The Ben Olson Enigma

by tliggett on Oct 1, 2007 12:21 AM PDT

I find Ben Olson, and all the commentary that surrounds him, confusing as hell. Here's a guy who at one time was the #1 HS QB recruit in the nation. So obviously at some point, somebody thought this guy could play. But a mission, a transfer, a year as Drew Olson's understudy, and an injury later, this guy just hasn't played a whole lot of football since HS.

I've written before that HS stats aren't always meaningful since we don't know what his competition was like back then. But let's go ahead and give this guy the benefit of the doubt and assume he's got some game - some game that we've only seen glimpses of at the D1 level so far. A lot has been said about some of the problems that Ben has had this year - and he has had problems. Some put it on Ben. Some put it on KD. But I think this most recent game against OSU sheds a little light on what the problem might be.

In the first half of the game, Ben looked pretty damned horrible. He did a lot of the frustrating things that rightfully drive us nuts - he looked confused in his reads, he held the ball too long, he stared down his primary receiver, and he didn't step up in the pocket.

But then in the second half, we saw a different Ben. We saw a Ben making reads and checking down. We saw a Ben hit recievers in stride on out patterns. We saw a Ben survey the field, step up in the pocket, and hit BB with a perfect strike on the skinny post for a 30 yd TD. In short, we saw a COMFORTABLE Ben.

I don't really don't know about what kind of coaching Ben gets during the week. I suspect, as others on this site do, that it ain't great. But I don't KNOW that because I'm not there.

What I DO know is that KD does NOTHING to get his quarterbacks comfortable early in a game. Instead, KD's vaunted run-run-pass-kick offense serves one purpose and one purpose only - it forces the QB to open the game with pressure throws on 3rd and long. And guess what, coach . . . that's not going to get your QB comfortable.

Seriously, let's think about this: we have discovered that Ben has problems under a heavy pass rush and he has problems when they drop 8 into coverage. But these things ONLY happen when the defense knows a throw is coming. So you know what that means, KD? Don't put your guy in a spot where he has to throw and everyone in the stadium knows he's going to throw! I know, it's crazy talk . . .

Since I want KD fired but I want UCLA to win football games even more than that, I feel obligated to offer up some suggestions:

Channel a little 1990s Dallas Cowboys passing offense. Give a quick 3-step drop and get the ball out right away to a guy on a slant, a hitch, or an out (I'm liking Dominique Johnson - he doesn't have the game yet but he's got the potential to be a good, physical reciever who can get himself between a DB and the ball on a quick pattern). That's a really nice rhythm throw. Do several of those, early in the game on 1st and 2nd down. Those will do a lot to get Ben comfortable and should help to get down the number of 3rd and longs.
Mix in a little play action pass. You like to run the ball, fine, but run more play action off it. That can help slow up the pass rush if they're blitzing and can hold the linebackers from dropping quickly into coverage if they're not.
Scrap the shotgun entirely, unless it's a definite passing down. Unless you're running the ever-popular spread-option offense, shotgun means pass and pass only. Sure, you might run out of the gun but probably not too effectively and teams aren't going to scheme for that. So keep your QB under center unless it's absolutely necessary so that the other team has to at least think about the run.

Damn, I liked those suggestions. Maybe I should send Dan Guerrero my resume. I mean, I've never coached at the college level. . . I've never even been an OC! So he might hire me . . .

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Some good points here.

I agree, Olson's been an enigma. Sometimes he looks good, sometimes he looks really bad--and you never really know what you are going to get from game to game.

KD has not helped Olson shine (no doubt about it), but I'll leave coaching out of this post since it is discussed at length elsewhere. But in my opinion, it's not all about the coaching anyway. The buck has to stop with the player at the end of the day, and for better or worse, Olson is the main player.

