Emails in on private schools & offensive lines
The new emails are in, a little light because it’s another vacation week, but some spirited debate about the public school/private school debate, offensive lines and assorted other subjects.
Josh, a self-proclaimed OSU psycho: “I have a research question for you. Has ANY team ever beaten Oklahoma, Nebraska AND Texas in the same season? No one has done it in the Big 12 era. Nobody. I am starting to think that nobody has ever done it. I tried to think who may have pulled it off in the Big 12. 1998: A&M lost to Texas. 2002: OSU lost to Texas. 2003: KSU lost to Texas. 2008: Tech lost to OU. OSU has gotten two of the three thrice: 1944, 1997, 2002 (OSU didn’t play NU in ’44 or ’97). I know this is complicated by the fact that Texas played in the SWC, but I am curious to see if anyone has ever gotten all three in the same season. It’s probably a pretty safe bet that if somebody did, they were pretty darn good.”
You’re right about. I found two teams — same school — that beat OU, NU and UT in the same year. The Colorado Buffaloes of 1989 and 1990. The ’89 Buffs played for the national title in the Orange Bowl. The ’90 Buffs won the national title.
Randy wrote about the OSU ticket and scheduling policies: “If you think I am going to drive four-plus hours to Stillwater eight times, just to see one game I want, you are in another fan base. The Cowboy fan base could be headed for a schism. One an hour away distance, comprised of OKC and Tulsa, the other in Dallas and southern counties. For approximately the last 15 years, OSU has been running a 14-20 percent student body from the Dallas area. There are now two somewhat different fan bases. And that is the reason I now firmly believe Holder has to bring the Cowboys to Dallas. If he doesn’t, he eventually loses this existing fan base, plus the emerging population of the southern counties in Oklahoma. This is potential large donor money. Why doesn’t OU have this problem with an existing 25 percent student body from Texas over the last 15 years? OU plays Texas in Fair Park. And Norman is roughly an hour and change closer to the Greater New Dallas metro area, which as previously mentioned, is moving into the Oklahoma southern counties. I consider Stillwater an equivalent to Troy, Alabama. Love the Oklahoma State campus, but Stillwater leaves me cold. And I speak for most of the Cowboy fans in Dallas when I write that. Due to this, as previously mentioned, I believe Holder has some immediate remedial action to salvage this fan base.”
All interesting discussions, but playing a game in Dallas doesn’t solve OSU’s chief concern, which is selling season tickets in Stillwater. Taking a good game away from campus is one less reason to buy a season ticket. It’s a thorny situation.
Jerry: “I was listening to the radio one day last week when you were asked where you would most like to see an OU away game. I was pleased to hear your response West Point. I, too, have always thought that would be a great venue for a road trip. Spend some time in NYC, then up the Hudson for some historic sightseeing. Many of my fellow fans have also mentioned to me they totally agree. Anyway, at an OU caravan stop a couple of years ago, I asked Joe C. about this possibility. He mentioned he too had heard from fans how cool this would be but said it probably would never happen. However, he didn’t explain why. Why do you think it is unlikely?”
I actually think it’s more likely now. I hear Army is more open to discussion.
Judy: “Did you hear President Obama tell Bob Costas at the All-Star Game that when he was a high school basketball player in Hawaii, his team played basketball with the Reds and Johnny Bench? It must have been during one of those not-really-sports challenge events for professional athletes. I was thinking you may have run out of things to ask Johnny Bench by now, so what about whether he remembers the game and whether he realized at some point that he’d played with a future president. Obama told Costas the experience made him a Reds fan, at least for a while.”
Bob Costas was at the All-Star Game?
MG: “I have a question regarding the OU-Florida game. Did you ever get a chance to ask Bob what his rationale was for trotting out Jimmy Stevens to attempt his longest field goal of the year? I’m interested in knowing why Bob didn’t give the best offense in the country, led by the Heisman Trophy winner, a shot to get the first down. I don’t know any Sooner fans who honestly believed Jimmy had a legitimate chance of making that kick.”
