Coaching/Schemes

[wist43]

I spent some time going over the 1st half of the Cincy game last night and a couple of things jumped out at me.

OFFENSE

I noticed this in the previous two games, but it was glaring in the Cincy game - the coaching staff is asking their OL to make blocks that are next to impossible to execute; specifically, in their version of the ZBS they are asking their OL, usually the backside TE or OT, to get across the face of the defensive lineman when they are "wrong shouldered" from before the snap. They have absolutely no chance of successfully executing this block, and every time they've attempted it the DL, predictably, is able to cleanly get down the line and blow the play up b/4 the back can even make the cut. Perhaps a "cut block" is called for in this situation (I've seen the Bronco's successfully utilize cut blocks in similar situations), but given the alignments I saw, a cut block would be equally difficult to execute.

ND72, if he reads this, might be able to offer up some insight as to why they think this will work, but I've seen nothing to suggest that they can be successful running the ball if they continue to try to block the backside in this manner.

Beyond the execution it seems to me also, that the ZBS as it is currently assimilated, is drastically unflexible. Afterall, the ZBS is basically "student body right, and student body left". Yes, specific OL are responsible for specific DL depending the defensive formation, but what is there to audible to???

I'm very, very skeptical about what they're trying to install in the running game.

DEFENSE

Cinncinnati went thru the Packer defense with ease, but there were some bright spots, and the big gash plays and 3rd down conversion plays were, more often than not, the result of one player breaking down - things that can be fixed, hopefully.

That said, I've gone from being only lukewarm on the scheme to pretty much hating it. It is far too passive and unflexible. Beyond that, and I can only hope that Sanders doesn't do this in the reg. season, Sanders seems to like to blitz and then play zone behind it - that is an absolute recipe for disaster. When you blitz, teams adjust by going to hot reads - receivers break off their routes, and the QB delivers the ball quickly... playing zone behind the blitz is literally saying to the QB, "go ahead and throw for the 1st down - be our guest".

On one 3rd down conversion for Cincy, Sanders zone-blitzed and ended up with KGB trying to cover Tab Perry, a WR. On another, he blitzed and then allowed all 4 receivers completely clean releases off the line, and enormous cushions in the zone. It resulted in an easy "pitch-and-catch" for the 1st down.

OVERALL

I've been very skeptical of the McCarthy hiring from the start, and one of the reasons was his ability to attract a top flight staff. As it is all three head spots (HC, OC, and DC) are headed by first timers who are bumbling and stumbling their way around trying to figure out what they're doing.

I was hoping that the ZBS would help mask our lack of talent up front, but I don't think that's going to happen; and, I was hoping that Sanders would prove to be more creative and aggressive, but I don't think that's going to happen either. Combined with the overall lack of talent and extreme inexperience of the players we do have, you have a recipe for disaster - not only for this season, but for the forseeable future.

[pbmax]

Re: Coaching/Schemes

Beyond the execution it seems to me also, that the ZBS as it is currently assimilated, is drastically unflexible. Afterall, the ZBS is basically "student body right, and student body left". Yes, specific OL are responsible for specific DL depending the defensive formation, but what is there to audible to???

I do not believe specific lineman are asked to block specific DL based position by formation. In several instances I have read that they are freqently asked to block the first man across their face. I think Jags has made this point.

This may be the onside assignment and may not cover the backside on the stretch. But the stretch is just half the equation. They also run the ZBS inside where the blocking in more head on.

That said, I've gone from being only lukewarm on the scheme to pretty much hating it. It is far too passive and unflexible. Beyond that, and I can only hope that Sanders doesn't do this in the reg. season, Sanders seems to like to blitz and then play zone behind it - that is an absolute recipe for disaster.

McGinn or Silverstein had a piece on JSO that mentioned that they played zone more last night as a test and to get some film on that defense. It may not be the scheme we see the most of when the season begins. Hopefully.

[Packnut]

Schemes

I posted yesterday that the offensive and defensive philosophy of our coaches was very troubling. There was a play Monday night that I could'nt believe. Cincy was inside our 20 and came out in a 3 WR set. We actually had a LB covering their WR split wide right. I don't givea damn what defense you run, LB's do not man up on WR's with no saftey help.

[wist43]

pbmax wrote: I do not believe specific lineman are asked to block specific DL based position by formation. In several instances I have read that they are freqently asked to block the first man across their face. I think Jags has made this point.

---------------

That is what I was referring to... who that "first man" is, may change, but the OL still has the responsibility to block a specific man, given the defensive alignment.

I have doubts about the flexibility of the scheme itself. As I said, student body right is student body right.

They're young, and it's going to take time, but I'm beginning to view the schemes on both sides of the ball as gimmicky and flawed.