Olson is getting praise this week for a nice 4th quarter v. OSU. And it is deserving--touchdowns were scored, passes were completed, and confidence was on display. But there were also three quarters of misery (2 1/2 at least), for which Olson also deserves some heat. He did not look good in the first half, and he had zero swagger. OSU did implode after-all, and before that happened, we were surely headed for defeat.

In my opinion Olson needs confidence. The tools are there--the potential too--but where is the mindset to back it up? The mindset that every great QB possesses. I'm talking about the swagger to know you can get it done in crunch time, and the feeling that you are one play away from a touchdown at all times. Where is that? I guess you could say KD and his staff has sucked it out of him, and if you want to make that argument go ahead--it's probably true in part. But everyone, good players and bad, has to play under poor coaching at times. It's part of the game, and truly great players rise above it.

I hope the OSU game gave Olson the swagger he deserves to own--and if it did, we can expect some huge games down the stretch. But if it didn't, I don't know what will become of him.

Olson has to put the team on his back despite KD, no excuses. Is it asking a lot? Yes. Is it fair to Olson that he's played under KD? No. But that's life--plain and simple. Olson is, afterall, the starting quarterback at UCLA with a full-ride to boot, and therefore, in my opinion a "The Buck Stops Here" placard should be placed in his locker as a matter of course, and Olson should be forced to adopt the phrase as his mantra. It simply has to be his attitude.

Sure, maybe the offense is too complex, and as I said above, it's clear that KD isn't helping anyone succeed. But, and this is my point, any self respecting 3rd year quarterback at UCLA should be angry to hear people make excuses on his behalf, especially "the-offense-is-to-complex" excuse. I simply don't want a QB who isn't angry to hear that. Losers and maybe first year quarterbacks blame complexity, winners and people with experience do not. Bottom line.

I've never heard Olson blame complexity (which is good), and I don't know if he gets angry hearing people make excuses for him. But he should. He should be angry, and he needs to play like it. At the end of the day, a quarterback's job is to rise above the adversity, and play well when his team needs it regardless of his situation. Olson has it in him, and if he can somehow get this team over the bubble this week and next--I'll call him great. Great not for his pure stats, but rather, Great because he was able to succeed under KD.

Can a legend be born for overcoming a dismal coach? I think YES, and I'm asking Olson to be that guy. No, I'm expecting him to be that guy, because this is UCLA, and it's what we deserve. Greatness.

Play angry Ben. Play angry and don't forget to slide that chip into your shoulder pads.

by rfirpo on Oct 1, 2007 9:39 AM PDT reply actions

2 things

In response to rfirpo, I think that sometimes a special player can overcome bad coaching. Vince Young did a good job of that with who many Texas fans consider to be a bad offensive coordinator. Now is Ben Olson the type of talent who can make those decisions for himself as to when to listen to the coach and when to go on his own? That remains to be seen.
I thought that one of the reasons for playing in the shotgun is that it also gives you a little more time from the pass rush. If Ben Olson is not the most mobile of QBs, it seems that maybe he might need a little more time to find open receivers, so scrapping the shotgun altogether might not be wise. But I think the other points are valid.

As I believe there is a moratorium on this site on saying negative things about players, I will just say that if Ben Olson plays the way he did during the 4th quarter, then UCLA has a MUCH better chance of winning. Also, whether it was the ineptitude of OSU's offense or the play of UCLA's defense (I like to think it was a combination of the two) that basically held OSU to 7 offensive points, I would like to see that a lot more as well, as it might also make Olson more comfortable, not having to come back from a big deficit.

GO BRUINS. HOOK 'EM HORNS.

by uclawarren on Oct 1, 2007 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions

Confidence is important, BUT

It's tough to gain confidence if your coaches are putting you in position to fail every single game. He needs some form of success before he can believe in himself.

Keep Dorrell ~ Mediocrity Rules.

by SuperBruinMan on Oct 1, 2007 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions

2 more things...

(1)If the OL stops playing like s** and gives BO more than 2 seconds to throw the ball then maybe we can have a better assessment of his talent.

