ADVERTISEMENT

Someone going to post this, so we might as well discuss it........

K2C Sooner

Sooner starter
Sep 2, 2012
8,618
5,362
113
Catoosa OK
Why did Bob replace Baker on the first series of the fourth quarter. Yes, we were up by 35, but that never stopped him from giving his starting q-b's the reps they may need next week. My goodness, he hasn't played in two years.

I don't know how many times I would have liked to see a sub at q-b in the past, after a blow out in the 3rd quarter, but not tonight. You think it might have been a Riley decision?

Am I wrong?
 
Why did Bob replace Baker on the first series of the fourth quarter. Yes, we were up by 35, but that never stopped him from giving his starting q-b's the reps they may need next week. My goodness, he hasn't played in two years.

I don't know how many times I would have liked to see a sub at q-b in the past, after a blow out in the 3rd quarter, but not tonight. You think it might have been a Riley decision?

Am I wrong?

I think Riley suggested it and Bob checked off on it, yep.

Bob likes to delegate, especially with the new guys. He'll give Riley all the latitude he wants until he fails.
That's Bob job. IMO that is.
 
I think Riley suggested it and Bob checked off on it, yep.

Bob likes to delegate, especially with the new guys. He'll give Riley all the latitude he wants until he fails.
That's Bob job. IMO that is.

I mentioned the problem Baker had with arm fatigue in the game thread. I wonder if that had something to do with it? I hope not..............
 
Don't care who I loved it and saw other areas of improvement too. Plus it was extremely hot & humid out there tonight and others will need all the reps they can get later this year. I've thought for years that Stoops was foolish for leaving starters in too long.

This for sure. I'm sure Riley had a part in mentioning it, and hopefully this is a new Bob Stoops who starts giving his backup players more playing time during blowout wins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schoonerman
I think Riley suggested it and Bob checked off on it, yep.

Bob likes to delegate, especially with the new guys. He'll give Riley all the latitude he wants until he fails.
That's Bob job. IMO that is.

He did say right before the game something along the lines of, "I'm excited to watch what happens."

Whatever the words and tone were, it struck me as Bob being pretty hands off and letting his staff do their jobs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K2C Sooner
I think there were a couple or three reasons. One is that the defense was controlling the game in a way that hasn't happened anytime recently. Sometimes 35 points is a bigger lead than at other times. Bob doesn't have the freedom to do a do over if an unexpected turnover triggers a comeback by the other side. OU controlled Akron's offense in the way that, well, Notre Dame controlled Texas. Very similar games. Texas should be better than Akron, but they had a race to decide whose offense was the worst of the week last night. OU's defense played a very tight, assignment sound game. It wasn't Florida State NC game efficient or dominant, but it was a great opening night performance. Akron wasn't going to score 35 last night if it had been a goal line drill in practice. It was a safer lead.

Two I believe has a lot to do with it. Why did Bob stop running a true spread in 2004? There were really two reasons. One was that he'd just recruited the best I-formation tailback since OJ Simpson. Okay, maybe since Herschell Walker. And AD was a lot better at tailback than he was at spread single back. But it was more than that. In 2000, 01, 02 and 03, Bob had seen his quarterbacks get maimed at sometime during the season.

Heupel couldn't throw an out route the last month of the NC season, but willed that team to a national championship anyway. 2001 the whole line got beat up, and shortly, the quarterbacks. We lost to a poor OSU team at the end of what had been a very promising season. And then with probably Bob's best defense at OU, barely beat Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl, despite the defense just toying with Matt Jones' offense.

2002, Jason White got hurt. Hybl limped home. He healed enough to be Rose Bowl MVP, but the offense wasn't as productive once the quarterback got hurt and the second quarterback was hurting.

2003, OU lost to LSU for the national championship because Jason White could barely walk. So Bob kept some spread elements in the offense, but ditched the pure spread. He got %tired of not having a quarterback close to 100% healthy for November or the bowl season.

So point two is that Bob understands the quarterback health risk, even though he'll never discuss it publicly. And the backup needs more reps.

I think three might be that the race between Mayfield and Knight might have been razor thin and hard to make. So Knight deserved some game reps. Let's not forget that this isn't really something new. In the opener, when Knight unexpectedly won the starting job, when the expected decision had been a future NFL tight end, Blake Bell played the whole fourth quarter in the first two games of the season.

The notion that this was Bob doing something different than ever before, just isn't the case.
 
Last edited:
This for sure. I'm sure Riley had a part in mentioning it, and hopefully this is a new Bob Stoops who starts giving his backup players more playing time during blowout wins.

Count me in too. Love seeing more guys getting playing time in the blowouts. I always felt Bob kept the starters in too long, so I was glad to see him have enough trust in Lincoln to get some of the other guys - on both sides of the ball - on the field. This is a pattern I'd like to see repeated as the season progresses and as the situation allows.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT