Would wishbone have survived with Switzer?
OU fired Barry Switzer 20 years ago today, and we could stage a rousing debate over whether the Sooners are better off or worse for wear over that decision.
Here’s an even better debate: Did the departure of Switzer spell the doom of the wishbone in big-time college football?
Few teams have run the ‘bone in the last 20 years, mostly service academies, and OU bailed on it in 1989, Year 1 of Gary Gibbs’ six-year run as coach. In John Blake’s desperation year of 1998, the Sooners went back to in limited form, but it had no chance. In Bob Stoops’ first game, the 1999 opener against Indiana State, the Sooners lined up in the wishbone on the opening snap, then shifted into the spread offense, and the ‘bone was gone for good.
What would have been the wishbone’s future had Switzer stayed at the helm? It would have had a much longer shelf life and been much more successful.
First, a clarification. We’re not talking about option football. Plenty of teams still run the option. Zac Robinson and Tim Tebow still run some option. We’re not talking Nebraska’s option, which lasted until Bill Callahan’s arrival in 2005.
We’re talking wishbone. Three running backs. Triple option.
Switzer long has said teams still can win with the option. But I don’t think the wishbone would have survived these two decades. Switzer would have given it a go and stuck with the ‘bone for several years. But eventually, the change in the game would have dictated a change in the coach.
College football defenses became bigger and faster. Creases are not as big. Open spaces closed more quickly. The need to throw grew, both in a variety of different ways and much more efficiently.
I think Switzer would have adapted. Would have morphed into more of a Nebraska option offense and maybe eventually into something resembling the current OSU offense, with triple threats of throwing, running and the option.
But no wishbone. Defenses could stack the line and get away with it. With exotic pass coverages unknown in the wishbone heyday, the home run passes that Jack Mildren and Steve Davis, J.C. Watts and Jamelle Holieway could sting unsuspecting defenses would be gone.
The wishbone’s chief limitation in 21st-century football is the inability to spread the defense. You would have seen the ‘bone broken more and more, to where eventually the base offense was not the three backs, but one or more likely both halfbacks in motion, to the slot or all the way to the sideline.
The wishbone was grand for 20 years of OU football. It would not have survived another 20, even with its greatest champion in control.
-------------Berry Tramel can be heard Monday through Friday from 4:40-5:20 p.m. on The Sports Animal radio network, including AM-640 and FM-98.1. You can e-mail him here and follow him on Twitter @BerryTramel. Visit Berry's website here.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Hi Berry,
The Wishbone would, still and does work. Just look at the Academies and how they have remained competitive by using it. What one needs to understand however is that you must use it continuously to make it successful and develope the skills it takes to run it properly. Despite what none wishbone people say it is an effective passing formation. It can make a slightly less talented team on a par with a more talented team.
But in spite of all that if an opposing team outclasses you with talent and skill it doesn’t matter what formation you come up against. On the other hand if your players are far and away more talented than your opponents, it doesn’t matter what formation you run.
If you recall Miami whoopin up on Oklahoma in the mid-80′s. They just had mush better players. Many of Barry’s teams were just much more talented than the opposition.
The Wishbone would be very effective today because not many teams are using it and it is difficult to prepare for something you only see once a year. Heck, if some University came out with the Single Wing and ran it effectively it would be very very difficult to stop.
I am a fan of the Wishbone. I beleive in that formations ability to confuse the opponent and the fact each play starts out looking the same then lulling you to sleep for the pass.
Regards,
Reed Jackson
OKC
Atletes make formations work. However, the wishbone would never score points like the current spread offense does. Not even close. Even in the days of no parity, the bone didn’t put up the numbers lasy year’s OU offense (in the era of parity) did.
I say line it up for a few plays every week and see what happens. It is more exciting than the old three yards and a cloud of dust routine that some school use. You got on your feet because you knew what “could” happen.
Switzer’s option football scheme was no longer that successful while still at the helm. Rem quick Ds shut it down cold. It was quite frustrating.