(2)JN and KD need to be more aggressive on the road with their playcalling. Why only call the trick plays at home at the Rose Bowl and play not to lose on the road?

**PC throws for 147 1 TD and 1 INT against Washington at home with better playcalling and BO throws for 2 TD and 1 INT on the road with horrible playcalling and people are still down on Ben asking for Pat? WTF?

by eoj703 on Oct 1, 2007 2:03 PM PDT reply actions

Good point

I am a (moderate) Pat Cowan fan, but you make some very good points here. I still say Ben Olson has not been given the chance to shine.

Our playcalling in the second half against Washington was much improved. Our playcalling against OSU sucked. It's almost like the Dorrell/Norvell Two-Headed Monster retreats back into its shell, way too often, when it should be letting the guys play.

Hey, we've been told the playbook has 5 bazillion plays in it. How about we try more than 3 of them?

by Barnes2JJ on Oct 1, 2007 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Madden

This game kind of reminded me of when I play Madden. I have about 4 different plays that I like to run (which might explain why I suck at Madden), but because I know those and I am comfortable with them, I run those almost exclusively. It seemed like there wasn't much of a variance from run up the middle, toss back to the RB (usually on 3rd down!), or a screen pass (and whatever the other pass play is that fails most of the time).

GO BRUINS. HOOK 'EM HORNS.

by uclawarren on Oct 1, 2007 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions

You forgot

Our 3rd and 9 play call where we go to the shotgun with 4 wide and 3 of the 4 recievers run 8 yard routes.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Oct 1, 2007 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions

I think...

it's because our OL can only protect up to 8 yard routes before Ben gets bodyslammed.

by eoj703 on Oct 1, 2007 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Are you implying that you have been a coach

at some level, even Pee Wee football. If you have then you have more head coaching experience than KD before he took the job. I'd a hired you over Dorrell. You've already demonstrated a better understanding of football in one post than Dorrell has in five years at the helm

by Dorrellian on Oct 1, 2007 10:54 PM PDT reply actions

Ben has limitations

which the offense has not adapted to. He is not particularly good at throwing the short ball. His footwork is not great, he has a slow delivery, and tends to not be great at going through progressions.

The offense should be tailored to fit his strengths, which is the long ball, and being a pocket passer. He would be more successful if we ran more play action, threw the ball down the field more, and gave him a more simplified offense with common progressions to read so he would be comfortable in them.

I think BO is a limited talent. He can be more successful with better coaching, but I don't think he is as talented on this level as he was in HS.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Oct 2, 2007 1:22 PM PDT reply actions

Too early to tell

As shown previously, Olson's first 8 games compare well statistically to Aikman, McNown and Carson Palmer. He is basically still a freshman, having played all of 9 games. He may have matured as a man but not as a football player yet. I don't think he is a limited talent at all. It is ridiculous to say he can't make short passes when he can throw accurate 50 yard bombs. The short passes are more about timing and that only comes with experience. Which is why guys like Montana, Young, Garcia, etc. do well in the WCO at late stages of their career.

by tasser10 on Oct 2, 2007 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions

I think a better comparison

would be to QBs who had their first start later in their careers, like Booty, or Lienert, than it would those who started straight out of high school. I think comparing to other first year qbs who are older would be a better metric, but i don't have that data. Not sure why Dohn didn't compile it.

I see a lot of problems with Olson's footwork when he tries to throw the ball flat. When he can get under it and get it high in the air with some arc, his motion is much better.

I think the timing plays into it, but I don't think his mechanics are particularly good on the short toss.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Oct 2, 2007 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Mechanics

He doesn't have the prettiest throwing motion, that's for sure. Anyway, there's no real comparison that's possible, since they all had different running backs, different receivers and a different OL. It's like when people try to guess who would win between the '76 Steelers and the '94 49ers. Dumb.

by tasser10 on Oct 4, 2007 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions