As always, I need to start by saying how much I like BB. He loves the kids he coaches, he prioritizes helping them become men, and he knows how to play OL as well or better than just about anyone. Everyone who knows OL play sings his praises highly.
But there's a big problem, and many don't want to acknowledge it. Our OL has really struggled in recent years, and we have enough data to know what the future holds unless something significant changes.
- Yes, it is true that BB usually turns out a decent to pretty good OL by the end of the year. Rarely has the OL been below average.
But, it is also true that our OL has not been SEC championship level (or even very close) since 2018. And even the great OLs of 2016-2018 didn't look too great in the playoffs.
It's also true that the SEC schedule doesn't allow the luxury of waiting till the back half of the schedule to figure the OL out.
- Yes, BB has had guys go to the NFL on the regular and be successful. NFL coaches love BB coached players, because they know how to play the position and are ready to play the pro game.
But, it's also true that this is of no help to OU. BB isn't here to prepare guys for the NFL, he's here to build OL that win college games. Sure, NFL success is great for recruiting...except that is hasn't been. At all. If it has, then BB's recruiting ability is even worse than we feared.
So, what's going on? Let me break down my thoughts as best I can:
NFL FACTORY
There's a hidden premise in most rebuttals in defense of BB, that NFL success means BB is a successful college OL coach. I think this false premise is harmful to the discourse and we need to acknowledge this.
In fact, this focus may in fact be a big part of the problem. Growing an OL player into an NFL player takes time. And it may be that NFL coaches love BB's guys because they've already made all their errors and struggles in college. There's a big learning curve, and OU struggles so that the NFL teams don't have to.
BB's way of coaching the OL is also likely a great filter for the NFL. Guys who can't make it under BB are unlikely to make it in the NFL. This is because it is harder to make it under BB than it is other places. We've also heard that BB's rough coaching and recruiting style turns off a lot of kids, which also helps filter out the kinds of kids who are less likely to make it big as a pro. That's all great if you are the NFL looking to take advantage of the end result. But it is not good for the college program that struggles with recruiting and has a low hit rate with players who make it to campus.
ASKING TOO MUCH
BB is very demanding of his players mentally. They can't just learn one position in one focused system, BB wants them to be able to know every position, know the intent behind it, and know how to block every scheme imaginable--most of which they will never even use in the zone-blocking heavy NFL.
I can appreciate this approach, but most kids can't do this, and it takes a lot of time for even the smartest players to get down. Contrast this to Art Briles' approach (gag me, I know) in which the best run blocking OL players are recruited and taught to perfect a simple blocking scheme so they can be very aggressive.
We've seen it time and again. Our OL are really aggressive in high school before OU and really aggressive in the NFL after they leave OU, but at OU that aggressiveness isn't there. They are always thinking too much. This is most apparent in run blocking, which is all about aggression. Even the best of our OLines mostly got guys in the right position, but few guys were able to actually get push against decent defenses. Gabe has been complaining about this for years, and I agree.
Their heads are spinning out there, they make mistakes, and many guys simply can't handle it mentally and never see the field.
But here's the thing: guys who play here long enough can sometimes get it down halfway through their last season. How many times have we seen a potentially great player struggle as a starter for 2 or 3 years, showing flashes here and there, but around the halfway point of their Sr year get it down and they end up a highly coveted draft pick? Again, that's great for the NFL, but unless we get lucky and all 5 guys happen to be veterans who have played at OU for 3 years, we aren't going to be winning a title.
This would all be great if guys spent 3 years as backups learning the position and started for a year or two after they were ready. Unfortunately, we cannot afford to do that. Why? Well...
NOT ENOUGH PLAYERS
OL is the hardest position, by far, to project in recruiting. The data makes that pretty clear. This fact has been used at times by people to defend BB's recruiting. But, while true, it does not excuse the terrible recruiting at OL.
