It didn't take long

[KYPack]

Opponents are already bitching about cut blocks in the lead zone scheme....

Quote on Bears' Harris cries foul
A big part of the new zone blocking scheme the Green Bay Packers are utilizing this season is the cut block, and it didn't take long for one of their opponents to take umbrage at what he considered to be questionable tactics.

Pro Bowl defensive tackle Tommie Harris limped off Lambeau Field with what appeared to be a right leg injury after the Chicago Bears' second and final interception of Brett Favre in their 26-0 shutout of the Packers on Sunday.

Harris wouldn't get into specifics regarding the injury in the locker room afterward, but had no problems expressing his displeasure with how he thought it occurred.

"I was coming underneath, I beat the guy as Favre was rolling out. I was running to him and he cut me," the 6-foot-3, 300-pound Harris said. "That was cheap. That was freakin' cheap. Everybody that seen it knew it was cheap. (Mark) Tauscher, whatever his name is."

Green Bay's zone blocking scheme, like other teams', requires its offensive linemen to take out the legs of the men they're assigned to block by throwing their bodies at the player's thighs.

Harris hadn't seen it regularly against the Packers previously, as former coach Mike Sherman favored a counter scheme that utilized pulling guards. But Harris said he and his teammates were well aware of the changes brought about by Green Bay's new regime.

"It's film, man. It's film. We expected that," Harris said. "They have the Falcons' offensive dude (offensive coordinator Jeff Jagdzinski). We knew that's how they block; they cut on the back side. One cut is cool, but all that every play? That's freakin' high school. Harris said he thought it was time the National Football League looked into what continues to be a controversial topic among defensive players. Quote off

Now this was in a shutout, when the opponent kicked our ass. Can you imagine the hue & cry when a long run off zone blocks wins us a close one?

I've often wondered if the lead zone scheme is gonna be worth all the other teams bitching about it.

OTOH, this might be the only excitement we get all year!

[Scott Campbell]

The Packers aren't the only team that uses this scheme. It's a league issue, not a team issue. Unless the league changes the rules, there will be teams that cut block.

[KYPack]

What is that Scott, your "universal" argument?

Yeah, those zone leads are LEGAL, but they piss everybody off.

Is it worth it to have an "offensive" offense. Instead of being able to tiptoe up on some teams, we now have everybody "laying" for us.

Is it worth it?

[MJZiggy]

They're not possibly suggesting that the Packers were the only team on the field yesterday using cut blocks? It's ok when the Bears line does it, but not ours because we use a ZBS?

[pbmax]

One easily missed problem with being labeled with the ZBS or Denver running scheme would be media running the angle even when unwarranted and players blame everything on it, as thought the O Line coach were teaching them to play dirty everywhere.

Harris said one cut, on the backside, OK. He objected to being cut by Tauscher on pass pro. If we weren't playing the scheme, would he be reacting the way? Did Tauscher do something new, or would he have done the same last year?

Going to be a constant theme.

[MJZiggy]

Can't we just call it something else? The Green Bay Synchronized Protection or something equally stupid? Then it's not Zone Blocking and therefore not subject to such scrutiny?

[Patler]

Harris was complaining about a block in pass protection. I suspect Tauscher would have used the same technique last year in the same circumstance. The big difference this year is using cutbloacks on the backside of running plays to open up cutback lanes. I doubt the new scheme changed pass protection a lot.

Perhaps, because they practice it more, linemen feel more confident in cutting a player they might not have otherwise have cut when in pass protection, but the change in emphasis is in the running game, not pass protection.

[KYPack]

Can't we just call it something else? The Green Bay Synchronized Protection or something equally stupid? Then it's not Zone Blocking and therefore not subject to such scrutiny?

M3 has tried that.

He calls it "lead zone run schemes".

I don't think that is gonna make any difference.

I guess what I've suggesting is philosphical, but did it make any sense to announce to the planet were going Zone, when we didn't really have the troops in place to run this? Shouldn't we just run a modified WCO and wait until the guards mature to put the whole "lead zone run schemes" shit in?

Who knows?

[Patler]

but did it make any sense to announce to the planet were going Zone,

That was my biggest complaint. Not that it would fool coaches or teams, they would understand immediately. But what the Packers did is bring media scrutiny down on themselves by proclaiming, "We are switching to a scheme that works well for some teams, but many players feel is cheap, dirty and should be regulated more closely by playing rule changes."

Now, every oponent D-lineman is looking for a situation to complain to the media about, and every writer is egging them on for something controversial.