The bone in major college football died when Miami lined up with d-back speed at the linebacker position, in the King’s last two games OU put up a combined 9 points. The Bone was dead, but the King would have surrounded himself with good coaches and adapted… Boomer Sooner
The Bone would not work today. Defenses in pre-1980s were built on either strength or speed, and the Wishbone could overcome one or the other – either by wearing them down, or by running them over. However, Jimmy Johnson showed that you could have both strength AND speed in a defensive lineup. The spread is the natural progression of offenses to fight that scheme: create one-on-one matchups and let the best athlete win.
Edgar, how was it not that successful with Switzer still in charge? Switzer won the national championship in 85. He might have won it in 84 if not for a bogged down Sooner Schooner in Miami. He was second or third in 1986. He lost the 1987 national championship game by just six points, 20-14, to Miami on its home field. He had a good but relatively down year in 1988, going 9-3 his last year at OU. He might have adapted the bone, but by no means was it dead when Switzer was at the OU helm.
The spread is option football with the pitch going downfield while the QB runs the remote control in the pocket. It is the wishbone for the remote control/mobile phone/ipod generation.
In case we forget, every time we face an option team now, we act like we never have seen it. With all of that time Barry spends with the team, you would think that he would impart some “option offense and defense” tips to Brent V and Bobby Stoops. You would think with the stable of fast running backs we now have, Bobby Stoops would find a way to add an option ground attack of some sort (without relying on the QB to run the ball) and employ a two-back running attack too. That would really open up the offense even more that it was last year. 70 points a game maybe and we might actually win the NC this time????
Oh well.
Frustrated Sooner Alumni
Switzer was one of the biggest cheaters in CF history. When he got fired OU was put on NCAA probation and banned from TV/Bowls and the UPI Poll. Only OU homers respect his sordid OU career. Its a matter of record that when he left OU he was a pariah.
“Even former Sooners are beginning to turn against Switzer. On Monday, Jim Owens, co-captain of the 1949 team, said that that squad would be canceling its 40th reunion in April to express disgust and embarrassment over the recent events in Norman.” –Rick Telander and Robert Sullivan, Sports Illustrated, 1989
Evidence of his ability to adapt can be seen in his time in Dallas. People close to that situation say Switzer was like having no head coach at all. Of course after the absolute mess he left in Norman it’s amazing anybody still wants to talk about him. OU was lucky they didn’t get the death penalty after the multiple infractions of the Switzer era.
The King? Why must we continue to pretend that Switzer was anything but a disgrace to our fine institution. Winning football games at the expense of our reputation is worthless.
The Wishbone was dead, but not by anything Switzer or opposing coaches did, but by the NCAA rules committee. Take a look at some vintage OU Wishbone footage and you will see 2 key differences.
First, the hash marks were much wider than a modern field. Those wide hash marks gave the running backs a lot more room to turn the corner. College hash marks today are almost as narrow as the NFL. Ever notice that most of the big plays from the 70s and 80s came while working towards the wide side of the field?
Second, offensive lineman are allowed much more use of their hands today than 25 years ago. If you want to pass the ball, the offensive lineman have to sustain their blocks until a receiver can come open downfield. That was much harder 25 years ago with the old blocking rules. By comparison, an option team only had to hold their blocks until the running back reached the corner. If you have Joe Washington or Marcus Dupree in the backfield, that amounts to less than one second. 25 years ago that gave an advantage to an option style offense compared to a passing scheme. That advantage doesn’t exist any more.
Would Switzer have adapted? Probably. He is one of the best coaches in NCAA history. However, he wouldn’t have been running a 1970s or 1980s vintage Wishbone offense in 2009.
One thing that would have allowed to Switzer to adjust to an era where the wishbone might not have worked was that he always seemed to have outstanding coordinators on his staff, offense and defense. I have no doubt in my mind that when the time came for Barry to change his offense, he would have had a mastermind in charge of it. Those were some serious staffs the king had working for him over the years…