Do we play DOWN to our competition?

[boomrsoonr]

Some post I saw earlier made me think about this. It seems that we always wind up playing down to our competition instead of blowing out teams we should be. And I'm talking about this year and several games last year.

It seems some of Bob's comments are true. A win is a win, and "we do what we can to win". But this team looks, at times, like it could hang 75 of just about anyone they want to. Then we wind up winning by anywhere from 1-6 points in what the media always states was a "nailbiter".

Do the mediocre teams really adjust that well as the game progresses? Or does the play calling digress to such a conservative level that we make it easy for them to stay in the game?

[JohnnyMack]

I could show you just as many 77 - 0, 65 - 13, 49 - 7 games over Stoops' tenure as I could close ones.

I think this particular team isn't good enough to blow people out however. They're young, and a lot of these guys haven't been in these situations before. But they're learning to win. They're figuring out what it takes to dominate at a high level.

Question: Have you ever seen a Stoops team with LESS on-field leadership than this one has?

[boomrsoonr]

You missed my point. I'm talking about this year, and some games last year. Not the games of 3 or 4 years ago.

I think this team has plenty of talent to blow out some of the teams that they've barely beat. Take for example the start of the last couple of games. They march down the field and look absolutely unstoppable. Then all of a sudden, it's a bunch of 3 and outs.

So do the coaches get conservative in their play calling? Or do the players themselves let down once they get a lead?

And I'm not blaming Stoops at all for anything. Granted he's the head coach, but he puts a lot of faith in his other coaches and lets them call the plays they think they should.

[JohnnyMack]

You missed my point. I'm talking about this year, and some games last year. Not the games of 3 or 4 years ago.

I think this team has plenty of talent to blow out some of the teams that they've barely beat. Take for example the start of the last couple of games. They march down the field and look absolutely unstoppable. Then all of a sudden, it's a bunch of 3 and outs.

So do the coaches get conservative in their play calling? Or do the players themselves let down once they get a lead?

And I'm not blaming Stoops at all for anything. Granted he's the head coach, but he puts a lot of faith in his other coaches and lets them call the plays they think they should.

.


I think this particular team isn't good enough to blow people out however. They're young, and a lot of these guys haven't been in these situations before. But they're learning to win. They're figuring out what it takes to dominate at a high level.

Question: Have you ever seen a Stoops team with LESS on-field leadership than this one has?

[SoonerSloan]

I dont think specifically we play down, i think its a combination of factors

i think our offensive strengths are not as suited to high scoring this year. When AD was healthy our OL had not yet gelled together, AP and CB are great running backs but they are a less of homerun threat like AD was. we like to grind it out on the ground with some pass mixed in, which has made for drives that consume 4-5+ minutes of the clock.

our defense has been pretty stout this season, especially with the turnovers problems we've had they done an amazing job. but sometimes our tackling is weak, and our play upfront just stagnates, allowing for some long bend dont break drives which eats up a lot of clock too.

then you throw in our turn over margin and thats another huge reason that our games have been so close.

Sometimes the scores have mislead people on exactly how close the game was, sometimes they represent it about dead on.

[homerSimpsonsBrain]

The pokes and aTm are much better home field teams. If those games are in Norman, they wind up as blow outs.

[I_SMELL_FEAR]

Yeah, I agree with JohnnyMack. Including last years team, we are really young with little on field leadership, unlike years past.

Plus, teams that has had the success that we have had over the past 5-10 years, (OU, UT, USC, Miami, OSU) get everyones best shot. Everyone wants to beat the teams on top. Baylor beating aTm by 7 is not the same as OU beating aTm by 7. Teams step up when they play OU, and I think its probably a combination of both, but more about them playing above their heads, more so than us playing down.

[RRWSooner]

Its possible. It seems that USC does the same thing. They just barely beat mediocre teams but really cream the good ones.

I get the idea that Stoops was just toying with both A&M and OSU.

I'm not worried at all about Nebraska for some reason...

OU - 2006 Big 12 champs.

Stoops - college football genius

[C&CDean]

I was talking to a coworker today about this very subject. Our conclusion?

Bob Stoops coached teams remind us a LOT of Barry Switzer coached teams. Anybody remember losing to KU and still winning the NC? Anybody remember nailbiters with chumps, and then massive blowouts of decent teams? In many ways, the comparisons are eery.

[zimwillett]

I think the lack of blowouts is explained by a number of factors:
1. The offense isn't really good enough or designed to blow anybody out.

2. This is a pretty young team that has a lot to learn about putting teams away.

3. The defense and special teams haven't exactly contributed to the scoring column like they have in years past.

4. The new clock rules are a factor. OU is going to have more pure talent than 9 out of 10 teams they play. I think fewer plays benefits the less talented team. Over time, with more plays, the more talented team is more likely to make more plays, and thus, you'd probably see more "blow outs."

5. I think you also have to account for the opposition playing "up" for OU. Since 2000, a win against OU pretty much makes a team's season (possible exception of Texas last year), so we've pretty much gotten everybody's best shot regardless of how good or bad we've been. Hard to blow a team out when they are giving you their best shot.

6. Parity. You have to account for parity in college football. Talent is just more spread out these days. The days of having 2 or 3 "off weeks" in conference play are over. In conference play, any team (even Baylor) is capable of pulling an upset. This is what makes what Stoops has done much more impressive than what either Bud or Barry accomplished, regardless of blowouts.

7. I agree that there is an element of playing "down" (probably related somewhat to #2 above).

[OUHOMER]

I dont think we play down to them, I think we get a lead, and try and milk the clock. So into a shell, no need in taking chances. I think at the beginning of the season we try and hold back, dont show the play book. I dont Stoops wants to run the score up on anybody but Mack. One of these days its going to bite us in the butt.