First of all, it isn't like BB is getting the guys near the top of his list very often. I trust BB's list more than I trust any recruiting service. If he was getting a bunch of his top choices, I would be ecstatic. But he isn't. He misses on so many he ends up having to take projects, or he just stops recruiting altogether as there are no more prospects worth taking.
The more raw a player is, the longer it will take them in the system to learn it (if they ever do) and the higher risk they will be a bust. Taking a raw project or two a class is okay, provided you have enough in the boat that are much lower risk. But this is not been the case. He strikes out on so many guys he has to take the projects.
The fact that OL are so hard to project to college means you have to sign more every year to give you more bites at the apple. Yes, BB is able to get a guy or two every year that are pretty highly ranked, but they often turn out to be misses. That's the way it is at the OL position. You can't put your eggs in one or two baskets. You have to sign more guys! And the solution is not more projects, it means you need even more low risk commits so that you can afford to take a swing or two at a high risk project. And considering how much of a filter our program is, in large part to how mentally demanding it is, we will have an even lower hit rate than other programs, further increasing the need to maximize our bites at the apple.
The biggest problem I see is that we don't have enough talent at the OL to be able to keep guys in the oven for a few years before they are ready to start. And yes, some kids are gonna get restless and transfer out, but if the NFL success isn't enough to keep those guys around, then the current approach is not viable and must change. If we have no choice but to start 1st and 2nd year players, we need to change to an offense that 1st and 2nd year players can execute at a high level.
TRANSFERS ARE NOT THE ANSWER
BB has been forced to rely on transfers to have enough guys in the room, and this is a problem. We have not been able to get high quality transfers at the OL position. Our best transfers have either been high floor low ceiling guys like Rouse (which I'm all for taking for depth) or projects like Guyton. I'm all for taking guys like Guyton if they are young enough to have time to develop before being able to start. But most of the transfers we've been able to get are just not good enough to start in a high level OL.
Guys like Rouse and Metoyer are great bandaids in emergency situations and excellent for depth. But they are never going to be elite. They are never going to be able to create space in the running game against good defenses.
So, if a young high ceiling guy like Guyton is available, you take him. And if we need some guys for emergency depth, a transfer may be needed. But the solution to the problem is not going be the transfer portal. This should be obvious. If it takes 3 years to be able to play the position aggressively, then bringing guys in with only a year or two of eligibility left is not going to help.
THE SOLUTION?
There appears to me to be only two possibilities:
1. Dramatically improve recruiting, and take more players every year. For BB's approach to work, we must have enough "hits" to allow all OL players to sit for 3 years before starting. That means taking more than 4 commits a year (more like 7) and landing more of BB's top choices.
How does this happen? No idea, but it has to. I like hearing that BB is almost done going after small town kids. Hopefully this change will be more effective. There also needs to be a change in BB's approach with recruits, or he needs someone to help him. Maybe a second OL coach (yes, this would require losing another coach)?
2. Changing the scheme and requirements for the players. If stuck with 1st and 2nd year players starting, we have to increase the hit rate and reduce the time it takes to develop. The only way to do that is to make it easier for players to run and reduce the amount of thinking required.
Zone blocking schemes are great for this. But there is another problem. If Gabe is to be believed, we do not coach zone blocking well at all. It isn't clear if Lebby or BB is to blame here, but we have not been able to zone block well for a long time. Zone blocking requires great coaching and experience with knowing how to execute the finer details. Gabe has been highly critical with the way our zone blocking is taught. For zone to be really effective, it must be specialized in. Unless Lebby and LR are to blame here, BB does not have the ability/knowledge/experience to coach zone blocking to the level needed.
I truly hope the answer is not to fire BB. I really like him and replacing him would be very difficult, particularly with someone who won't leave after a few years. But, if neither of the above are possible, then that may be the only option.
CONCLUSION
So there you go. Long, I know. But this is a discussion that needs to happen. And thus far, the discourse has been very unhelpful and far too simplistic in my opinion, on both sides.
The offense will only ever be as good as the OL play, particularly against the really good defenses. If we ever want to compete for titles, the OL must improve dramatically. Unfortunately, unlike the other positions, I just don't see anything to give me hope for significant improvement in the future.
