IMHO was he believed that institutions can often get enamored of a particular theory or doctrine which then tends to morph into dogma. He read widely and thought he better saw the "big picture" of historical military events and their application to current military thought.

Wilf is sort of right when he points out that Boyd offered no original or great theory. His Energy-Maneuverability theory was applied to fighter aircraft development, particularly the F-15 and 16. I do feel much of Boyd's work is insightful and useful, just not enough to place him on some sort of pedestal.

I agree with Cavguy, just going through Boyd's briefings can be confusing since they are absent the "voice over" he provided (they are not stand alone works).

I think through his "marathon" briefings Boyd merely tried to get folks to think more holistically about the lessons that can be gleaned from past conflicts, and that there were certain parallels to be found. Plus, the briefing was constantly being updated right up to Boyd's death, since he felt that nothing was static and that lessons could be constantly drawn.

As to the deification of him, I like to think Boyd would be the first to raise the BS flag on that...