Jags installs cut blocking....

[The Leaper]

Leaper, I'll ask you then, why does the team not do it in practice in live drills if it's no more dangerous than any other block?

I see no reason why you shouldn't execute it against your own team. However, you need to practice it full speed against moving targets...and that is difficult to do on a consistent basis even in a controlled setting.

Also, the players first have to learn how to throw the block correctly. If they throw it incorrectly, the risk of injury goes up dramatically. Since this is practice...it makes sense to assume incorrect blocks will be numerous. So why raise the risk of injury in a non-game situation?

[The Leaper]

Exactly, it's meant to kill.............anyone argueing otherwise is denying the facts.

The same way blindsiding a QB at full speed is meant to kill.

Football is violent. Expect injuries.

[woodbuck27]

Many Packer fans are in favor of the Packer players playing tougher and to strike fear in the opponent, as one way to gain more respect around the league.

Well the decision has been made to adopt the ZBS and with that comes the LEGAL Cut Block. Them's. . the facts Luther.

Welcome to tougher Packer Football. We have to ask ourselves which way is it going to be? The cut block . . . is now a fact of life in OUR game, as long as OUR player doesn't do so illegally ie roll up on the opponent ankle (lower leg) etc.

Is the cut block going to make us popular amongst the teams we face? NO !Do I believe we will attempt to use the cut block legally . . . YES !

[KYPack]

RASTAK WROTE: So explain why it's never done live aginst their own team?.


Because they're saving it for Erasmus James.

and anybody else in purple

Exactly, it's meant to kill.............anyone argueing otherwise is denying the facts.

Only on Vikings, Slick.

The cut will be intitiated against all purple uni's.

Let the evil games begin!

[Noodle]

Packerrats covered this in some earlier threads -- packernews.com needs to get it in gear a little bit.

I'll admit that I'm not all that thrilled about us embracing the cut block. I like my nasty straight up, not diving at a guy's knees or ankles, and I always thought Denver's line was punk for doing cutting the way they did it.

I understand that some form of cut blocking is a part of every OL system, the main diff being that the ZBS emphasizes it a whole lot more. I also understand that a cut block can be done legally and without undue risk to the DL or LB.

But, as Tauscher's quote indicates, it's real easy to miss and crash in to a guy from the side or behind. And these are huge friggin guys crashing into other huge friggin' guys who'll have a hard time getting out of the friggin' way.

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. I felt that way about Sapp's hit on Cliffy. I'm not going to change now. And I think Jags's attitude about it sucks.

[pbmax]

Re: Jags installs cut blocking....

From packersnews.com

... Cut blocking is legal under NFL rules if the defensive player isn’t engaged with another blocker....

I believe this is incomplete. It is legal in the manner described as long as it occurs within 3 yards of the Line Of Scrimmage.

Maybe ND72 can comment on this.

[Partial]

Its funny how everyone changes their tune when something is legal but dirty.

Remember when the Broncos did that to us? How'd you feel then? You all thought it was cheap and dirty.

More recently, what about Warren Sapps' hit on Cliffy. Now THAT was Dirty. We'd all agree on it. At the time, it was also legal. Lets keep things in perspective.

What we'll be doing is dirty. Right or wrong, its dirty. I foresee it either becoming illegal or popular in the league over the next few years. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out.

[Rastak]

RASTAK WROTE: So explain why it's never done live aginst their own team?.


Because they're saving it for Erasmus James.

and anybody else in purple

Exactly, it's meant to kill.............anyone argueing otherwise is denying the facts.

Only on Vikings, Slick.

The cut will be intitiated against all purple uni's.

Let the evil games begin!

Just remember the retaliation is usually taken out on the guy who handles the ball the most....

[Noodle]

Re: Jags installs cut blocking....

From packersnews.com

... Cut blocking is legal under NFL rules if the defensive player isn’t engaged with another blocker....

I believe this is incomplete. It is legal in the manner described as long as it occurs within 3 yards of the Line Of Scrimmage.

Maybe ND72 can comment on this.

Polaris and KY also seem to know their way around an offensive line. I'd be interested in their views on this.

[Rastak]

Re: Jags installs cut blocking....

From packersnews.com

... Cut blocking is legal under NFL rules if the defensive player isn’t engaged with another blocker....

I believe this is incomplete. It is legal in the manner described as long as it occurs within 3 yards of the Line Of Scrimmage.

Maybe ND72 can comment on this.

Polaris and KY also seem to know their way around an offensive line. I'd be interested in their views on this.

Yea, that's true...I'm mainly kidding but it does surprise me that it's not done against people in practice, If it's not dangerous they would practice it against their own guys like any other block. It'll be interesting to see how they run in preseason.


Hey ND72?

[BallHawk]

Some people consider it dirty, and if it is done the wrong way it is dirty. But look at the success it had with Denver and Atlanta.

I'd rather be hated and good, than not hated and bad. When the opposing d-line looks at the schedule I want them to say "sh*t we're playing the packers, they block like animals.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Yep, you'll be able to hear the snap of ACL's in Lambeau this fall.

I REALLY, REALLY wish the rules were changed in the NFL to protect defensive linemen. You shouldn't be able to block below the waist, from behind, anywhere on the field. F*ck this "ok to maim guys within 3 yards of line of scrimmage" crap.

The NFL has two priorities:
1) Protect the QBs
2) Keep scoring high

[Patler]

Yep, you'll be able to hear the snap of ACL's in Lambeau this fall.

I REALLY, REALLY wish the rules were changed in the NFL to protect defensive linemen. You shouldn't be able to block below the waist, from behind, anywhere on the field. F*ck this "ok to maim guys within 3 yards of line of scrimmage" crap.

The NFL has two priorities:
1) Protect the QBs
2) Keep scoring high

Until such time as defensive players are prohibited from drilling receivers and QBs in the back at full speed, or aren't allowed to make tackles from the ground, I'm not going to get too concerned over a block they don't see coming.

[pbmax]

Paul Zimmerman will write this again this year, guaranteed. But as a former O-Lineman himself (college and semi-pro) he says the rule should read, no cut blocking unless you are engaged with the defender one on one, all over the field.

The idea being that the block itself is legal, but that diving towards the player wouldn't be allowed.

Interesting that lineman got hurt last year playing Denver when it supposed to be the backside pursuit (LB) that gets cut. Perhaps we haven't seen all there is or how it shakes out depending on the defensive front.

[Spaulding]

Was trolling JSOnline and actually saw some good posts for once. Credit goes to VikingQuest2006 and Ezra over there.

Basically they provide nice explanation of cut blocking versus chop blocking and a full example of how it's implemented.

Cut blocking is when you are in the free blocking zone at the snap (4 ft. to either side of the center and three feet deep either way from the ball in high school and even smaller zone in college and pros) and an offensive lineman engages w/ you below the knees w/o anybody else making contact w/ you. This is the technique the Broncos and Falcons use. It does upset people but it is 100% legal. Chop blocking is when a DL is already engaged w/ a blocker and another blocker comes in low and takes out his legs. This is illegal in HS, college and the pros.

The post goes on to state the poster played DL in college and currently officials HS and College games and still supports cut blocking due to the team aspect and relative safety as long as not involving chop blocking.

The second poster also played DL in college and coaches at HS level and had the following to say with a very nice example:

Being the old-school OL guy, I wasn't really that keen on the idea of coaching it. I thought it was kind of a wussy way of playing football. Just line 'em up and run 'em over.

As a DL in college, I played against some zone schemes. I was more annoyed by cut blocks than worried about injuries. Contact from cut blocks is made within the first step-and-a-half, so there isn't that much force or momentum being generated by the OL yet. If you (as a DL) stay low and use your hands (like you are supposed to), you're not going to get hurt from a cut block. But you're also not going to get much push or penetration at the LOS.

Basicially, the OL is getting in your way, and even if you keep your feet, there isn't much you can do except go around the OL - thus creating the running lanes. Once that initial surge off of the LOS has occurred, the OL can no longer cut block. Also, if a defensive player is outside of the "tackle box" (see Viking Quest's post), an OL cannot cut block him (which means a LB can't get cut if he is lined up at a normal LB depth).

Here is an example:

Let's say I am a Center and we are running a sweep to the right side. I have a NT lined up on my right shoulder. In zone blocking, the RG is stepping right because that is where the ball is going. Unless that NT loops away from the play, he is going to cross my face and be my guy to block.

This is a critical block becuase if he penetrates, he could disrupt the timing of the play and the angle of the ball carrier. Trying to reach block the NT is a pretty difficult block for me to make. Thank goodness for the cut block!!

As I snap the ball, I take a hard jab step with my right (playside) foot. Sure enough - the NT is trying to penetrate. He's crossing my face, so he's my guy. As I take my next step, I make myself big, stay low, and let that poor sucker trip over me.

What a lot of people don't realize, if this same play were being run with a traditional man-blocking scheme, the Center may be called upon to cut block anyway.

The play is still a sweep right, and the LG is pulling. The NT can disrupt the play with penetration - getting in the pulling guard's way - so some combination of the RG and C needs to stop him. The RG and C might combo-block the NT - that is, double-team him at first, then one would slide off and go to the next level (LB). But if circumstances dictate that the RG cannot combo block on the NT (because he is covered by a DL, because he is supposed to pull, because the defense shifted right before the snap), it leaves the C to have to take the NT himself. In that case, the C would cut the NT.

Truth be told, if you look at the Packers from years past, you will see cut blocking too. The main difference between zone blocking and man blocking isn't really the cut block - although, the cut block is used more in a zone scheme.

In man blocking, it's "you get that guy, you get that guy, and I'll get this guy".

In zone blocking, it's "let's all go to our assigned areas and block the first person that crosses our face."

So when a DL is trying to penetrate upon the snap, after that first step toward the play, the OL knows if the DL is going to cross his face. So by the second step, he is cutting off his penetration with a cut block. If no one is crossing his face by that second step, the OL will have to take on the defensive player with a "normal" block, because he's beyond his "initial surge".

It's not that the zone blocking scheme was created specifically to use this "dirty" technique. To me, zone blocking is a lot easier to teach and easier to grasp than man blocking. But inherant to the principles of zone blocking - that is, taking a jab-step toward the play and blocking the first man to cross your face - is it is going to put you in a position to have to use the cut block as the blocking technique.

In summary, I guess, rather than emphasizing "driving the other guy out of the hole", the cut block portion of zone blocking kind of emphasizes "keep the guy from getting to the hole". But cut blocks are only a part of the zone scheme - just like they are part of a man scheme. The zone scheme is easy to teach, and there is less potential confusion about blocking assignments in a zone scheme.

That said, I have grown to appreciate zone blocking as a blocking. I still think cut blocking is kind of wussy because it goes against the whole gladiator imagery of being a lineman. The testosterone in me still makes me favor going toe-to-toe. But it's not this cheap-shot, injury-causing, dirty, bull$hit scheme like some people seem to think it is. And most importantly, IT WORKS. Just ask Denver and Atlanta.

Once upon a time, the forward pass was probably frowned upon as some kind of dopey gimmick - a wussy alternative to the running game. But once other teams saw how effective the passing game could be, gimmick or not, other teams started doing the same thing.

The NFL is one big copycat league anyway. Everyone went from 4-3 to 3-4... then back to 4-3... and now it is going back to 3-4. How many teams jumped on the run-and-shoot bandwagon? How about the 46 Bears defense? Two TE, single back offense?

As long as they are effective, these "gimmicks" or "trends" or "flavors of the day" will exist in the NFL. The forward pass is still around. Run-and-shoot teams, not so much. My guess is zone blocking isn't going away, and will fal somewhere in between.