|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311 |
Diam: You may be a ND homer, but I wouldn't say you're arrogant. 
Ammo: Regarding Shaffer, he may not be as athletic as say, a Joe Thomas, but he did block pretty well for Michael Vick who was always on the move. So I gotta think he'll fare pretty well in a scheme that requires a lot of movement and mobility.
My fear is that this sounds like a very complex scheme that only offenses who have a lot of chemistry and athleticism can perfect. And we may be that offense someday, but it's going to take a lot of practice and time before we get this down. Do we have that kind of time?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Just going to chime in here with some of your pass protection questions... The Steelers, under LeBeau, have always shown a lot of overload blitz packages. If you see the Steelers-Browns Thursday night game from last year, they decide to attack a side of the OL. One play in particular, the Steelers dropped Polamalu into the box on the weakside (odd from him since he usually is on the strong side), and blitzed him and Porter on a wide play, where basically Shaffer had to pick a guy and trust the back. The Steelers, with all of their fancy zone blitz's, usually attempt to overload a side (usually the weak), and hope someone busts through. I think you'll see the Browns showing more balanced formations in an attempt to balance this out (sort of like the two TE sets under Arians, but you know, better), and slide to the designated side. Baltimore on the other hand is a way bigger problem. Scheme wise they are next to impossible to predict their blitz, but it might help that Adalius Thomas is gone now. With Dan Cody stepping into that role, I would expect them to scale back a lot on the complexity. The Ravens will probably utilize Bart Scott more as a blitzer this year on passing downs, which sucks, because he owns the Browns. And after re-reading your post I realize I didn't exactly answer your question. Whoops 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
And after re-reading your post I realize I didn't exactly answer your question. Whoops
Good info none the less. I'll be keeping an eye on those formations this year. Thanks! 
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg) "I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"well appearantly tabber thinnks i'm a real idiot ."
No way...I don't think anyones an idiot - especially someone who wants to learn - The guys I think are idiots are the ones who coach my sons in HS ball here in NY and they explain and teach blocking as...GET HIM! KNOCK HIM ON HIS ASS!!! - and I'm not kidding. 
Racer... "but what if the tackle shoots the gap between the center and guard...guess it would be the 1 gap...does the tackle then try to get to the will linebacker? or does the guard just let the tackle go and then go to the will? (in other words delay him long enough to be out of the play)"
The DT must cross the face of the LG to shoot the gap...the LG should be able to hold the DT from shooting the gap...the LT can still double down on the DT even if he is just getting a push by the backSIDE (not back) --- this will enable the LG to control the DT enough to beable to achieve the proper leverage...see Vers' post about the LG getting his face across the body of the DT and his feet (bottom base should follow) ergo double team. Once the LG has the leverage and the proper positioning with his base the LT can now slide off the BackSIDE of the DT and go to the 2nd tier. It of course will be the LT as I'm sure Will's gap responsibility would be on the backside since the DT is shooting the other gap.
Defense against the Zone blocking scheme....Simple terms not in detail just concept. I would attack the LOS with more than my DL to put more on that 1st tier and muck stuff up...of course for every LB that comes up to attack the LOS a Safety...usually the SS fills in for the 2nd tier gap responsibility.
That is why when you watch games...not so sure how easily seen in the NFL but very easily seen on the college level...When you got LBs faking the blitz how do you know when they are going to blitz...look at the safeties as they cheat up to take the slot of the blitzing LB - pre snap. Sometimes its just a step but thats enough to tell you that the LB he's stepping to is blitzing.
JMHO and again keeping it simple...if any depth is needed to add please ask.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"Do we simulate their styles and run those types of plays in practice, and does that mean our D needs to be implementing more complex defensive schemes"
Actually thats the beauty and simplicity of the Zone Blocking scheme...
unless a flood blitz is occuring...(more than one defender attacking the same GAP)
DT...DE...LB...SS for everyone that is attacking the GAP the other who normally would be would be attacking another gap or dropping back to the others responsibility (Zone Blitz) - For Zone blocking there is no MAN Responsibility involved...more so AREA So if a play is drawn up for the double to be the Strongside DE...and a LB is blitzing that GAP and the DE is looping to take responsibility of the LB's area/gap...its simple now we would Double the blitzing LB and slide off the double to take care of the 2nd tier...now manned by the DE.
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064 |
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 06/11/07 08:27 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
These diagrams are a little cheesy considering how good the text is. I'll say a few words about each only for those who don't understand them. If you already get the diagrams, you can skip this post.
1st diagram: This is probably the best one.
---Notice the two double teams w/the guards and tackles. In each case, they have to read the LBer to their side to see who comes off the initial double team to get the LBer.
---The FB isn't a lead blocker on this particular play. Hell, it looks like he is just a decoy to me, because the backside DE isn't going to make the tackle anyway.
---It annoys me that he didn't draw in what the TE is doing. He should block toward the inside shoulder of the Sam, turning him to the outside.
---Notice that the RB has 3 holes he can choose from. Very nice.
2nd Diagram: We already discussed this one.
3rd Diagram: This is man/drive/base blocking.
---It shows how a slanting DE can really blow up a running play. He beats the OT off the snap because he is angling toward the inside. I call this pinching. He then hits the OG, whose "predetermined" man was the LBer.
---And despite what some people may want to believe, this is precisely why zone blocking is superior to drive blocking.
4th Diagram:
---Just shows the different cutback lanes and the flexibility of zone blocking.
---It is important that the RB take a hard angle for the OTs inside leg on this play. If you go back to the play I described for Diam, you'll see that this play is similar in nature. Anyone remember who the back's key is? By key, I mean.......telling him which way to cut.
Hey guys.........been a great thread. But, I'm still waiting for the McKinney scouting report and how the zone teams fare in short yardage and/or goal line situations. Many of you are good at researching stuff like that. It would help the thread if you want to participate. Thanks.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Cheesy..oh well... If I could draw a diagram up I would but I went with what this guy had.. I did encounter this about the SB and it may or may not shed any more to this topic or your last comment.. http://www.footballforecasters.com/2006/picks-wk21.htmlThe Bears are a more conventional offense; they have passed more this season than in the past but they are still a run first team. They can, and will, take shots down the field, and that has worked well for them within the context of their normal game plan. Still the team wants to establish a power running game particularly against the smaller Colts defensive linemen. Against the Saints they ran Benson early, he is the better contact runner and more punishing than Jones, that might be their plan again. Both offensive lines are quite good though in different ways. The Bears tend to drive block particularly between the tackles and push opponents off the ball; they are somewhat less effective when pulling and trapping. They can have trouble with speed rushers on the edge; Jason Taylor was particularly a problem when they played Miami so they ought to be planning for Freeney. The Colts on the other hand are a very good pass blocking line and are at their best zone blocking for the stretch play, they are not particularly good drive blocking for short yardage.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
I wasn't knocking you for them being cheesy, LOL. I'm glad you posted them. I just thought a guy like Davie would have better diagrams. Like I said earlier, I heard him speak before and he is pretty good.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
No I said that because I'm a artist and drawing is one of my fortes'..so when something like that doesn't show everything I want it leaves a gap.
What did you think of the article about the Bears vs Colts?
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 06/11/07 09:23 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
No, I don't feel that is true at all. I think gap blocking, which I briefly described earlier is much more effective than drive blocking. The key is to get your head across the defender, putting your face mask right into his opposite armpit, your lead arm is up in his pads and your back arm is like a chicken wing that is high around the defenders shoulder pads. You can really turn a guy and drive him out of the play w/this technique.
i didn't realize that....i played rg in high school, and i always thought it was easier to block when the guy was over you than when he was off to side in the gap...of course i sucked  but i don't remember anybody teaching me what you just posted either....
Quote:
One other note: Notice where it says "eyes on LBer" in the diagram. This is what I was referring to earlier when I asked the question about what Marshal said and then when I tried explaining it to mac later. It is imperative that the guys who are part of the double teams keep their eyes on the LBer to their side. That guy has to be blocked, because if he isn't.........we aren't gaining any yards. And it is also important that both guys involved in the double team know each other, because if you both release, the d-lineman will be left all alone. Ever see where a defensive lineman is left all alone and rushes in to kill the RB? That's why.......LOL.