Stoops was asked right after the game — might have been me, I can’t remember — and admitted it was a mistake. And Stoops knew it. No way should Stevens have been asked to try a 47-yard field goal.
Ted wrote about blog item in which I said Roy Williams, Tony Casillas and Brian Bosworth were the three best OU defenders of the last 30 years. “Why do people believe Tony’s hype. Look at Rick Bryan’s tackle records compared to Casillas. Ricky has more career tackles than the greatest of them all, LeRoy Selmon. Besides that, Ricky was a nice guy and a very underrated OU player. Tony didn’t show up for our loss in the Orange bowl (true, he was double-teamed most of the time, but so were all the good ones) and then he blamed everybody else for the loss, including the Sooner Schooner. If he had spent less time before the game posing beside a colorful catamaran on the beach and more time concentrating on the game, we would have had another national championship. Despite his considerable personal flaws, I agree with Boz’s abilities. Roy Williams was also another dominant performer — would that that had carried over and lasted at Dallas.”
Tony Casillas hyped? He was a great, great college player, then an excellent pro. I love Rick Bryan. He was a great player, too, but he was no Casillas. Buddy Burris, who played at OU from 1946-48, saw every OU team from the ’40s into the 1990s. He thought Casillas was the best.
OK, on to the public school/private school debate. Tim: “Agree with your cornerstone point: the high stakes are a quality education, not the resting place for gold balls. Other terms used are easy to agree with: social laboratories; warehouse teens for next pass through; need for backbone, conscience, vision, & attuned parents. These have been expressed elsewhere. A term Dumbing of America comes to mind. The solution, however, is the exact opposite in which you suggest. To acquire quality education public schools require less, much less, as in zero, activities. Major core subjects reading, writing, arithmetic, must be repetitiously taught to the extreme. Some correlated minors must also be available. That’s it. No sports, cheer, pom, music, drama, debate, shop, etc. If you want such extras, do it on your own dime and time outside of public education. To become well-rounded, some refer this as developing the whole person, be advised there is no bottom to this slippery slope! There is never enough money and programs to produce desired roundness. If roundness is the goal, students need to get a job after class working for someone, make a little money and learn real world responsibility. Fire all coaches, put locks on gyms and stadiums. Nothing in the past 40 years has been more detrimental to public education than sports. It defocuses education with misplaced heroics. Instead, students must master fundamental core subjects. There is no cafeteria. School is over at 11:50. By noon students are off school grounds, unless consulting with a teacher or doing research in the library. Students who do not want to be in school for the outstanding public education available are encouraged to leave. Discipline is strict. Those who bump the line are sent home and as required suspended for the semester. End product is a superb quality public educated student at a fraction of current cost.”
I don’t buy it. To use your terms, only rearranged, the end product is a fraction of superb quality public educated students. Extracurricular activities do more than create a well-rounded person. They keep many students interested and connected to school. High school is not just a college prepatory school. All kinds of kids won’t go on to college and shouldn’t. But we need plumbers as much as we need doctors and a heck of a lot more than we need lawyers or college professors. And to say that sports has been the most detrimental element in schools the last 40 years is ridiculous. Bad parenting laps the field on that one.
David: “Extra-curricular activities are extremely valuable for the life lessons they teach regardless of how many medals or trophies are won. I actually think that so long as kids put forth great effort, they can often learn more from defeat than winning. However, I’m not convinced that compulsory participation is best. After all, you do need to be able to cull the bad eggs because they will bring the other participants down. But kids could benefit greatly if we encouraged our schools to place a bigger emphasis on participation.”
Interesting debate. Are knuckleheads pulled up by being placed in a good environment, or do they pull others down? I would say it depends on the quality of the discipline — and that goes for the classroom and the ballfield.
