Comments on: Would wishbone have survived with Switzer?

By: mike frazier

mike frazier — Sat, 08 Sep 2012 19:08:16 +0000

the only way that the bone would have worked for switzer if he would had used more of the flex versus the base bone.in that he would have the ability to spread the defense and create more gaps to move the football down field. when tom osborne ran the wing I at nebraska he realized as the years went on he had to pass a little more to offset the runninggame and from there he used his so-called double wing to spead the defense and create more gaps to move the football down field.even with the wing t offense coaches had to implement more of the jet series, shotgun wing t, and the spead shot wing-t to create the gaps.in summary the bone can still work btu you have to add more variety to make it a success alokng with the other two systems mentioned as well.

By: Roger

Roger — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:06:10 +0000

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.

By: Frank in Norman

Frank in Norman — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:34:12 +0000

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.

By: Dan in Tulsa

Dan in Tulsa — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:19:39 +0000

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.

By: Jimmy

Jimmy — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:00:47 +0000

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

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:19:39 +0000

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

By: Edwin

Edwin — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:04:11 +0000

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.

By: Edwin

Edwin — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:00:39 +0000

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.

By: Mark L

Mark L — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:09:02 +0000

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.

By: Douglas Miles

Douglas Miles — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:22:31 +0000

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