PDA

View Full Version : Blowouts and statistics versus getting younger players experience



Tear Down This Wall
9/10/2009, 11:31 AM
I’ve had this discussion over the years with several fellow Sooner fan and figures I’d test it here.

There premise is that Bob Stoops’ penchant for leaving starters in when OU is blowing out an opponent robs younger player of valuable game time experience. The result is that the Sooners have huge gaps in experience whenever upperclassmen play out their eligibility or when injuries strike.

The contrast is Barry Switzer. The King would often begin pulling starters before halftime if his Sooners had a game well in hand. You often saw the third team quarterbacks such as Rod Pegues and Eric Mitchel in the fourth quarter of games.

Charles Thompson saw so much time in 1987 that when he was called upon to replace the injured Jamelle Holieway for the Game of the Century II in Lincoln, he was able to “shock the world” by leading the Sooners over first-ranked Nebraska. Thompson had played extensively throughout the season during blowouts. He wasn't walking into the game cold.

So, the question is, why doesn’t Bob Stoops do the same? Is the team really developing with an eye to the future when starters play the third quarters of games that were, for all intents and purposes, over midway through the second quarter. Are Heismans and scoring records really preferable to developing the team for the future?

In the Stoops era, the inexperience has manifested in multiple position changed for some players, particularly in the defensive backfield. The defensive back-linebacker shuffle, the cornerback-safety shuffle, tight ends moving into the offensive line.

Players caught in the shuffle have included Chris Chester, Eric Bassey, Keenan Clayton, Lendy Holmes, Reggie Smith, and now Brody Eldridge. All good athletes, some with NFL success. But, you’ve got to separate that from college.

Jake Delhomme was a solid NFL quarterback, but it had little to do with college. In the NFL, you have 52 other professional players around you on the roster as well as a coaching staff of professionals with many years, often decades, in the business. Not so in college.

Chris Chester was flipped into an inexperienced line in 2005 and the results were poor. OU was blowout by UCLA and Texas. A late inteception deep in their own territory by Clint Ingram preserved the Sooners’ last known bowl win later that year after the offense struggled to put 17 points on the board.

Bob Stoops is well into his career as head football coach at OU. This is his 11th season. There really is no excuse for lack of depth to the degree OU has shown over the past two seasons at some positions. By now, if a lineman goes down, there should be a scholarship lineman to replace him. Or, a middle linebacker. Or, a tight end. Or, a quarterback.

And, those backups should already have game experience. The only reason ours don’t is that Stoops leaves the starters in blowouts far too long. And, I'm not talkng about playing the last half of the fourth quarter, handing the ball off 20 times or taking a knee experience. Heck, Texas had a 45-10 lead against Louisiana-Monroe, and on their last two touchdowns, Mack had the second team kicker doing the PATs. He seems to get it.

Yes, Bob Stoops has won more Big 12 titles. But, Mack hasn’t had any let down years like we had in 2005...and which we may be about to experience in 2009. Mack and other coaches truly do reload because they have their eyes on the future even with their feet firmly planted in today.

I sincerely hope that the 2005 experience and the fall camp/game one experience of 2009 will change Stoops' mind about how long to leave starting players in games. Surely, he knows that he should be in this position when injuries hit his team. He can do something about it by getting the younger players into games sooner during blowouts every season.

Position Limit
9/10/2009, 11:34 AM
with

cvsooner
9/10/2009, 12:19 PM
And then you run into a situation like this, that feeds on itself. Idaho State won't present much of a challenge but they'll be trying to get as much experience as they can for the starters. At some point, hopefully, they can get to the point where the starters can sit and the backups take over. But with the way we played Saturday, would you feel comfortable with pulling the starters any sooner than you had to? Or at all?

bent rider
9/10/2009, 12:23 PM
How about starting with a decent lead, first, and then actually winning??!!
OK, I know its Idaho State, but given the injuries, etc, I don't think anything is a gimmee at this point.

stoops the eternal pimp
9/10/2009, 12:26 PM
If Idaho St isn't a "gimmee", then OU won't win a conference game

Sooner-N-KS
9/10/2009, 12:27 PM
After last weekend I expect the starters to play more than they would have.

What I wonder about is how many points will Stoops allow if the offense can score at will against a really, really bad Idaho St.

JLEW1818
9/10/2009, 12:28 PM
If Idaho St isn't a "gimmee", then OU won't win a conference game

+1

Sasakwa
9/10/2009, 12:28 PM
There premise is that Bob Stoops’ penchant for leaving starters in when OU is blowing out an opponent robs younger player of valuable game time experience.

Not only does it rob younger players of experience, it risks injury to starters during junk time. Injuries happen, but to have a starter get hurt when a game is decided is different. Sam's injury did not occur during a blowout, but can you imagine the fallout if he goes down with OU up 30?

To me its a simple risk/reward question. Is the risk of injury plus the risk of no experienced backups worth the reward of a greater MOV? Its simple to set up the question, not so simple to answer. The argument can be made that if the MOV wasn't what it was last year, OU doesn't play Florida.

Pricetag
9/10/2009, 12:35 PM
Did the media get on to Switzer when he'd put up 70 points and/or rush for 700 yards back then?

The key is being able to put in your back up guys and let them run the offense. Where is the equilibrium point where you can do that and not catch flak for running up the score?

A 21-point lead makes sense, but then again, if the other team scores once, you're only talking about a two-touchdown lead, and you'd kinda like to have your starters in there to ensure that the lead is scored.

A 28-point lead is even more safe, but if you score once, then you're talking about a 35-point lead, and it could snowball from there.

I've always thought that you should let reserve players try to score, media be damned. They work hard in practice, and they deserve the chance to let it rip when they're in there.

sooneron
9/10/2009, 01:39 PM
I've always thought that you should let reserve players try to score, media be damned. They work hard in practice, and they deserve the chance to let it rip when they're in there.

^ This

cvsooner
9/10/2009, 01:51 PM
I've got no problem with that. If all else fails, you could always put the starters back in.

Jello Biafra
9/10/2009, 02:21 PM
I've got no problem with that. If all else fails, you could always put the starters back in.

with the way some of the starters played saturday, maybe we should let the backups START

TexasLidig8r
9/10/2009, 03:53 PM
TDTW brings up some very legit points...

If Bradford had declared for the draft.. as many believed he would... that would have left Jones, with no college snaps at all..as your starting QB this year.

And not to downgrade New Mexico high school football too much.. but... being a Gatorade High School Football player of the year in New Mexico.. is that comparable to winning a "Most Beautiful Woman in a Leper Colony" Pageant?

Unless Stoops was told by Bradford during the season last year that he would definitely be coming back, why he didn't start to groom Jones with some game time experience last year (especially in those 60 point blow out wins) deserves some scrutiny.

sooneron
9/10/2009, 03:56 PM
Unless Stoops was told by Bradford during the season last year that he would definitely be coming back, why he didn't start to groom Jones with some game time experience last year (especially in those 60 point blow out wins) deserves some scrutiny.

Probably because Landry wasn't the back up last year. He was a true freshman and at the moment, I'm foggy on how much a kid can play and still retain his rs.

TexasLidig8r
9/10/2009, 03:59 PM
Probably because Landry wasn't the back up last year. He was a true freshman and at the moment, I'm foggy on how much a kid can play and still retain his rs.

If he plays one play, his redshirt is burned.

Hazle was your back up last year..

And, Hazle was never going to be your QB of the future.

Contrast this with Garrett Gilbert, who got in for some snaps in the 4th quarter and was allowed to run the offense and not just hand off.

sooneron
9/10/2009, 04:04 PM
My guess is that Stoops thought we would be fine with Jones getting the important reps in the spring and fall if Sam had left (as he would be going up against a pretty good d in scrimmages etc), sort of the way it was with Sam in 07. I'm sure he didn't think he had a Sam clone, but he watches them practice and had a good idea of how they will project.


and I know who our backup was last year.

bent rider
9/10/2009, 04:25 PM
If Idaho St isn't a "gimmee", then OU won't win a conference game

If the Sooners can't get 6 from first-and-goal at the 2, then OU won't win a conference game.

Sooner04
9/10/2009, 04:27 PM
The reason Switzer and his band of mercenaries scored 50+ while totaling 600 yards all the time is because of one very simple thing: they were incredibly good at the things you had to do to run out the clock.

If you wanted us to start punting, we had to pass. That wasn't going to happen, but our second stringers were so good we could give it to Rotnei Anderson up the gut and still chew up big chunks of yardage. Charles Thompson could keep it around the corner at the Cotton Bowl and go to the house for 60.

Different times.

Stoops has been a complete maroon when it comes to using the backups. Will it ever change? Doubt it.

stoops the eternal pimp
9/10/2009, 04:31 PM
If the Sooners can't get 6 from first-and-goal at the 2, then OU won't win a conference game.

your talking about 2 different things...teams don't convert all of those situations, but there is no if in whether or not Idaho St is a gimmee

hpara759
9/10/2009, 06:04 PM
Barry Switzer. The King

you lost me here......

Partial Qualifier
9/10/2009, 06:53 PM
And not to downgrade New Mexico high school football too much.. but... being a Gatorade High School Football player of the year in New Mexico.. is that comparable to winning a "Most Beautiful Woman in a Leper Colony" Pageant?




Why is that necessary, Lid? Barry Sanders was a consensus Nobody of the Year when he graduated high school. What's your point?


Not to mention you're regurgitating material you read on Hornfans..