Now.........can you see why I say you can do a lot WITHOUT pads? That's all stuff that can be done w/bags, or other guys in your offensive line drills.
i can see what your saying...imo this scheme involves more work initially, but it then gives the guy who has the best shot at making a block on the lb the ability to slide off, where as man blocking might have a guy with bad position having to try and get to a linebacker...
in looking at the scheme in general i'm starting to see what you were saying initially about movement...
its gonna be 600 pounds vs. 300 pounds initally on a double team...the oline should get movement in whatever direction they choose...
this imo would give us 2-3 yards on a crappy run if they push the tackle backwards...it prevents a stalemate at the los...
now if you factor in the linebackers the whole thing could change....if the linebackers charge the hole, you are lessening the time for the double team, and stopping the vertical/horizontal movement....the double team would have to get broken off early for the backer to be blocked...i guess this is why they invented the run blitz
of course if a team did that all day your te would be open across the middle with just a safety to stop him...play action would work well too....
in looking at this diagram this is another strength of this blocking scheme...it looks to me that if one hole is filled the other may be open...(meaning that if the d stunts toward the b,c gaps, the a gap is open) or vis-a-versa....if all that fails then the cutback lane might be open....
i'm assuming from the pick that the weakside guard and tackle will cutblock the tackle and end, (ala denver) or simply ride them wide out of the play vs a 4-3....or double the de, and slide off to the backer vs. the 3-4
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
The DT must cross the face of the LG to shoot the gap...the LG should be able to hold the DT from shooting the gap...the LT can still double down on the DT even if he is just getting a push by the backSIDE (not back) --- this will enable the LG to control the DT enough to beable to achieve the proper leverage...see Vers' post about the LG getting his face across the body of the DT and his feet (bottom base should follow) ergo double team. Once the LG has the leverage and the proper positioning with his base the LT can now slide off the BackSIDE of the DT and go to the 2nd tier. It of course will be the LT as I'm sure Will's gap responsibility would be on the backside since the DT is shooting the other gap.
so in essence you are taking away the d's ablility to shoot a gap and get penetration...and steering him to one of your linemen....with his momentum lost its easier to control him...i guess now that i think about it, if a guy is right over you he can go 2 ways....wheras if he's in the gap thats probably right where his going, unless they stunt..
Quote:
Defense against the Zone blocking scheme....Simple terms not in detail just concept. I would attack the LOS with more than my DL to put more on that 1st tier and muck stuff up...of course for every LB that comes up to attack the LOS a Safety...usually the SS fills in for the 2nd tier gap responsibility.
thats exactly what i was thinking with the backers....if they shoot gaps right on the snap, then it essentially becomes man blocking again, as you lose the time to double team...
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Quote:
i didn't realize that....i played rg in high school, and i always thought it was easier to block when the guy was over you than when he was off to side in the gap...of course i sucked but i don't remember anybody teaching me what you just posted either....
I didn't say gap blocking was easier......LOL. Sorry if I didn't communicate that properly. It's not easier....it is more effective. It was the key to our run blocking. The cool thing is a lot of times the DT and DE didn't know which direction it was coming from. We used to trap a lot too. We would also pull. We would do multiple things on any given play. You could see on the film that the defensive linemen were looking for guys coming at them, which obviously made them react much slower to a play. We had one play where the TE would drive block the DE and our C would trap all the way to that DE. LMAO.......it was great and our centers would always start drooling when we ran that play. They would get a lot of steam built up and since the DE was already engaged and not expecting the C to be coming after him........well.......you get the idea. 
Btw: I like how you are analyzing the information and learning from this. It's cool to see people who want to learn. Brings a smile to my face.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Thanks tab, for the info above...
Vers, tab, whom ever...
Would you mind explaining blocking assignments against "8 in the box" as well as CB & safety blitzes?
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
If they put 8 in the box we are going to want to throw it, right? Zone blocking is a superior scheme against such a front and it is also superior if teams run either a corner blitz or if they bring a safety and the WLBer at the same time. Hell, it is better against any kind of blitz.
The reason is because because you have a predetermined man in man blocking, where as Zone protection calls for you to cover an area. Thus, man blocking schemes are overwhelmed if they are outnumbered. In zone blocking you just protect your area and don't have to stray too far.
Now, that's not to say that it is foolproof because it is not. But once again....think back to why zone blocking was created. It was created to nullify teams that move around a lot and give you a lot of different looks. And it was also created because man or drive blocking schemes were getting killed by those types of defenses.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
First things first...Vers - regarding the FB in that one diagram (the only one depicting the FB) the speed of the offside DE especially on that side - guys like Freeney of the Colts or in our case Wimbley the OLB could very well get to the RB as in most cases he must be patient and wait for the hole to develop. I think the FB is definately well used there.
