Sucks to lose Sermon.
When 100% I think he’s our best all-around back.
But he definitely won’t be 100 early next fall.
When 100% I think he’s our best all-around back.
But he definitely won’t be 100 early next fall.
Sermon
- Thread starter owenfieldreams
- Start date
Sermon looked like he got a lot quicker in the ‘19 off-season, but ankle started acting up again. Then knee.
I much prefer a featured back system with one primary back to give the starter a blow. But that’s just me being an old fart.....maybe.
That don't make it right! One common stat for championship years after Bud is that there was one dominate running back carrying the majority of totes. 1974 Washington, 1975 Washington, 1985 Carr, and 2000 Quentin. In the case of Switzer's titles, the quarterback was the 2nd leading rusher in the Wishbone. I'm pretty sure that even the close calls we had for a natty the same was true. But as you point out those days may be gone, but that's by design. I just don't like it......and I’m not the head coach.
Last edited:
No, it doesn't....but football today is not as much the grind-it-out game it once was because of the increased size and speed of today's players, which lead to more injuries....which leads to needing more depth at every position.
BTW, Carr was a fullback who shared a backfield of running backs Tillman, Collins, Stell, Stafford and Earl Johnson (who played some FB) and behind Carr were Rotnei Anderson and Leon Perry. Those four years, 1984-1987, featured some great offenses at OU with great depth in the backfields.
CT, I was referring to our 1985 championship year. Except for Perry, Carr had almost more carries than all the others running backs combined. They averaged about 50. Perry 100 and Carr 190. So Carr was the featured RB and Perry #2. Just saying.
Good point. Carr’s work at fullback also made Tillman, Collins, Stafford and Stell have solid production at their RB positions and Holieway really produced....all thanks to Carr’s power running between the tackles behind a great offensive line.
You are so right. Holieway made it all happen, had almost as many yards as the leading back and greatly minimized the number of carries by our halfbacks. And Barry never subbed for him until the game was well in hand. You’re right about the size of today’s players influencing the number of running backs’ playing time. I didn’t consider that point. If DeMarco or Peterson types were still on campus I wonder how Riley would handle their carries. LOL. I’m sure that has a lot to do with his thinking, too.
My opinion has been that the three Miami defeats in 1985, 1986 and 1987 spelled the end (or near end) of the wishbone era. Miami had defenses, with their size and speed, never faced by OU and its wishbone was contained by Miami's NFL caliber defenses. And those three OU teams were among the best teams OU ever had.
BTW, incoming freshman Seth McGowan, 5'11" 215 lbs, is said to have Perine-type ability. So OU has three good young backs in Pledger, Major and McGowan behind Brooks and Stevenson.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Crazy quick feet, great vision, and acceleration.
Look at his legs. He obviously puts in the work.
Washington was a great college running back. But he still split carries a lot. All the wishbone did, was limit his ability to sweep both ends. Same with Greg Pruitt. It's partly why Barry moved toward using some I formation in the early 80s. I still thought we could have lined up a little in a triple I, then shifted the running backs to opposite sides occasionally, especially the year that former fullback Tim Welch was playing halfback a lot, opposite Joe Silvershoes.
Things were soooo different in those days.
Billy Sims might have had some fun at the back end of an I Formation occasionally also.
Sims, Washington and Pruitt all are in the discussion when all time great college rb's in the subject. But the wishbone limited all at least a little. But I disagree with the premise that we were one back dominated. All of those teams had other quality ball carriers. Crosswhite was drafted in the 2nd round. Wylie was soph of the year in half the 1970 votes, (along with Johnny Rodgers). And even though his stature went down some after injuriers, he still was a 4th rounder.
Sims had Kenny King in front of him at fullback. Washington played his freshman season with Pruitt, and had quality fullbacks in front of him ever year, and several very good right halfbacks alongside after Gregory D.
Things were soooo different in those days.
Billy Sims might have had some fun at the back end of an I Formation occasionally also.
Sims, Washington and Pruitt all are in the discussion when all time great college rb's in the subject. But the wishbone limited all at least a little. But I disagree with the premise that we were one back dominated. All of those teams had other quality ball carriers. Crosswhite was drafted in the 2nd round. Wylie was soph of the year in half the 1970 votes, (along with Johnny Rodgers). And even though his stature went down some after injuriers, he still was a 4th rounder.
Sims had Kenny King in front of him at fullback. Washington played his freshman season with Pruitt, and had quality fullbacks in front of him ever year, and several very good right halfbacks alongside after Gregory D.
I think Steve Owens was the last back to be the main single back and that’s an understatement. Once Ron Shotts left after the 1967 season, Owens had the running game virtually to himself.
And once the wishbone came into play in 1970 Switzer was loaded at RB as Plaino stated.
IMO Joe Wylie, even with his injuries, was OU’s last great white RB. Grant Burger was very good as well and I recall he injured his knee in the 1973 opener vs Baylor but returned in 1974 and gained 379 yards and 8 TD’s.
That 2974 team had Washington, Burget, Peacock as halfbacks and Littrell and Russell at FB. There were others as well: Rogers and Berg who did mop up duty.
Last edited:
I know that.
The "R" and the "T" are next to each other on the keyboard and I hit the wrong letter.
Grant Burget's younger brother Barry was a DE in 1977-79. He and Bruce Taton were solid performers who came to OU as backs.
That was a long time ago....when playing defense mattered at OU.
I think it has always mattered. It's ironic that OU under Bob Stoops let the genie out of the bottle. The Hal Mumme spread was a rarely used offensive strategy until Mike Leach brought it to OU in 1999. Leach left, but OU used it to win a national title in 2000. Within five years, every to school in the country was using it. Vince Young used incredible athleticism to show what could happen. Pretty much every national champion since, has used some form of the spread.
And it is incredibly hard to defend. Mike Stoops was viewed as a fool by a majority of OU fans when he returned to OU after a stint as Arizona's HC. He'd been a great DC from 1999 to 2003. But Mike's defense was based on controlling gaps in the run game. Very structured. Very disciplined. The spread changed that. It created one extra gap to defend, and it destroyed everything Mike's defense was built on. He never really found a way to make it work. It didn't help that talent in Oklahoma took a dip.
Mike's defenses the first five years also were about being physically intimidating. That is now illegal. We had tough guys, not unlike the Stoops boys were as players.
I believe that the quality of hs football in Oklahoma has dropped and OU has been hurt by that. And the kind of defenders that make for great college players have subsided in Oklahoma and Texas because of hs spread offenses.
College football is now much less about who coaches, and much more about overall team athleticism, especially at quarterback. But on defense, it requires great depth, and players who can think for themselves. And you can't just have 11 plus three or four. Offenses have a distinct advantage. You have to have deep, smart, athletic guys.
I'm a pessimist when it comes to the present defensive administration. I don't believe that pre-snap shifting is such a wonderful thing for defensive players. Until OUr geographical talent base gets better, we're going have a hard time accumulating the talent necessary to play great or even very good defense.
And I really don't think you recruit many great DL's by emphasizing chasing the ball. You need about eight. OU does want to play great defense. It's going to take considerable salesmanship, and some very good fortune to turn it around.
OU has two defensive players, Gallimore and Murray, projected to be drafted in the first round....two defensive players from a team that has not played anywhere near championship caliber defense in recent years.
This tells me that, as Plaino just pointed out, that quality depth has been eluding OU these days. OU will get a few defensive studs, but just not enough to fill out 11 defensive positions and/or provide meaningful depth.
Yes, it will take considerable salesmanship recruiting top defensive players and this must be further enhanced by on-field defensive performance on Saturdays. Until that happens, OU will remain "painted into a corner" in attracting top defensive talent.
This tells me that, as Plaino just pointed out, that quality depth has been eluding OU these days. OU will get a few defensive studs, but just not enough to fill out 11 defensive positions and/or provide meaningful depth.
Yes, it will take considerable salesmanship recruiting top defensive players and this must be further enhanced by on-field defensive performance on Saturdays. Until that happens, OU will remain "painted into a corner" in attracting top defensive talent.
I think Murray and Gallimore might have been enough if they could have clicked at the same time. Murray struggled too much with injuries and Gallimore started off the year with an immediate injury against Ohio State.
Even though I believe they could have made the backbone of a decent defense, I do believe that OU really misses a disruptive edge rusher - DE. They got away using an edge rushing LB for a few years now, but I'd rather see a dedicated, game-changing DE.
The NFL has already shown this blueprint as the most important part of a defense. Elite DEs are primary draft targets and are getting salaries rivaling QBs for good reason.
Even though I believe they could have made the backbone of a decent defense, I do believe that OU really misses a disruptive edge rusher - DE. They got away using an edge rushing LB for a few years now, but I'd rather see a dedicated, game-changing DE.
The NFL has already shown this blueprint as the most important part of a defense. Elite DEs are primary draft targets and are getting salaries rivaling QBs for good reason.