But there's a big problem, and many don't want to acknowledge it. Our OL has really struggled in recent years, and we have enough data to know what the future holds unless something significant changes.
- Yes, it is true that BB usually turns out a decent to pretty good OL by the end of the year. Rarely has the OL been below average.
But, it is also true that our OL has not been SEC championship level (or even very close) since 2018. And even the great OLs of 2016-2018 didn't look too great in the playoffs.
It's also true that the SEC schedule doesn't allow the luxury of waiting till the back half of the schedule to figure the OL out.
- Yes, BB has had guys go to the NFL on the regular and be successful. NFL coaches love BB coached players, because they know how to play the position and are ready to play the pro game.
But, it's also true that this is of no help to OU. BB isn't here to prepare guys for the NFL, he's here to build OL that win college games. Sure, NFL success is great for recruiting...except that is hasn't been. At all. If it has, then BB's recruiting ability is even worse than we feared.
So, what's going on? Let me break down my thoughts as best I can:
NFL FACTORY
There's a hidden premise in most rebuttals in defense of BB, that NFL success means BB is a successful college OL coach. I think this false premise is harmful to the discourse and we need to acknowledge this.
In fact, this focus may in fact be a big part of the problem. Growing an OL player into an NFL player takes time. And it may be that NFL coaches love BB's guys because they've already made all their errors and struggles in college. There's a big learning curve, and OU struggles so that the NFL teams don't have to.
BB's way of coaching the OL is also likely a great filter for the NFL. Guys who can't make it under BB are unlikely to make it in the NFL. This is because it is harder to make it under BB than it is other places. We've also heard that BB's rough coaching and recruiting style turns off a lot of kids, which also helps filter out the kinds of kids who are less likely to make it big as a pro. That's all great if you are the NFL looking to take advantage of the end result. But it is not good for the college program that struggles with recruiting and has a low hit rate with players who make it to campus.
ASKING TOO MUCH
BB is very demanding of his players mentally. They can't just learn one position in one focused system, BB wants them to be able to know every position, know the intent behind it, and know how to block every scheme imaginable--most of which they will never even use in the zone-blocking heavy NFL.
I can appreciate this approach, but most kids can't do this, and it takes a lot of time for even the smartest players to get down. Contrast this to Art Briles' approach (gag me, I know) in which the best run blocking OL players are recruited and taught to perfect a simple blocking scheme so they can be very aggressive.
We've seen it time and again. Our OL are really aggressive in high school before OU and really aggressive in the NFL after they leave OU, but at OU that aggressiveness isn't there. They are always thinking too much. This is most apparent in run blocking, which is all about aggression. Even the best of our OLines mostly got guys in the right position, but few guys were able to actually get push against decent defenses. Gabe has been complaining about this for years, and I agree.
Their heads are spinning out there, they make mistakes, and many guys simply can't handle it mentally and never see the field.
But here's the thing: guys who play here long enough can sometimes get it down halfway through their last season. How many times have we seen a potentially great player struggle as a starter for 2 or 3 years, showing flashes here and there, but around the halfway point of their Sr year get it down and they end up a highly coveted draft pick? Again, that's great for the NFL, but unless we get lucky and all 5 guys happen to be veterans who have played at OU for 3 years, we aren't going to be winning a title.
This would all be great if guys spent 3 years as backups learning the position and started for a year or two after they were ready. Unfortunately, we cannot afford to do that. Why? Well...
NOT ENOUGH PLAYERS
OL is the hardest position, by far, to project in recruiting. The data makes that pretty clear. This fact has been used at times by people to defend BB's recruiting. But, while true, it does not excuse the terrible recruiting at OL.
First of all, it isn't like BB is getting the guys near the top of his list very often. I trust BB's list more than I trust any recruiting service. If he was getting a bunch of his top choices, I would be ecstatic. But he isn't. He misses on so many he ends up having to take projects, or he just stops recruiting altogether as there are no more prospects worth taking.