And Cal Dawg - got to run as I got a call while typing the above. But Blitzing...it doesn't matter as we are Zone Blocking - if the blitzer is in the zone that is who we take...if the Zone is flooded well that is what I was talking about in defeating the Zone Blocking scheme...obviously the double team would have to be nixed as one would have to take on the Blitzer and the other deal with the DE or DT individually.
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 602
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 602 |
Vers, Great post, this is why I originaly came to this board several yrs back (well, the other original board ). I have a question for you and any of the posters in this thread that have gave some knowledgable O-line knowledge. What happens when the defense "overloads" one side of the line in Zone blocking? Isn't that a favorite trick of both B-more and Pittsburgh. I know Man blocking doesn't fair to well against it, but how would you counter-act it in a zone scheme? Does this solely depend on the QB and/or the center recognizing the blitz pre-snap and checking to a RB or TE to shift and block to that side or shifting to a quick pass to that side?
Born and breed with OSU, App. State alumni, but bleed orange and brown.
Go ARMY......Beat Navy!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Quote:
First things first...Vers - regarding the FB in that one diagram (the only one depicting the FB) the speed of the offside DE especially on that side - guys like Freeney of the Colts or in our case Wimbley the OLB could very well get to the RB as in most cases he must be patient and wait for the hole to develop. I think the FB is definately well used there.
Could be, but understand Davie is talking about the college game.
The reason I said decoy, and it was a poor choice of words, is that I think they send the FB that way to get the defensive line and Mike moving that way, which if you look at how they want to block it, will make it easier to turn the key defenders away from the play.
I still think that is the primary purpose of sending the FB in that direction rather than blocking a quick DE, but I could be wrong.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
I understand that the attributes for one are desirable in both as the more of those attributes U bring to the table the better blocker your going to be no matter what the system .. but some traits are MORE important and NEEDED for one as opposed to the other ... comparing Faine and nate Newton would be a good example ... Faine would never be a good drive blocker cause hes to light and Newton would never be a good zone blocker cause hes not "atheletic" or smart enough to do whats needed ... Quote:
But having a deficiency in either physical attributes is not good cause honestly in this NFL you want flexibility...you want to be able to do both. In Goal line you want to have the ability for your OL to Drive Block...getting to the Red Zone you would want the ability for your OL to Zone Block.
that brings up a good question ... if your a zone blocking team how often are u a zone blocking team ... do u zone block 100% of the time?? do u use drive blocking in short yardage situations??? how often does Denver zone block vs drive block?? do they ever drive block??
another question ... is zone blocking good on 4th and 1/2 yard?? 4th and 1 yard ... 4th and 2??? I would think that drive blocking is MUCH BETTER in those situations .... so does a team like Denver thats built solely for zone blocking use it in those situations .. or do they take their best drive blocking side and run that way??
Quote:
Two part question here.
RB - actually I think the lateral gaps made are more visible and obvious in a Zone blocking scheme that a RB doesn't have to have that great intangible to separate them...and why I think almost any RB is successful in the Denver O...then struggle when they simply don't have the skills to make it everywhere.
In drive blocking scheme there are assigned holes and you can have the vision and hit them hard and fast but you have to have the vision to see it clogged and so that you slide to the hole which isn't always exact.
I think in Zone Blocking Patience is the virtue most necessary...the running lanes are obvious - patience is needed to let them develop.
good point .. that all makes sense ... so patience is more important than great vision in zone blocking ... i beilieve i understand that ...
ya .. this helped conceptually ... thanks bro ... i'm a detail kind of guy and want to know the BIG PIC and not just the little snippets so thats why i asked ...
thanks bro ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
Well, your assumptions certainly prove you are not ignorant about the topic.
*LOL* ... all i did was reguritate what U and BigC and tabber and Mour said .. I just read and learned and them summed up to make sure I was learning correctly .. its not like i made the list up on my own .. *L*
i really know nothing about this stuff .. well now i know a WEE WEE WEE BIT ....
and for everyone that thinks I think I know it all ... guess this is quite a shocker .. huh??? *LOL* ..
Quote:
Yes, w/out a doubt. In fact, that is the strength of zone blocking.
Could u tell me one more time why zone blocking was originated again ... all i have so far is to combat teams doing alot of moving suck as stunting and slanting and blitzing .. is that it or is there more???
and what are its other strengths??? and what are its weaknesses ... sorry if i'm making u repeat but my memory stinks at times and its been 3 or 4 days since i read the first few pages ... sorry bro ..
Quote:
I would say so. Great vision is pretty much a requisite for all good backs and in any system, but certainly that vision will lead to longer runs in a zone blocking scheme.
so it would seem to me that cutback ability and a backs ability to "stop and go" and get back to full speed are of the utmost importance in zone blocking???
any clue if detriot utilized zone blocking when Sanders was there ... he seems like he would have been a great zone blocking back ... well i guess when they actually blocked for him did they utilize zone blocking .. *L*
Quote:
The second part of your question is sometimes true. But, the backside doesn't seal off on every play. They seal off more on running plays that go wide, boots, roll outs, and in some other passing plays. Many times, the backside guys go to the second level.
OK .. now i'm confused .. maybe u clear it up for me later ... if u do I'll just mention it down there .. if not i'll be back here .. *LOL* ..
OK . u didnt clear it up for me here ... let me go see your other post and if u don't clear it up then I'll be back .. *L* ....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
I wish I could diagram this for you.
Ya me to .. if we ever meet up again U need to "borrow" one of those majic boards from school so U can teach me stuff ...
Quote:
LT: Area to the right, leave DE unblocked and go after the Will, again attacking the inside shoulder, turning him away from the play.
this is where Joe is going to excel in yours and Mours eyes???
thats good .. excelling is a word we havent been able to use when talking about our OLman in a LONG LONG TIME ... *L* ... its like when DQ and the word INSTINCTS were used with a LBer on our team ... just sumptin we been very short of around here for a long long time ..
its EXCITING to say the least .. *L* ..
Quote:
FB: This can change, but in this case, he is going through the 0 hole and blocks the first man that crosses his face. Most times it is the Mike or a hard-charging SS who has sniffed out the run.
now thats interesting .. why is he going through a different hole than the RB?? is it cause hes more of a back side sealer or because it just gets him downfield quicker???
OK good stuff .. now i have a much better CONCEPTUALAZATION of the basic blocking assignments on this particular play .. let me just sum up quickly ....
Rip through the 4 hole ....
C .... seals ML by going to his left shoulder ..
RG .... LDT getting to his outside shoulder and "sealing" him the RG's left ...
RT .... LDE initialy pushes him to the RT's right .. then if the Sam is doing his job correctly goes and seals him off from filling the hole ...
TE .... LDE "drive" blocks him and then stays with him and pancakes his ass .. 
so the "initial" hole is created by the RG/RT and TE ... with the C and RT responsible for the LBer's not filling the hole and getting the RB through to the secondary if everything goes as planned ...
LG .... RDT seals him to the LG's left keeping him from getting down the line to muck things up ..
LT .... gets to 2nd level and seals Will from getting over ..
and these two blockes create the cutback lane that hopefully will open up if the MLber or Sam beats there blocks and fills the "initial" hole??? ...
now .... if the LDT takes an angle to the RG's right and so the RG cant get to his oustide shoulder like we need him to .. the RG would then just block down on him and the RB would have to read it and go through the 2 hole and if the C/LG and LT do their jobs that would open things up for him there???
then the FB going through the 0 hole would be real good .. *LOL* ..
I like to sum things up as u can tell .. its the best way i know how to make sure i'm actually understanding what yur trying to say .. it gets to be a pain in the ass .. but it really helps avoid confusion ...
OK .. now i wanna take a shot at it ... Im gonna run the same play against a 3-4 .... PLEASE CORRECT WHEN WRONG .. i dont wanna put out bad info .. so folks dont take this as anymore than a very uneducated guess on my part .. this isnt the hes prolly 99% right here that i usually put out ..
so were going rip through the 4 hole ....
hmmmm .. this is gonne be tougher than i thought ... so many options .. ok think man think ...
C .... seals the NT by gettting to the NT's lefts shoulder and sealing him from going left ..
RG .... i want him to help the C but dont think thats possible .. he best take right off for the SIL (strong inside linebacker) ... and he has to attack him and he will have no angle to get to his outside shoulder so it would make sense he just goes to his inside shoulder and seals him off that way .. but that would seem to put him right in the hole ... soi i guess he needs to push him out ... hmmm .. maybe i should have went through the 2 hole ..*L* ..
