PDA

View Full Version : Can someone break this down?


DenverBound
11-10-2009, 02:52 PM
Obviously our line is not getting the job done the way it was last year. Through the last two games they have been getting pulverized off the ball. They can't give Orton time. They can't create running lanes.

A lot of people are blaming the scheme. Some people are blaming Wiegmann and Hamilton's inability to get any push on defenders. So what is it?

What is the main difference between a Zone Blocking scheme and a power running scheme? Why would Wiegmann and Hamilton be successful in a ZBS and not in a power scheme? I know they are a little on the small side (< 300 lbs.) but what are they being asked to do that is so different from lat year?

If someone could break this down for me I would really appreciate it.

DenverBound
11-10-2009, 07:01 PM
Gee, thanks guys!

Mogulseeker
11-10-2009, 07:04 PM
100 post rule.

s0phr0syne
11-10-2009, 07:06 PM
It's sad because threads like this used to get filled up with solid analysis.

Mogulseeker
11-10-2009, 07:14 PM
Yeah, I was just joshin.

The bandwagon has emptied.

lex
11-10-2009, 07:21 PM
Obviously our line is not getting the job done the way it was last year. Through the last two games they have been getting pulverized off the ball. They can't give Orton time. They can't create running lanes.

A lot of people are blaming the scheme. Some people are blaming Wiegmann and Hamilton's inability to get any push on defenders. So what is it?

What is the main difference between a Zone Blocking scheme and a power running scheme? Why would Wiegmann and Hamilton be successful in a ZBS and not in a power scheme? I know they are a little on the small side (< 300 lbs.) but what are they being asked to do that is so different from lat year?

If someone could break this down for me I would really appreciate it.

The area next to the center is a vital piece of real estate. I think El Sid is onto something when he points out that Hamiltons injury puts him in no mans land, which is to say that as an undersized technician, his hamstring injury is limiting his game in a dire way. If Hamilton doesnt have full range of movement then, what does that turn him into? Basically, he becomes and undersized ragdoll. The guy is probably giving his all but it has been turned into a physics lesson for him. With Hamiltons struggles the question becomes, is it better to do ZBS (again with Hamilton being hampered) or is it better to man block even with Hamilton undersized? Its a dilemma and I have to wonder if its a reason why McDaniels is avoiding ZBS. The other thing is that its apparent that they think an injured/struggling Hamilton is better than their next option, which, in itself, is puzzling.

Its a real problem and, if anything, it should underscore how important it is to control the area next to the center. You rarely see guards taken in the first round when they and the center are responsible for what is probably the most important part of the field. Tackles are, of course, important since they match up against the best pass rushers but its also further from the QB and where the RB receives a handoff. You can use RBs and TEs to help (Graham was our best tackle his first year here). But if you cant control the middle, it creates a whole slew of problems that make it difficult. I hate to pile on one guy and if anything, it should show how important the interior line is.

Granted, the past two opponents are far better than most teams when it comes to nose tackles and defense up the middle. But, actually, the Redskins have a good defense featuring Haynesworth as do the Giants with what some might say is the deepest line in football.


Another valid issue that Ive seen raised is the lack of a fullback, given the inability to control the middle. Someone made an excellent obsvervation that because there is no fullback, teams know they can concentrate pressure on this area and without a fullback, it causes maximum disruption.

So then, what can you do to counter this? You can maybe throw screens or drags in the area vacated by the defense except with Orton not throwing the ball downfield, the box is saturated with defenders.

The primary problem exists with not being able to control this area but its amplified by other factors such as not being able or willing to throw downfield. And part of the reason for not being able to do this is not controlling the schwerpunkt.

This whole problem makes me think back to the day when our interior OLine when up against really strong 3-4 defenses in KC and Pitt followed by Gilbert Brown in the SB. It really makes me appreciate teams that much more.

And, btw, a lot of long runs come when guys load the box. There are ways to counter it but if you cant keep guys off your RB and QB, its a problem.

loborugger
11-10-2009, 08:25 PM
It's sad because threads like this used to get filled up with solid analysis.

A lot of solid posters have been run off the sophmoric antics that dominate this place these days.

DenverBound
11-10-2009, 09:13 PM
The area next to the center is a vital piece of real estate. I think El Sid is onto something when he points out that Hamiltons injury puts him in no mans land, which is to say that as an undersized technician, his hamstring injury is limiting his game in a dire way. If Hamilton doesnt have full range of movement then, what does that turn him into? Basically, he becomes and undersized ragdoll. The guy is probably giving his all but it has been turned into a physics lesson for him. With Hamiltons struggles the question becomes, is it better to do ZBS (again with Hamilton being hampered) or is it better to man block even with Hamilton undersized? Its a dilemma and I have to wonder if its a reason why McDaniels is avoiding ZBS. The other thing is that its apparent that they think an injured/struggling Hamilton is better than their next option, which, in itself, is puzzling.

Its a real problem and, if anything, it should underscore how important it is to control the area next to the center. You rarely see guards taken in the first round when they and the center are responsible for what is probably the most important part of the field. Tackles are, of course, important since they match up against the best pass rushers but its also further from the QB and where the RB receives a handoff. You can use RBs and TEs to help (Graham was our best tackle his first year here). But if you cant control the middle, it creates a whole slew of problems that make it difficult. I hate to pile on one guy and if anything, it should show how important the interior line is.

Granted, the past two opponents are far better than most teams when it comes to nose tackles and defense up the middle. But, actually, the Redskins have a good defense featuring Haynesworth as do the Giants with what some might say is the deepest line in football.


Another valid issue that Ive seen raised is the lack of a fullback, given the inability to control the middle. Someone made an excellent obsvervation that because there is no fullback, teams know they can concentrate pressure on this area and without a fullback, it causes maximum disruption.

So then, what can you do to counter this? You can maybe throw screens or drags in the area vacated by the defense except with Orton not throwing the ball downfield, the box is saturated with defenders.

The primary problem exists with not being able to control this area but its amplified by other factors such as not being able or willing to throw downfield. And part of the reason for not being able to do this is not controlling the schwerpunkt.

This whole problem makes me think back to the day when our interior OLine when up against really strong 3-4 defenses in KC and Pitt followed by Gilbert Brown in the SB. It really makes me appreciate teams that much more.

And, btw, a lot of long runs come when guys load the box. There are ways to counter it but if you cant keep guys off your RB and QB, its a problem.

Thank you for the response. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

What are the differences of a ZBS and a Power Scheme? How do they work and what makes one more desirable than the other for our personnel.

Popps
11-10-2009, 09:35 PM
Thank you for the response. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

What are the differences of a ZBS and a Power Scheme? How do they work and what makes one more desirable than the other for our personnel.

The easiest way to think about it is that the zone schemes basically rely on athletic linemen, pulling, moving and attacking outward, trying to get D-lines moving and using that movement against them with counter-plays, etc.

Power running schemes are essentially asking a man to beat a man, and generally to stay engaged for a longer period of time.

As for which suits us better at this point, that's a difficult question. We're a team in transition. Clady is a big boy, but most of our guys aren't. I'd imagine we'll continue to get bigger on the line, and move towards a power scheme.

You also have to have the backs to run either, and honestly... I'm not sure what our guys are suited to running. They've looked good at times, and not so good at other times.

I don't think there's a quick fix. It's a transition period, and we're in the middle of it.

Bronco Yoda
11-10-2009, 09:47 PM
Obviously our line is not getting the job done the way it was last year. Through the last two games they have been getting pulverized off the ball. They can't give Orton time. They can't create running lanes.

A lot of people are blaming the scheme. Some people are blaming Wiegmann and Hamilton's inability to get any push on defenders. So what is it?

What is the main difference between a Zone Blocking scheme and a power running scheme? Why would Wiegmann and Hamilton be successful in a ZBS and not in a power scheme? I know they are a little on the small side (< 300 lbs.) but what are they being asked to do that is so different from lat year?

If someone could break this down for me I would really appreciate it.

ZBS is a different mindset. You're thinking "stretch and block" or "stretch and assist" depending on the coverage for running plays.

The first move would usually be a lateral move for position, not a forward move for blocking contact. It's all about getting position and a leverage advantage over the defenders. It was not about looking to overpower the defenders but to steer them. Often times entice them to go one way so our back could cutback and go through the empty hole.

You could even take care of blitzing defensive linemen and linebackers by permitting them to rush into areas of the offensive backfield that are unimportant in the play called by the offense. Meanwhile, the offensive linemen who vacated the unimportant area could then migrate to the point of attack, blocking defensive players that were closer to the action.

Our linemen in the ZBS use to look for specific areas of the field to block. If a defender was there, they would block the defender to control the spot. If not, they'd continue toward that spot, offering double-team assistance only if it was convenient. Once they controlled a zone, if they were not fully engaged, the linemen would then look to the "second level" for somebody in the defensive backfield to block (on run plays).

It was about deflecting, steering and enticing a defensive lineman. Using his own body size against himself in many cases and employing deception. Not to mention the cut block technique to finish them off with :rofl:.

Much different than the straight up shoving matches that guys like Hamilton are just not built for in these days.

Did I explain this correctly everyone? Assist me if I forgot something here. I can ramble on incoherently if you let me but I'm also lazy typer these days...:giggle:

strafen
11-10-2009, 09:57 PM
Good read, guys!

lex
11-10-2009, 10:03 PM
Thank you for the response. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

What are the differences of a ZBS and a Power Scheme? How do they work and what makes one more desirable than the other for our personnel.

ZBS involves an initial double team at where the play is originally designed to go followed by one of the linemen disengaging and getting to next level based on the flow of the defense. On the backside, it typically involves a lot of cutblocking and creating cutback lanes. So mobility is of a greater importance than man blocking where you engage your guy. If you have a hard time cutblocking and getting to the next level vs. straight up engaging a guy and controlling him, then man blocking is better. But the thing is that Ben has been struggling a lot with pass blocking as well.