Lynn: “Let me tell you a little story about my school. Every so often, I do a little informal survey of my high school classes. I ask the students how many of them have a job. Typically, about 90 percent of the students hold up their hands. I then ask those who have jobs, ‘How many of you depend on your jobs to buy your school uniforms, supplies, and other things you need?’ Of those who have jobs, usually all to nearly all, hold up their hands. Then I ask, ‘How many for how many of you, your paycheck pays for the light bill, some of the rent or other family needs?’ Usually half of the students hold up their hands for this one. I know my survey is entirely anecdotal, but I don’t think it is all that inaccurate considering the home lives these kids have. This is a further advantage that private schools have over our school. For me, the only solution is for private schools to have their champion and public schools theirs. I know this won’t satisfy those who want a true champion, but after all, extra curricular activities are about character rather than winning, aren’t they?”
I’m afraid Lynn is right. But the train has left the station. Forty years ago, when Bishop McGuinness first was admitted to the OSSAA, some warned that public schools would rue the day.
Mary: I am a high school band director, beginning my 30th year of teaching in the Oklahoma public schools. During the 30 years, I have seen a decline in the student’s discipline and work ethic. There are so many life lessons that are taught in extra-curricular activities. I appreciate your words and encouragement for extra-curricular activities.”
I know that requiring all kids to participate in an extra-curricular would be a hardship for some. But it might be worth it.
Diane: “You made many generous statements about private schools. I appreciate that. And I applaud your thesis: it would be to the advantage of youngsters in public schools to have an activities requirement for graduation. I hope the suggestion is taken seriously by public schools. However, as a teacher and administrator for over 30 years in private schools (and a former teacher in public schools), I disagree with the oft-repeated position regarding the ‘inherent advantage’ that private schools have over public ones in athletics. More specifically, that the private schools are able to ‘control their enrollment’ gives them an advantage in OSSAA activities. ‘That’s a huge difference,’ you say. Why? I find it hard to understand that public school athletic directors and principals take this position. Are they not in control of their team memberships? Do the public school teams accept all comers? No. In fact, the fact that it is more difficult to make a team in public schools (or have playing time if you do manage to make it) is one reason why some parents make the sacrifice to send their modestly-talented kids to private schools. So that they can be a part of something, even if they aren’t stars, and have the memories and life experiences that your column advocates. And the greater percentage of students (that your article recommends) ‘participating’ exerts its own pressures on coaches different from those caused by ‘knuckleheads,’ but challenges, just the same. Yes, private schools decide whom they enroll. And like public schools, they can ‘remove’ kids who are problems, reassigning them to alternative settings. Most important, all schools have the right to disallow kids with character issues to be on a team.”
This is a train wreck of a letter. This was written by someone who hasn’t been in the real world since about 1964. Knuckleheads on teams are not the problem in public school. Knuckleheads in school, who can NOT be easily removed, are the problem.
Carrie: “You made lots of good points. When we have school-age kids, we want them to participate in something, anything, whatever they want. I think clubs and teams and other activities provide support for kids, especially those without much of a home life.”
I don’t think there’s any doubt about it.
My theory that offensive lines aren’t as important as they once were drew some dialogue. Roy: “A fine line divides champions from also-rans like Texas Tech and, sad to say, OU. You do need meatpackers to consistently get short yardage in critical situations (especially near the goal line). OU’s generally dismal performance in this area has probably cost them a couple of national championships. OU TDs in the red zone: 71 out of 84 (not that great). Look at the big games. Outrushed badly by Texas and Florida. Four for four from red zone vs. Texas, none by running. Only 2 for 4 vs. Gators, none by rushing, and as I recall they had an interception at the 4. Man, you gotta be able to muscle it in from there when the chips are down.”
Well, I think 71 of 84 is pretty darn good. In fact, I looked it up. OU was fifth nationally in red-zone efficiency, scoring on 78 of 84 possessions. That ranked behind Ohio State, UNLV, Miami and Utah State. But the NCAA measures red-zone efficiency as scoring after reaching the red zone and doesn’t differentiate between a field goal and a touchdown, which is silly. So I calculated touchdown efficiency from the red zone. And OU led the nation by a wide margin. OU’s 71 of 84 is .845 percent. Next best was Utah (.784), UNLV (.783), Texas (.765), Arizona (.750) and LSU (.745). And as for the notion that OU couldn’t run it into the end zone, that’s kooky. OU had 41 rushing touchdowns last season, which led the nation by a huge margin. Florida was next with 32. The Sooners failed to muscle it in against Florida. No doubt about it. But OU had a first-rate offensive line last season. It’s just like I said; o-line play isn’t as vital as it once was.
James: “To lend a little more credence to your ranking of the importance (or lack of) of an offensive line, we need look no further than last year’s Super Bowl winner. Add to that the fact that the Steelers also won a Super Bowl just a few years before that with a far less than stellar offensive line.”
I’m no expert on the Steelers’ offensive line, but what I say about college offensive lines do NOT apply to the NFL. In the pros, you still play he-man football.
Shlomo: “Your piece on the value of the O-Line in college football reminds me of Coach Switzer’s promotion of the wishbone as the best thing since sliced bread. He said that, among the benefits of the formation, it was relatively easy to teach, not least of which because the offensive linemen didn’t have to hold their blocks; the play developed so quickly that the initial block was sufficient. Another analogy: Back then, and before the ‘bone, when it was Shotts up the middle and Owens making like a human tractor, the OU coaches used to say that there weren’t but three things could happen when you throw the ball and two of ‘em are bad. Now the wishbone tended to leave the ball on the floor a lot, owing to the razzle dazzle. But the spread, in the wrong hands, can get pretty sloppy, too. And for all the success that the OU offense had last year, nevertheless, when push came to shove, it was the lack of one smashmouth play that pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory. So, for me, I wonder if OU will put up the kind of numbers that we saw last year. The O-line might have more to do with it than one might imagine. The receiving corps is a work in progress. Sam may need more time. A little ball control might be just what the doctor ordered. One last thing. Sam Bradford is a gifted athlete. And he is not a little guy. If he could do some running, that might make the offense even more unpredictable and, therefore, explosive. Would he even if he could? Will the coaches try to protect him? Should they?”
Yes, the coaches should try to protect Bradford. If they put some quarterback-run game into the playbook, they’ve lost their minds. Bradford is an OK runner, but nothing special. Nothing that would make you think he could get you six yards on 3rd-and-5. The Sooners still will try to run the ball this year and almost surely will be successful. They might even overpower some foes. But line play isn’t as important as it once was, because there are other ways to attack defenses. Seems simple to me.
Mickey: “‘OU still likes to play smashmouth on occasional downs, which is why they still make room for Haystack Calhouns on the line.’ Great line, Berry. I didn’t realize you and your readership were that old.”
I’m still looking for old wrestling fans who remember the Medics and the Assassins.
-------------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
Scared or not, OU still lost when Florida and Tebow decided to take charge
of the game. There have been public schools do the same as private on
“jockying” their enrollment for classification purpose’s. Ada was most guilty
of this for years. Recruiting is the bigger issue, especially in 6 & 5A. I
remember when Edmond brought in Che Foster from MWC area, Blankenship’s
big “transfer”. Tulsa area schools thrive on “transfer’s” and what is the
underlying factor, besides promise’s, $$$! It’s a fact of life in big time HS
Football. Some of these kids come up on it their whole career and when they
get to college old habits are hard to break. Like ‘Roids in Texas schools, or
holding grade school kids back because of size. Their are some sick coach’s
and parents out there.
I watched the first half of the NC game the other day. It still amazed me how much OU dominated that half – except for the goal line plays. You have to give Florida credit – and I dont think enough people do – they came up with some big plays, its a fine line when two great teams play each other – and that was definitely the case in that game.
Berry, OU’s running game is just fine. Florida has some pretty darn fine defensive players. And there has not been one Florida fan I have spoken with after the game since I live here in Florida who has not said OU had the crap scared out of them in the first half. Most followed by saying, we were lucky to hold on long enough to get our offense moving….are the the UF fans smarter than ours? To read this blog we got blown out….-greg