Nichol was the backup? They even burned his red-shirt early and it appeared as if he was the 2nd in line. My question now becomes...at what point does Keith Nichol see the writing on the wall and bail for another school? Bradford sets the freshman TD mark and doesn't look like he will let up any time soon. Nichol doesn't get snaps as the backup and has burned a redshirt...any thoughts on this? I take nothing away from Joey Halzle but if Nichol is the QB of the future then shouldn't he be getting some snaps in atleast a game like OSWho yesterday?

[soonerboomer93]

as it's been stated, Nichol probably has an "injury"

[soonerboomer93]

considering how many fumbles we've had this year, I don't really have a problem with a benching after a fumble. It's the coach's decision and part of making them earn their playing time.

we lost to TT purely because the offense could not get in synch for over 2 1/2 quarters period. Yes, the defense gave up yards, but the O was going 3 and out. IMHO if Halzle had connected on the first pass (the big bomb) then we would have straight blown away TT. He didn't, offense was out of sync and we lost. That's they way the **** goes sometimes.

[Frozen Sooner]

as it's been stated, Nichol probably has an "injury"

That was me and I was wrong. They were going to play Nichol off the bench this week had Sam not been able to go. Per Stoops, at least.

[OUTrumpet]

In part, OU lost to TT because they had not given Halzle adequate snaps in the blowouts earlier in the season.

Uh...when was the last time Halzle played? Miami or Utah State? I remember Nichol played quite a bit against Utah State, can't remember if Halzle came in or not.

Since non-conference, we've played: CU, L 27-24, Texas W 28-21, Mizzou W 41-31, ISU W 17-7, bye week, A&M W 42-14, Baylor W 52-21. We had a long stretch of games where we didn't blow anyone out, hence the backup doesn't play.

And he played again in the final moments of the Baylor game. And when we tend to put our backup qb in for mop-up duty, we just run the ball to keep us from scoring anymore. Stoops isn't going to have the backup run the full offense with 5-10 minutes left and us up by 4-5 td's.

I think the reason we lost to TTU was due to our offense going 3 and out so many times in the first half. You can't let TTU have the ball for over 20 minutes in a half, your defense will get exhausted and eventually won't be able to keep up.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I say bench 'em for a few series, but don't ban them from playing the rest of the game. While I am a huge Murray fan and think we shoulda kept handing him the ball rather than going to dumb passes, I think the strength of our RB corp is their variety of running styles. The extra change-up coulda helped some and if we'd just rammed it down their throats we might have ended up on top.

I do think it's weird for Wilson to make this statement, agree or disagree with the policy, for the simple reason that it gives opposing defenses a piece of information they don't really need to be hearing!

[goingoneight]

Ap came back in the game a few times at Tech, but was virtually ineffective. He usually is unless he is in there a lot. Like 20+ carries-kinda a lot.

[rhombic21]

Again....I never said that OU lost because AP got benched and we've kind of strayed from the topic. The original thread had to do with Wilson saying that once a guy fumbles he's done. My comment and belief is that once your starting QB goes down then all bets are off. Give AP a chance to gash TT. Last season after AD went down all Patrick did was come in and average 8 yards per carry and totally dominated A&M. Anyway, moot point now but thought it was interesting to hear Wilson come out with that policy.

I don't understand why your starting QB getting injured would make you want to take DeMarco Murray out of the game in favor of the guy who fumbled the ball and hadn't been very effective since conference play began. I would think that if anything, it would be the reverse. Since you know that you're going to have to lean on the running game, you'd want to make sure that you give the ball to your best back as many times as possible.

[RedstickSooner]

Firstly, I *love* our depth at running back, and Patrick is great -- but I don't see where he's head & shoulders above anyone else. So pulling him didn't seem like such a dumb move.

Second, it's our defense that disappointed me against TTech. When your start QB goes down, a defense as talented as ours should rally and play lights out -- not give up a season-high 34 points. We gave up 473 yards of offense -- there's no excuse for that. It's not like TTech should be some kind of mystery to us. We play 'em every damned year.

[Leroy Lizard]

It tells them: if you want to play hang on to the ball.

I see. So we bench any WR who drops a pass.

What if Bradford throws an INT. Bench him?

Adrian Peterson fumbled against the Cowboys. Bench him?

[Egeo]

If Murray had played against Oklahoma State, he probably would have increased his YPC as well. Murray was consistently the better runner in games that they both played in.
yep, looks like he's way better


ap dm
0-0 17-87
7-47 15-64
8-113 4-100
19-145 8-46
18-96 6-19
11-10 17-128
11-44 4-2
13-57 9-59
15-70 15-70
13-46 13-95
2-9 19-94
29-208 0-0

[KingBarry]

This type of mentality is exactly why we didn't have a backup QB ready to go against Tech.

A handful of "game" snaps wasn't going to get a QB ready to come in at Lubbock. The reason we didn't have anybody "ready" was the lack of practice snaps with first team receivers/backs.

The quandary is do you take practice snaps away from the guy you know will play, in order to give extra time to the guy who might someday play? That risks having no one ready to play.

It's a tough call, and I can not say that the coaching staff made the right trade off. However, what I can say, is I don't see these guys everyday in practice, and I don't evaluate the game film.

I can also say that Stoops wins 80% of his games and, since his job is to win football games, its hard for me to criticize his decisions much.

[TMcGee86]

The answer last week wasn't to give Patrick a bunch of carries. The answer was to keep feeding Murray, who was gashing Tech for 7 and 8 yards per carry.

Nothing against Allen, who had a great game yesterday, but Murray is the better player and probably runs for over 250 on that OSU defense with the way our OL was blocking. Murray makes yards after contact, is a lot better at making people miss, has a better feel for cutback lanes, and has better breakaway speed. He's just an all-around better back than Patrick is. Frankly, we should have been getting Murray more carries throughout the year when Allen was struggling.

I totally agree.

I remember at least three times during the poke game where I said "Murray would have scored right there."

[brown town sooner]

Don't miss the point here guys. Don't confuse what I'm saying by making this an AP vs. DM issue. That wasn't my point. AP got benched and didn't get another shot after having fumbled in the first play from scrimmage. Wilson said the policy is to bench and go to the next guy. My argument is...when you have the NC on the line don't you throw policy out the window and take a chance? I do believe AP played special teams but if memory serves me correctly he didn't touch the ball offensively after the fumble.

[Theskipster]

When you have 3 or 4 really strong backs and a fumbling problem then it is probably a good policy to implement.

If you only have 2 good backs and no real fumbling problem, then it is a bad policy.

OU is loaded at RB and had a fumbling problem this year. Good policy.

[brown town sooner]

Theskipster....OK...so are you saying right now with the game on the line BESIDES Murray you would take Chris Brown, Mosses Madu and Jacob Gutierez over AP? The guy fumbled one time (early mind you) in the most important game of the season and your going to bench him because of "policy" or pride? I don't buy it. BAD POLICY. I would argue that OU only has 3 really good backs. Murray, Patrick and Brown....in that order.