O-line Blocking Schemes

[Vols4us]

FWIW. Have patience with the analysis. If you don't have time skip this thread. It is a positive discussion.

If you want to better understand what CJC and CHH were trying to do with our O-line blocking this past season, watch the Packers O-line this evening. They are Sprint Draw Zone blocking on the few running plays they run. The lineman stay in their same general position at the snap of the ball and try to neutralize the D-lineman with their hands and arms while staying in a leveraged position with their footwork. This is designed to look like it could be a pass or a run for a second of confusion of the D. If it is a run and no defender gets in the assigned gap of the O-lineman, he will move into the next level and try to block a LB or the secondary. They can also man block out of this same scheme. Notice that the RB is lined up 8-9 yards behind the scrimmage line. Many NFL and Big 10 teams use this. Brian Kelly (CHH's new boss) and Urbie's offenses use it as well. We did not have the personnel, experience or dual threat QB to use this scheme obviously. It was a big fail.

So when somebody that thinks they know what they are talking about says they are zone blocking - that is not entirely correct. In pure zone blocking the O-linemen fire out off the snap to control their zone and there are a lot of counters, traps and the like. The RB stands 6-7 yards behind the scrimmage line because the seams are created quicker and will close quicker. You need quicker lineman to use this scheme. Man blocking is man on man based on the gap assignment of the play call and you fire out like zone to pancake your assignment. The RB lines up at the same depth as zone.

CDD stated that they plan to change the offensive run game scheme some. Pittman has coached both zone and man blocking without the sprint draw feature - thank goodness. The O-line we have now are big and strong, but slower than typical zone blockers. They generally failed at the few counter plays they tried to run last year. So it looks to me like we may be going man in the running game. You can still run counters and traps out of man blocking as a change of pace. If so they are imitating Bama (again) in the O-line and by recruiting bigger RBs like Lane, Hill and Bourque (think Ingram, Richardson, and Lacey).

If this happens the VolNation could very well be happy campers next season IMO. Big turnaround in the running game could happen. We have some strong guys in the line with good experience that will not have to overthink it and that could hold a block for an RB that can get to the seam quicker. If that happens our offense could blow the less talented D's off the field. In which case our coaching staff, including Chaney, will be first rate.

Thoughts?

 

[Johnny Majors' Ghost]

Agree. Chaney gets dogged on here quite often but was obviously handcuffed somewhat last season. He didnt get where he is by being a bad coach.

 

[DL916]

Can someone read this and sum it up for me?

Just kidding.

You make some good points.

 

[MFL]

Not long ago it was said CDD told RB Cross we wanted scat backs. Cross then decommited. You are saying bruisers fit in better. Explain?

 

[Vol8188]

Seams are not created quicker in a zone blocking scheme. One of the most important things for a zone RB is to be patient. Zone plays take longer to develop because you need time for the linemen to create movement off the football with their double teams, and then get up to the next level.

Also bigger running backs do not mean we are going to more man blocking schemes. Bigger running backs are preferred in zone blockings schemes. Look at Ron Dayne’s years at Wisconsin. Wisconsin has been running zone for years.

We probably failed at our counter plays because we couldn’t run our base plays, not because of our o-lines lack of athletic ability.

“Over thinking” is typically more of a problem with man teams than zone teams. Most coaches switch to zone running schemes because of their simplicity.

 

[WallyBalls]

Thank you for posting that. I've been trying to argue that point for a while...

 

[Vol8188]

Another example of zone blocking teams that prefer larger rb's would be run n shoot teams. They like to call their single back their "superback" and normally get a kid who looks more like a fullback to run their inside zone scheme.

The bigger guys work better in zone schemes because of the number of times they will be asked to run through arm tackles. Look at Arian Foster. He's a big man who does pretty well at running both stretch and inside zone.

 

[Vols4us]

Not long ago it was said CDD told RB Cross we wanted scat backs. Cross then decommited. You are saying bruisers fit in better. Explain?

It's not so much bruisers as it is guys that are one cut, strong enough to break an arm tackle and go. More slasher types. They get the tough yards you need and can occasionally break one. Most folks that have seen Borque see Reggie Cobb if he learns to get lower behind his pads. When I watched Cross I saw a guy that was slow getting to the hole, but, he was strong and they kind of bounced off of him. He would then have a head of steam built up and could get it done. Kind of a shorter version of Brandon Jacobs tonight. Slower, but strong enough to break tackles until he gets into the open field.

I think CDD and CJC want a good scatback to offer the change of pace so that they can get them in space. DY is an option and Q Watson may be another.

And I may be full of sh## (lol). Just what it appears to me.

 

[Thump]

Seams are not created quicker in a zone blocking scheme. One of the most important things for a zone RB is to be patient. Zone plays take longer to develop because you need time for the linemen to create movement off the football with their double teams, and then get up to the next level.

Also bigger running backs do not mean we are going to more man blocking schemes. Bigger running backs are preferred in zone blockings schemes. Look at Ron Dayne’s years at Wisconsin. Wisconsin has been running zone for years.

We probably failed at our counter plays because we couldn’t run our base plays, not because of our o-lines lack of athletic ability.

“Over thinking” is typically more of a problem with man teams than zone teams. Most coaches switch to zone running schemes because of their simplicity.

Agreed. Zone is basically run until someone crosses your face and then push them out of the way...

Man is more Guard and Center have the MLB and the Noseguard on said play. Whichever side the LB goes, the player on said side will release and pick him up. If the DT lines up in a 3 instead of a 1 or 0, then he is the Guard's responsibility and the Center gets the linebacker. Man blocking requires much more knowledge of opponent's defenses and the plays themselves. If you watch Man Blocking teams u will see linemen talking back an forth much more and lots of pointing.

I would say that double teams exist in both schemes.

 

[Vols4us]

Another example of zone blocking teams that prefer larger rb's would be run n shoot teams. They like to call their single back their "superback" and normally get a kid who looks more like a fullback to run their inside zone scheme.

The bigger guys work better in zone schemes because of the number of times they will be asked to run through arm tackles. Look at Arian Foster. He's a big man who does pretty well at running both stretch and inside zone.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one. Those teams are running sprint draw zone IMO. If you want to see the best straight zone blocking scheme ever run go back and watch Shanahan's Broncos back in the day. Lighter and more mobile linemen. RBs 6-7 yards back. Quicker developing. They could plug in and play any quick running back that could break a tackle.

 

[Vol8188]

We will have to agree to disagree on that one. Those teams are running sprint draw zone IMO. If you want to see the best straight zone blocking scheme ever run go back and watch Shanahan's Broncos back in the day. Lighter and more mobile linemen. RBs 6-7 yards back. Quicker developing. They could plug in and play any quick running back that could break a tackle.

Shanahan loved big runningbacks. He loved converting FB's to RB. Peyton Hillis was one of those (there was a FB before him who ran 1k but I can't think of his name). I think he also had both Ron Dayne and Maurice Claret on his team near the end of his tenure. I want to say that his starting RB this season in Washington was 220+ also.

His offensive line is quick, but that doesn't mean the play develops quickly. You have to let the double teams develop. Your linemen need time to help with the nearest play side d-lineman, and then get up to the second level. That takes a second.

 

[StoVol]

Not long ago it was said CDD told RB Cross we wanted scat backs. Cross then decommited. You are saying bruisers fit in better. Explain?

Link to said comment to cross?

 

[OuterBanksVol]

FWIW. Have patience with the analysis. If you don't have time skip this thread. It is a positive discussion.

If you want to better understand what CJC and CHH were trying to do with our O-line blocking this past season, watch the Packers O-line this evening. They are Sprint Draw Zone blocking on the few running plays they run. The lineman stay in their same general position at the snap of the ball and try to neutralize the D-lineman with their hands and arms while staying in a leveraged position with their footwork. This is designed to look like it could be a pass or a run for a second of confusion of the D. If it is a run and no defender gets in the assigned gap of the O-lineman, he will move into the next level and try to block a LB or the secondary. They can also man block out of this same scheme. Notice that the RB is lined up 8-9 yards behind the scrimmage line. Many NFL and Big 10 teams use this. Brian Kelly (CHH's new boss) and Urbie's offenses use it as well. We did not have the personnel, experience or dual threat QB to use this scheme obviously. It was a big fail.

So when somebody that thinks they know what they are talking about says they are zone blocking - that is not entirely correct. In pure zone blocking the O-linemen fire out off the snap to control their zone and there are a lot of counters, traps and the like. The RB stands 6-7 yards behind the scrimmage line because the seams are created quicker and will close quicker. You need quicker lineman to use this scheme. Man blocking is man on man based on the gap assignment of the play call and you fire out like zone to pancake your assignment. The RB lines up at the same depth as zone.

CDD stated that they plan to change the offensive run game scheme some. Pittman has coached both zone and man blocking without the sprint draw feature - thank goodness. The O-line we have now are big and strong, but slower than typical zone blockers. They generally failed at the few counter plays they tried to run last year. So it looks to me like we may be going man in the running game. You can still run counters and traps out of man blocking as a change of pace. If so they are imitating Bama (again) in the O-line and by recruiting bigger RBs like Lane, Hill and Bourque (think Ingram, Richardson, and Lacey).

If this happens the VolNation could very well be happy campers next season IMO. Big turnaround in the running game could happen. We have some strong guys in the line with good experience that will not have to overthink it and that could hold a block for an RB that can get to the seam quicker. If that happens our offense could blow the less talented D's off the field. In which case our coaching staff, including Chaney, will be first rate.

Thoughts?

Nice post. Really in depth, but I think I get the brunth of it. We got big dudes up front, and in college, you really don't have time to fully develop zone blocking schemes, IMO, with only 4 years and all the OL turnover. I sure hope we dumb it down this year with the run, and fall back on Bray's arm when we falter.

 

[Vol8188]

Just for clarification, when you say "sprint draw" is this the same as the slice (slow iso)? If not could you talk me through it?

 

[Vols4us]

Nice post. Really in depth, but I think I get the brunth of it. We got big dudes up front, and in college, you really don't have time to fully develop zone blocking schemes, IMO, with only 4 years and all the OL turnover. I sure hope we dumb it down this year with the run, and fall back on Bray's arm when we falter.

I agree. I think they will mix it at 55% pass/45% run.

 

[Vols4us]

Just for clarification, when you say "sprint draw" is this the same as the slice (slow iso)? If not could you talk me through it?

Most teams with a dual threat QB use the zone read option, right? How can they have a d-lineman or LB make a decision on what to defend and option off of it if the o-line has cleared the area of attack or is down the field blocking? They have already given the play away. So in the sprint draw you can still block man or zone, but instead of a drive block against the d-line it has the appearance of a pass block without moving backwards into the backfield. The o-line shields and neutralizes the charge of the d-lineman or blitzer in the man block or zone block scheme. You will see them right at the line hand fighting and shoving while standing up. The back gets the ball a couple of yards deeper like any draw play, they read the gap assignment blocks and go. Remember Dooley lamenting week after week that he could get Poole and Lane to get up into the gap quickly, that they hesitated? By the time they got there, the D had covered all of the gaps. Since we could not run it successfully, play action passing stopped working even with Bray in the game

Simple way to tell you have a line blocking zone or man without the sprint draw is they are downfield or lying on the ground downfield. Sprint draw always works with O-lineman standing up unless the guy misses the block and tries to cut them behind the line. The other way is the depth of the RB, 8-10 yards back for sprint draw or if they are running a zone read the RB may be right beside the QB.

I didn't come up with this on my own. Butch Jones, the Cincy HC stated we did it in post UT game interviews. He knows the blocking scheme since they run a version of it only with a dual threat QB that gave them more options. Brian Kelly established it there and took it with him to ND. Butch said we reminded him of Big 10 foes. I started researching it and saw where it was used by some NFL teams and at Ohio State with Terrrell Pryor among others. Urban will use his own version now. Our problem was we did not have dual threat QB. It will not work well without one because the D knows there are only two things to defend against - a run by the RB or a pass. So they put 8 in the box if need be, read the play and if a pass drop the LBs quickly into zone pass defense. If a run they have more guys in the gaps than we can block. Hence #116 in the country in running it. Add in Bray's inability to check off as well.

I was thinking more of the Bronco backs from Clinton Portis back in time. Mike Anderson, the UGA backs (forgot their names - T. Davis?), etc. Shorter, could break a tackle, hide behind the lineman, make a quick cut and go. Seemed like they put a new one in every season for years and they all would get 1000+.

 

[Vol8188]

Most teams with a dual threat QB use the zone read option, right? How can they have a d-lineman or LB make a decision on what to defend and option off of it if the o-line has cleared the area of attack or is down the field blocking? They have already given the play away. So in the sprint draw you can still block man or zone, but instead of a drive block against the d-line it has the appearance of a pass block without moving backwards into the backfield. The o-line shields and neutralizes the charge of the d-lineman or blitzer in the man block or zone block scheme. You will see them right at the line hand fighting and shoving while standing up. The back gets the ball a couple of yards deeper like any draw play, they read the gap assignment blocks and go. Remember Dooley lamenting week after week that he could get Poole and Lane to get up into the gap quickly, that they hesitated? By the time they got there, the D had covered all of the gaps. Since we could not run it successfully, play action passing stopped working even with Bray in the game

Simple way to tell you have a line blocking zone or man without the sprint draw is they are downfield or lying on the ground downfield. Sprint draw always works with O-lineman standing up unless the guy misses the block and tries to cut them behind the line. The other way is the depth of the RB, 8-10 yards back for sprint draw or if they are running a zone read the RB may be right beside the QB.

I didn't come up with this on my own. Butch Jones, the Cincy HC stated we did it in post UT game interviews. He knows the blocking scheme since they run a version of it only with a dual threat QB that gave them more options. Brian Kelly established it there and took it with him to ND. Butch said we reminded him of Big 10 foes. I started researching it and saw where it was used by some NFL teams and at Ohio State with Terrrell Pryor among others. Urban will use his own version now. Our problem was we did not have dual threat QB. It will not work well without one because the D knows there are only two things to defend against - a run by the RB or a pass. So they put 8 in the box if need be, read the play and if a pass drop the LBs quickly into zone pass defense. If a run they have more guys in the gaps than we can block. Hence #116 in the country in running it. Add in Bray's inability to check off as well.

I was thinking more of the Bronco backs from Clinton Portis back in time. Mike Anderson, the UGA backs (forgot their names - T. Davis?), etc. Shorter, could break a tackle, hide behind the lineman, make a quick cut and go. Seemed like they put a new one in every season for years and they all would get 1000+.

If you have a link or a diagram, that would be awesome. Everything I am finding online labeled as sprint draw looks like slow iso to me.

Here's an example of what I'm calling slow iso: The Ohio State Offensive Playbook Part II: The Sprint Draw Series - Along The Olentangy

 

[Tampavolz]

whatever run blocking scheme is used, the one used last year was pathetic. Worst running game I have ever witnessed at UT. CHH and maybe Chaney is at fault here,
and was a major reason for the KY loss and other losses.

I would call it the run challenged blocking scheme,, not what the packers run.