Comments on: Barry Switzer Wants Teams to Lose Properly http://larrybrownsports.com/college-football/barry-switzer-wants-teams-to-lose-properly/941 Brown Bag it, Baby Sun, 27 May 2012 04:47:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Larry Brown http://larrybrownsports.com/college-football/barry-switzer-wants-teams-to-lose-properly/941/comment-page-1#comment-22087 Larry Brown Wed, 12 Sep 2007 05:06:10 +0000 http://larrybrownsports.com/2007/09/11/barry-switzer-wants-teams-to-lose-properly/#comment-22087 That's a good point -- I didn't really think about it that way. Still though, obviously they were more concerned about getting their extra work in than the embarrassment of the final score, and that's fine by me. That’s a good point — I didn’t really think about it that way. Still though, obviously they were more concerned about getting their extra work in than the embarrassment of the final score, and that’s fine by me.

]]> By: gene http://larrybrownsports.com/college-football/barry-switzer-wants-teams-to-lose-properly/941/comment-page-1#comment-21969 gene Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:25:34 +0000 http://larrybrownsports.com/2007/09/11/barry-switzer-wants-teams-to-lose-properly/#comment-21969 I agree with Barry, because perception becomes reality over time. Everyone looks at the most points scored an opponent historically and the announcers mention it on every telecast. For instance, last Saturday we all heard that Michigan hadn't lost a game by a wider margin since Ohio State beat them 50-14 in 1968. In 1954, Stanford with John Brody at QB, kept working on its passing game, and wound up losing to UCLA 72-0. UCLA had more yardage on interception returns than Stanford did on its passing game. The implications of that game were far reaching, because Stanford's vote helped put the sanctions on USC, UCLA and Washington that resulted in the dissolution of the Pacific Coast Conference. In the end, everyone forgot about UCLA's offense running the ball with all of the reserves on the squad and concentrated on the final score of 72-0 for many years thereafter. Every time UCLA scores a lot of points, the announcers always bring up 72-0. Nobody recalls that the score would have been in the 40's if Stanford had heeded Switzer's advice, and west coast football history would possibly be different. Similarly, I am sure that Oklahoma's 79-10 score will be remembered and pointed to as an act of running the score up. Everyone will forget that North Texas was "working on their passing game". I agree with Barry, because perception becomes reality over time. Everyone looks at the most points scored an opponent historically and the announcers mention it on every telecast.

For instance, last Saturday we all heard that Michigan hadn’t lost a game by a wider margin since Ohio State beat them 50-14 in 1968.

In 1954, Stanford with John Brody at QB, kept working on its passing game, and wound up losing to UCLA 72-0. UCLA had more yardage on interception returns than Stanford did on its passing game. The implications of that game were far reaching, because Stanford’s vote helped put the sanctions on USC, UCLA and Washington that resulted in the dissolution of the Pacific Coast Conference.

In the end, everyone forgot about UCLA’s offense running the ball with all of the reserves on the squad and concentrated on the final score of 72-0 for many years thereafter. Every time UCLA scores a lot of points, the announcers always bring up 72-0. Nobody recalls that the score would have been in the 40′s if Stanford had heeded Switzer’s advice, and west coast football history would possibly be different.

Similarly, I am sure that Oklahoma’s 79-10 score will be remembered and pointed to as an act of running the score up. Everyone will forget that North Texas was “working on their passing game”.

]]>