The more raw a player is, the longer it will take them in the system to learn it (if they ever do) and the higher risk they will be a bust. Taking a raw project or two a class is okay, provided you have enough in the boat that are much lower risk. But this is not been the case. He strikes out on so many guys he has to take the projects.
The fact that OL are so hard to project to college means you have to sign more every year to give you more bites at the apple. Yes, BB is able to get a guy or two every year that are pretty highly ranked, but they often turn out to be misses. That's the way it is at the OL position. You can't put your eggs in one or two baskets. You have to sign more guys! And the solution is not more projects, it means you need even more low risk commits so that you can afford to take a swing or two at a high risk project. And considering how much of a filter our program is, in large part to how mentally demanding it is, we will have an even lower hit rate than other programs, further increasing the need to maximize our bites at the apple.
The biggest problem I see is that we don't have enough talent at the OL to be able to keep guys in the oven for a few years before they are ready to start. And yes, some kids are gonna get restless and transfer out, but if the NFL success isn't enough to keep those guys around, then the current approach is not viable and must change. If we have no choice but to start 1st and 2nd year players, we need to change to an offense that 1st and 2nd year players can execute at a high level.
TRANSFERS ARE NOT THE ANSWER
BB has been forced to rely on transfers to have enough guys in the room, and this is a problem. We have not been able to get high quality transfers at the OL position. Our best transfers have either been high floor low ceiling guys like Rouse (which I'm all for taking for depth) or projects like Guyton. I'm all for taking guys like Guyton if they are young enough to have time to develop before being able to start. But most of the transfers we've been able to get are just not good enough to start in a high level OL.
Guys like Rouse and Metoyer are great bandaids in emergency situations and excellent for depth. But they are never going to be elite. They are never going to be able to create space in the running game against good defenses.
So, if a young high ceiling guy like Guyton is available, you take him. And if we need some guys for emergency depth, a transfer may be needed. But the solution to the problem is not going be the transfer portal. This should be obvious. If it takes 3 years to be able to play the position aggressively, then bringing guys in with only a year or two of eligibility left is not going to help.
THE SOLUTION?
There appears to me to be only two possibilities:
1. Dramatically improve recruiting, and take more players every year. For BB's approach to work, we must have enough "hits" to allow all OL players to sit for 3 years before starting. That means taking more than 4 commits a year (more like 7) and landing more of BB's top choices.
How does this happen? No idea, but it has to. I like hearing that BB is almost done going after small town kids. Hopefully this change will be more effective. There also needs to be a change in BB's approach with recruits, or he needs someone to help him. Maybe a second OL coach (yes, this would require losing another coach)?
2. Changing the scheme and requirements for the players. If stuck with 1st and 2nd year players starting, we have to increase the hit rate and reduce the time it takes to develop. The only way to do that is to make it easier for players to run and reduce the amount of thinking required.
Zone blocking schemes are great for this. But there is another problem. If Gabe is to be believed, we do not coach zone blocking well at all. It isn't clear if Lebby or BB is to blame here, but we have not been able to zone block well for a long time. Zone blocking requires great coaching and experience with knowing how to execute the finer details. Gabe has been highly critical with the way our zone blocking is taught. For zone to be really effective, it must be specialized in. Unless Lebby and LR are to blame here, BB does not have the ability/knowledge/experience to coach zone blocking to the level needed.
I truly hope the answer is not to fire BB. I really like him and replacing him would be very difficult, particularly with someone who won't leave after a few years. But, if neither of the above are possible, then that may be the only option.
CONCLUSION
So there you go. Long, I know. But this is a discussion that needs to happen. And thus far, the discourse has been very unhelpful and far too simplistic in my opinion, on both sides.
The offense will only ever be as good as the OL play, particularly against the really good defenses. If we ever want to compete for titles, the OL must improve dramatically. Unfortunately, unlike the other positions, I just don't see anything to give me hope for significant improvement in the future.
Last edited:
