This is not true. TO routinely played 2nd and 3rd string players. I remember a few games with participation of more than 100 players. TO even put the 2nd string QB in for the 2nd quarter against weak teams early in the year (Frankie London against Central Florida in 1996). TO routinely had 2 or even 3 back sharing the load.
There's one that didn't pan out for sure. We thought we hit paydirt but it turns out all we had was fools gold.
TO and Bob managed the games so we got far enough ahead of the teams that we were obviously far superior to in talent and depth, which allowed them to clear the bench in those games. Now we play even with those teams most of the game. Add to that some kind of idol worship of the starting QB with recent coaches and the backups just don't get prepared like they used to.
A more talented backup allows for the coaches to go the the backup earlier if the starter is injured or ineffective. POB could have actually played more than Fyfe, if he could have just beaten out Fyfe at the beginning of the season.
I think it's dumb to waste a year of eligibility to be a backup. I imagine it didn't matter if POB beat out Fyfe. If he didn't beat out Tommy, he was going to redshirt.
I don't see how any of what you said refutes what you quoted. It WAS difficult to crack the starting lineup as an underclassman when Osborne was coaching, especially along the offensive line. Osborne believed those linemen needed their development time and it's hard to argue with his results.
A team that aspires to be Top 25 has backups ready to go with the full playbook.....whether they play or not is irrelevant, just like every other position. I'm sure you remember the year when Colorado was down to about their 5th string and every one of them played like a pro.