RT .... LDE and does the same block u said he did in the previous play .. and then depending on where the SOL (strong outside LBer) either stays with the LDE or goes and seal the SOL ... this is more than likely ..
TE - mushes the LDE as above ...
that creates the initial hole ....
LG goes and seals the WIL (weak inside LBer) by getting to the WIL left shoulder and not letting him through ...
LT goes and takes care of the WOL by getting to his left shoulder and not letting him through ...
I would ASSume the RDE goes unblocked again????
then the FB goes through the 0 or maybe 2 hole this time to mush first guy in his face ... the reason i may move him to the 2 hole as conceptually the toughest blocks we have are the RG getting the SIL and the fact the C is trying to control the NT all by his lonesome and that will more than likely clog up the 0 hole bigtime if the C can block him correctly .. theres no lane at 0 for the FB to run through ...
the wr's blocks pretty much stay the same as the CBer's and Safeties are in "approximately" the same vicinity as they were in the 4-3 ..
OK ... theres my try ... now go unfix all the problems I just created with all my misinformation ... *LOL* ....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Quote:
I wish I could diagram this for you.
Ya me to .. if we ever meet up again U need to "borrow" one of those majic boards from school so U can teach me stuff ...
I'm a visual learner, so I wish you guys would just come over to my house and show me while the game is on. Of course, we'd all get too drunk and I'd never learn a damn thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Could u tell me one more time why zone blocking was originated again ... all i have so far is to combat teams doing alot of moving suck as stunting and slanting and blitzing .. is that it or is there more???
From what I remember that is why Vers said it was originated. For counter defenses where the DL run at angles from the line of scrimmage. Now, I haven't studied very hard yet because I haven't had time to sit down and read post by post, but that's what I recall.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
thats why i asked Vers ... so we would'nt have to go reread all the posts .. *L* ... now don't u have some baking to do????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Well, I can cook, but I can't bake worth a damn.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
If they put 8 in the box we are going to want to throw it, right? Zone blocking is a superior scheme against such a front and it is also superior if teams run either a corner blitz or if they bring a safety and the WLBer at the same time. Hell, it is better against any kind of blitz.
Thanks Vers, tab... would you mind touching on the role of the RB in this situation, how it's determined where he lines up and how he knows which man is his, (or what zone?)
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
that brings up a good question ... if your a zone blocking team how often are u a zone blocking team ... do u zone block 100% of the time?? do u use drive blocking in short yardage situations??? how often does Denver zone block vs drive block?? do they ever drive block??
No , I doubt if any team does it 100% , but the BRONCOS from what I just read from a few blogs use this almost exclusively.
I think they use the scheme all the time whereas other teams may use a mix.
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 06/12/07 02:53 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
hey diam...i would think on short yardage stuff that its not zone blocking but straight up man blocking.....
with the zone, you are blocking an area....the lb might drop into coverage, or try to fill the hole....
in short yardage, he's gonna be right at the line of scrimmage....if he's right over say a guard, then the guard can't double the d tackle, he's gotta just drive the linebacker out of the hole...
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Quote:
What happens when the defense "overloads" one side of the line in Zone blocking? Isn't that a favorite trick of both B-more and Pittsburgh. I know Man blocking doesn't fair to well against it, but how would you counter-act it in a zone scheme?
As you stated, this type of defense really gives drive blocking teams a hard time. Zone blocking teams fare better because they are blocking an area and will get the first man who crosses their face.
Quote:
Does this solely depend on the QB and/or the center recognizing the blitz pre-snap and checking to a RB or TE to shift and block to that side or shifting to a quick pass to that side?
Not solely, but obviously, it is a big part of the success or lack of in any play. I'll do a QB thread later.
Remember this guys. There are no perfect plays or schemes on offense. A defense can stop any play. Likewise, there is no defense that can shut down any offense. Coaches don't design plays, schemes, and packages to fail. *L*
Execution is always key. The point of this thread was simply a starting point for one aspect of football for people who want to learn more about it. With that said, I do think zone blocking is far superior to drive blocking.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Denver stills runs the zone on the goal line, but they cut block more. So you'll see their OL going low on the snap, hoping to guys out that legs (hoping to push them to the backside of the formation away from the flow of the ball).
The biggest reason that Denver's version of the zone is because Gibbs put the cut blocks in there, and it's a huge part of their goal-line offense. It's not like they have any better linemen than other zone teams, they just play dirtier. Same thing when Gibbs went to Atlanta...the holes that Dunn had were so massive Pia Sangapuletele (I butchered the spelling, but a classic Brown) could have run for 1000 behind 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
I PMed BigC to answer your questions about particular teams and how much they use zone blocking and drive blocking. I would be making up if I tried answering that. Too hard for me to tell on TV. And I don't like making things up. I will come back and answer your technical questions later. I will tell you that as I already mentioned, I believe zone blocking became popular to combat defenses that angle/slant a lot, and defenses that rely on a lot of movement. Zone blocking helps negate that movement because you aren't "chasing" your man. I also think that they found zone blocking creates more movement at the LOS than drive blocking does. There could be other reasons, but I don't know the absolute answer. And I am going to take a guess on whether or not zone blocking teams revert to drive blocking in short yardage situations. I say......No. We would mix the two, but I found our short yardage plays worked better when we utilized zone blocking. You have less of a chance of being stood up by a defensive lineman in zone blocking than you do w/drive blocking. Now, I don't know if that is the case for sure or not in the NFL, but I am guessing it's the same. I'll be looking forward to hearing from BigC if he chooses to respond. Alright....I'll answer one more before I go: Quote:
and what are its other strengths??? and what are its weaknesses ... sorry if i'm making u repeat but my memory stinks at times and its been 3 or 4 days since i read the first few pages ... sorry bro ..
Other strengths would include
---superior blocking at the second level.
---more flexibility in formations, motion, and audibles. [this is big]
---lack of being burned by blitzes and overloads.
---more options for your RB.
---That is in addition to movement at the LOS and negating defenses that move a lot.
Weaknesses:
---if you aren't technically sound, you will struggle in a zone blocking scheme.
---it is a must that the offensive linemen work cohesively. As I said earlier, that is the working definition of cohesion amongst an offensive line. People took that phrase and turned it into something different.
---dumb, plodding offensive linemen don't do well in this scheme. *L*
I'll be back later, oh Humble One.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
One other thing.............I am still waiting for someone to post how zone blocking teams like Indy, Denver, etc fare in short yardage situations. I know someone can find that info. Some of you guys are really good at researching quickly.
I think it is important, because it would eliminate a lot of the drive blocking questions at the goal line type questions. Well.......I am assuming that those teams fare well in short yardage situations, so perhaps it wouldn't clear it up. *L*
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
I don't have the info in front of me, but that would take some time. Indy's goalline offense focuses more on passing the ball and play action. They didn't trust Rhodes and Addai to punch it in as much this year because neither are very powerful runners. The allowed Edge the chance to do it when he was the feature back.
Denver had a fairly bad goalline offense this year, I believe. Don't quote me on it, but I don't see to remember them being special.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Indi STUNK at goal line plays when they ran Edge .. I had him on my fantasy team 3 years ago and was PI$$ED at how few carries he got inside the 2 and was FUMING cause when he got them he HARDLY EVER SCORED ... them one of my best friends had him the year after and I warned him about that .. and my bud was PI$$ED by the end of the season also .. *L* ..
and remember they had GOAL LINE DEBACLES against NE twice in HUGE SITUATIONS in different years ... could'nt get a yard either time on 3 or 4 carries from the 1 .....
and Denver runs a TON OF PLAY ACTION down there ... although two or three years ago Mike Anderson was VERY GOOD inside the two ... had him in fantasy also .. *L* .. but in general over the last 4 or 5 years they've not been very good at it .. lots of play action and QB rollouts ...
now to be fair ... they havent had any real power backs other than Anderson ... all the others have been "smaller speed" type backs other than Rube ...
and Vers with my limited knowledge i would say that drive blocking has to be MUCH BETTER than zone blocking in short yardage ... u said it yourelf in the begging (I believe it was U anyhow) .. the 3 yards and a cloud of dust typifies a drive blocking scheme more than a zone blocking scheme ..