[pbmax]

pbmax wrote: I do not believe specific lineman are asked to block specific DL based position by formation. In several instances I have read that they are freqently asked to block the first man across their face. I think Jags has made this point.

---------------

That is what I was referring to... who that "first man" is, may change, but the OL still has the responsibility to block a specific man, given the defensive alignment.

I have doubts about the flexibility of the scheme itself. As I said, student body right is student body right.

They're young, and it's going to take time, but I'm beginning to view the schemes on both sides of the ball as gimmicky and flawed.

I don't view the running game as gimmicked, as say the Run and Shoot might be. Its base personnel and a blocking scheme that has been demonstrated to work.

I think Denver and Atlanta have had too much success to chalk it up as successful because its new and different. And many teams have run the stretch outside of a ZBS system.

My concern is the tackles. Clifton has bad knees and Tauscher I believe has been compared to the Pillsbury Dough Boy. Now Tauscher has been great, but is he built for this scheme? And is Clifton healthy enough? Run blocking was not his strong suit to begin with.

Denver made a point of having some exceptional people at tackle. Gary Zimmerman is a potential Hall of Famer and they imported Tony Jones from the Browns/Raven for the RT spot, and I believe he was the LT for the Browns. Do out tackles match up?

Part of the problem here is the point of comparison. The AFC is clearly superior now and we just got whipped by two teams who are good enough to go to the AFC playoffs. Atlanta might not be good enough to go to the weak sister NFC playoffs.

On defense, until I see it in a game, I believe Sanders will run Bates scheme much as last year. It been demonstrated to work for over a decade.

I think we are looking at a Seattle rebuilding timetable. Not one or two years, but 5. Favre or no Favre, its going to be a while.

[Partial]

pbmax wrote: I do not believe specific lineman are asked to block specific DL based position by formation. In several instances I have read that they are freqently asked to block the first man across their face. I think Jags has made this point.

---------------

That is what I was referring to... who that "first man" is, may change, but the OL still has the responsibility to block a specific man, given the defensive alignment.

I have doubts about the flexibility of the scheme itself. As I said, student body right is student body right.

They're young, and it's going to take time, but I'm beginning to view the schemes on both sides of the ball as gimmicky and flawed.

I don't view the running game as gimmicked, as say the Run and Shoot might be. Its base personnel and a blocking scheme that has been demonstrated to work.

I think Denver and Atlanta have had too much success to chalk it up as successful because its new and different. And many teams have run the stretch outside of a ZBS system.

My concern is the tackles. Clifton has bad knees and Tauscher I believe has been compared to the Pillsbury Dough Boy. Now Tauscher has been great, but is he built for this scheme? And is Clifton healthy enough? Run blocking was not his strong suit to begin with.

Denver made a point of having some exceptional people at tackle. Gary Zimmerman is a potential Hall of Famer and they imported Tony Jones from the Browns/Raven for the RT spot, and I believe he was the LT for the Browns. Do out tackles match up?

Part of the problem here is the point of comparison. The AFC is clearly superior now and we just got whipped by two teams who are good enough to go to the AFC playoffs. Atlanta might not be good enough to go to the weak sister NFC playoffs.

On defense, until I see it in a game, I believe Sanders will run Bates scheme much as last year. It been demonstrated to work for over a decade.

I think we are looking at a Seattle rebuilding timetable. Not one or two years, but 5. Favre or no Favre, its going to be a while.

It could be longer than that, lets remind you they had two incredibly lucky draft picks that turned out amazingly well with Alexander and Jones

[MJZiggy]

You're right, Partial. TT is really good at those amazingly lucky draft picks that turn out well...

[Packnut]

Schemes

McCarthy said there were communication problems on defense that led to a number of the third-down conversions by Cincinnati.



This is the shit that really bugs me. They have all this time in camp to go over every responsibility on every type offensive play yet in the 3rd game we have communication problems? This is unacceptable. MM hired Sanders and the coaching staff so this is on him. Half the battle on defense is being where your suppossed to be!

[KYPack]

Wist,

The scenario you describe should call for a combo block.

You comment is well taken. Some things may look impossible in this learning phase of the new blocking system. I call this the "lead zone" instead of ZBS, because that's what the coaches call it. It's called lead zone because the big difference in the technique is the lineman takes his first step (his lead step) with the playside foot.

In this system there are just a few plays:

Zone tight (L or R)
Zone Wide (L or R)
And the counters (also called backside plays).

There a bunch of new rules that the blockers have to follow, I've got a handle on a lot of this, but hey, I'm learnin' too.

The tight plays are run with the RB heading for his "landmark". In Tight Zone left, that would be the outside leg of the playside guard (the LG).

The lineman go left, like you said in a "student body left". Your assignment depends on whether you are covered by a DLineman or uncovered. If covered, your job is is to block the first guy you see. If uncovered, he takes a lead step at the helmet of the first lineman and blocks out. You don't block a LBer unless he is threatening the hole.