PLUS in short yardage/goalline stuff the D has way more guys right on the line .. your usually going up against at least a 5 man front and sometimes even 6 men with the ML and safeties real real close .. its alot more mano e mano than the zone is really built for ..
i guess what i'm saying is in GOALLINE OR REAL SHORT (maybe under 2 yeards) the D dictates straight ahead drive blocking type stuff ..
i agree with racer on this one ...
Verse, tabber, BigC that make sense to U????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
I think in a more practical sense, the drive blocking does make more sense on the line, but like I said, Denver combats that by cut blocking everything within 100 yards of the goalline. If the OL gets in position fast enough, and maintains his block long enough for the back to get through the hole, and then the guy gets cut to the backside, it can be as effective. You're kinda playing with fire at that point though. And as you said, this is why Denver uses a lot of play action.
I have to disagree that Anderson was the only power back. Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Mike Bell, Reuben Droughns, and in a few spurts Ron Dayne shows that the system works more efficiently with power runners. Clinton Portis' first two years in the league, he was barely 200 lbs, but he understand his responsiblity, and didn't dance, which is what made him so efficent. The zone scheme tends to work best (IMO) with guys who are a bit more powerful, and dedicated. Reggie Bush would be a horrible zone block runner, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Quote:
Verse, tabber, BigC that make sense to U????
I think it makes sense in most people's minds. The thinking being that drive blocking is going to blow people off the ball. In reality, I don't think it's true for a minute. Then again, I'm just going by my experience.
Here's why:
I mentioned this before and no one spoke to it. *L* Maybe no one wants to believe it. Seriously, have you ever wrestled a wrestler? Why can a guy who weighs 50 lbs. less than you take you down in a second? It's all about quickness and leverage. Strength and size only takes you so far. You w/me?
We spent countless hours having guys work at JUST coming out of their stance. If they didn't do it right....I made them do it again. And again. And again. Truth be told, most of the bigger guys aren't great at this, bro. I'll tell you what. Even at my age, I guarantee I can knock a guy back who weighs WAY more than me. Quickness, technique, and and leverage is where it's at. I'm not ragging on you, but it really slays me how people think great size means guys are effective. Additionally, in short yardage situations, it's all about lower body strength. Those stupid bench reps they do are WAY overrated. Upper body strength is useful in certain situations, such as pass blocking [punch], but most of the time, it's about leg strength.
Now........we have had bigger offensive linemen here in Cleveland. And we drive block. How damn effective have the Browns been in short yardage situations? Seriously bro......we've been the worst in the entire NFL. Hell, running the ball between the tackles hasn't even been a freaking option for us! And it's got coordinators fired.
Another thing that I think people are forgetting. We used to use a combination of zone blocking and drive blocking on many plays. If a freaking high school team, albeit an advanced one, can do it.....does anyone really think that pro teams don't employ this strategy?
Now.....one more freaking thing before I go...........since drive blocking relies solely on a guy beating his man, how in the hell are they going to beat a defense that has all kinds of guys shooting the gaps?
I get the feeling you guys ain't buying what I'm selling here, but I guarantee it is a fallacy that big, strong drive blockers are more effective anywhere, and I am including short yardage!!!
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
I respect your opinion, but I disagree - as far as zone blocking vs. man blocking in short yardage, including, goalline blocking. And my reasoning is this: in zone blocking, the linemen don't know WHO they are blocking when the ball is snapped. There is a second or so where they are moving, yet unsure of who to hit. The delay will hurt everytime, as you're giving the d linemen the speed advantage.
In man blocking, the o line lines up, and they know who they are blocking prior to the snap. Granted, they may not know which way they will block them, depending on the stunts the d line uses, but they know who they are hitting.
In short yardage, you don't need to blow your guy off the line. You need to move him: left, right, or back. Not knowing who you are going to hit til after the snap (when the movement starts) puts you at a disadvantage.
Not arguing, just stating my opinion that in short yardage, knowing who you are supposed to move prior to the snap is important. In my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
I think part of the issue is zone blocking is looked as "softer" than drive blocking...the goalline is the most grueling area on the field, and therefore people think "Why would you use a softer scheme when you should be bashing heads with your big uglies down there?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Did you happen to look at the play I described for Diam? If not, you may want to look at it. Believe me, they will block someone and they will move.
I will say I didn't create this thread to argue the merits of either zone blocking or drive blocking. I thought it would be pretty obvious that zone blocking was superior, but I guess not.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Coach Talk: Zone Blocking
|
|
Go Browns!