You mention a situation where the lineman (backside? from your description) was asked to do the impossible and completely make and impossible block. Sounds like a blown line call. A look on the backside like you talk about would require a combo block of some sort.

Most likely a "scoop" block should have been called to help the hapless lineman. Hey, these kids are learning this stuff, too!

A couple principles of the lead zone:

-Run as many plays to the open side as the tight end side

-Always gain at least two yards.

Be glad to discuss the lead zone with anyone, I'm learning more about it all the time.

Perhaps one of our "broken down old lineman" can chime in here, too.

[Partial]

You're right, Partial. TT is really good at those amazingly lucky draft picks that turn out well...

Well right, but drafting two hall of famers? I mean come on, even with high first round picks you get no guarantees. Even if they were just great players, Seattle wouldn't be anywhere near as good as they are now. Walter Jones is flat out ridiculous

[ND72]

Re: Coaching/Schemes

I spent some time going over the 1st half of the Cincy game last night and a couple of things jumped out at me.

OFFENSE

I noticed this in the previous two games, but it was glaring in the Cincy game - the coaching staff is asking their OL to make blocks that are next to impossible to execute; specifically, in their version of the ZBS they are asking their OL, usually the backside TE or OT, to get across the face of the defensive lineman when they a "wrong shouldered" from before the snap. They have absolutely no chance of successfully executing this block, and every time they've attempted it the DL, predictably, is able to cleanly get down the line and blow the play up b/4 the back can even make the cut. Perhaps a "cut block" is called for in this situation (I've seen the Bronco's successfully utilize cut blocks in similar situations), but given the alignments I saw, a cut block would be equally difficult to execute.

ND72, if he reads this, might be able to offer up some insight as to why they think this will work, but I've seen nothing to suggest that they can be successful running the ball if they continue to try to block the backside in this manner.

It's actually funny you mention that...buddy of mine and I were just talking about hte same thing. In our colelge zone blocking, we had calls for that. like for instance, if the DT was more like a nose, in the C/G gap, we'd have a call for the Center to block back, and the Guard would pull around the center and get up the LB. Same thing with a G/T and a T/TE situation. we really don't understand why they are doing that as well, unless they plan on cut blocking a lot more. Our only other thought was they are setting up a cut back play. we ran a certain zoen that wrong shouldered a guy, just to set up and pre-designed cut back play, like a zone counter....BUT, they've been doing this the entire preseason. Evidently they know something I don't, since they are in the NFL, and i'm coaching High School Freshman.

[wist43]

ND, I understand what you're talking about "wrong shouldering a DL" essentially to entice him into running himself out of the play, but I don't think that's the case with what the Packers are doing - and, if that's the case, then what they're attempting to do is unsound and doomed to continue to fail.

Based on what they've been doing so far in the preseason, I don't see where the back would even have the option to cut it back b/c the backside pursuit is coming down the line essentially unmolested. If the DL takes the proper angle the play is over, and the back will be lucky to get back to the LOS.

I'm very skeptical of this coaching staff.

[KYPack]

ND, I understand what you're talking about "wrong shouldering a DL" essentially to entice him into running himself out of the play, but I don't think that's the case with what the Packers are doing - and, if that's the case, then what they're attempting to do is unsound and doomed to continue to fail.

Based on what they've been doing so far in the preseason, I don't see where the back would even have the option to cut it back b/c the backside pursuit is coming down the line essentially unmolested. If the DL takes the proper angle the play is over, and the back will be lucky to get back to the LOS.

I'm very skeptical of this coaching staff.

Wist,

There are automatics, line calls, and backside plays to counter this.

Two things:

- it's totally possible they haven't installed all this to the young line.

- They are trying to stay vanilla in Pre-season and not unveil any of this before things get real in the regular season.

Just letting the D blow up the plays isn't in the program. It has to be inexperience or a strategy that is causing 'em to not make the adjustments.

That said, we should be running the counters and backside plays to get the guys experienced in making the adjustments.

[MJZiggy]

You're right, Partial. TT is really good at those amazingly lucky draft picks that turn out well...

Well right, but drafting two hall of famers? I mean come on, even with high first round picks you get no guarantees. Even if they were just great players, Seattle wouldn't be anywhere near as good as they are now. Walter Jones is flat out ridiculous

And what leads you to believe that Hawk or Jennings won't be?

[Fritz]

Wist - While I often don't agree with you I want to compliment you on this thread. Nice to read a thread by a bunch of people who are actually talking football - schemes and what they are and whether they'll work.
Thank you.

I don't have any expertise on the topic; my limited knowledge allows me only to observe that there seem to be an awful lot of d-lineman and linebackers right up in the faces of our running backs right before they hit the line of scrimmage.