McDaniels said he wants to run both and its possible the struggles are a function of Hamilton being injured (as ElSid said). And its also possible that Hamiltons injury is why McDaniels is running less ZBS. Even with Shanahan here, I thought we needed to get guys who can do both, partly because there have been several occasions of Hamilton getting ragdolled in shortyardage scenarios in previous years where the LOS is heavily saturated by defensive linemen and LBs.

Schlereth was one guy who could do both because even though he wasnt huge, he was still really strong...much stouter than Hamilton. Even if youre a technician, at guard, there should be a base level of strength (unless youre someone like Randall McDaniel, who is an outlier) that you should have.

lex
11-10-2009, 10:08 PM
ZBS is a different mindset. You're thinking "stretch and block" or "stretch and assist" depending on the coverage for running plays.

The first move would usually be a lateral move for position, not a forward move for blocking contact. It's all about getting position and a leverage advantage over the defenders. It was not about looking to overpower the defenders but to steer them. Often times entice them to go one way so our back could cutback and go through the empty hole.

You could even take care of blitzing defensive linemen and linebackers by permitting them to rush into areas of the offensive backfield that are unimportant in the play called by the offense. Meanwhile, the offensive linemen who vacated the unimportant area could then migrate to the point of attack, blocking defensive players that were closer to the action.

Our linemen in the ZBS use to look for specific areas of the field to block. If a defender was there, they would block the defender to control the spot. If not, they'd continue toward that spot, offering double-team assistance only if it was convenient. Once they controlled a zone, if they were not fully engaged, the linemen would then look to the "second level" for somebody in the defensive backfield to block (on run plays).

It was about deflecting, steering and enticing a defensive lineman. Using his own body size against himself in many cases and employing deception. Not to mention the cut block technique to finish them off with :rofl:.

Much different than the straight up shoving matches that guys like Hamilton are just not built for in these days.

Did I explain this correctly everyone? Assist me if I forgot something here. I can ramble on incoherently if you let me but I'm also lazy typer these days...:giggle:

You did well. But you forgot to mention how on the backside there is a lot of cutblocking, which not everyone is adept at.

DenverBound
11-10-2009, 10:15 PM
ZBS is a different mindset. You're thinking "stretch and block" or "stretch and assist" depending on the coverage for running plays.

The first move would usually be a lateral move for position, not a forward move for blocking contact. It's all about getting position and a leverage advantage over the defenders. It was not about looking to overpower the defenders but to steer them. Often times entice them to go one way so our back could cutback and go through the empty hole.

You could even take care of blitzing defensive linemen and linebackers by permitting them to rush into areas of the offensive backfield that are unimportant in the play called by the offense. Meanwhile, the offensive linemen who vacated the unimportant area could then migrate to the point of attack, blocking defensive players that were closer to the action.

Our linemen in the ZBS use to look for specific areas of the field to block. If a defender was there, they would block the defender to control the spot. If not, they'd continue toward that spot, offering double-team assistance only if it was convenient. Once they controlled a zone, if they were not fully engaged, the linemen would then look to the "second level" for somebody in the defensive backfield to block (on run plays).

It was about deflecting, steering and enticing a defensive lineman. Using his own body size against himself in many cases and employing deception. Not to mention the cut block technique to finish them off with :rofl:.

Much different than the straight up shoving matches that guys like Hamilton are just not built for in these days.

Did I explain this correctly everyone? Assist me if I forgot something here. I can ramble on incoherently if you let me but I'm also lazy typer these days...:giggle:

Wow. Thank you. That was very easy to understand. So guys like Casey and Ben would be considered more athletic technically sound than the type of guys we would need for power blocking? It sounds like we need some big, mean, nasty dummies. I really like the ZBS core idea. Why not create running lanes for our backs to run in? It seems like a no-brainer.

As I have always said, "Work smarter, not harder." It seems like power blocking is the latter.

+Rep for you and Lex. Thanks guys.

lex
11-10-2009, 10:22 PM
Wow. Thank you. That was very easy to understand. So guys like Casey and Ben would be considered more athletic technically sound than the type of guys we would need for power blocking? It sounds like we need some big, mean, nasty dummies. I really like the ZBS core idea. Why not create running lanes for our backs to run in? It seems like a no-brainer.

As I have always said, "Work smarter, not harder." It seems like power blocking is the latter.

+Rep for you and Lex. Thanks guys.

Again, McDaniels said he wants to do both. This is actually something I agree with. I definitely dont want to lose the ZBS but, rather, have more versatile personnel who arent so overwhelmed in matchup scenarios. There was actually a discussion on this board over the past couple of years about the need to get bigger/stronger linemen who are mobile enough over, say, mobile linemen you hope are strong enough. Ive been kind of hoping for the former. One of the things that makes that more possible is that youre seeing more college teams run ZBS like Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan, who havent exactly had small linemen.

Play2win
11-10-2009, 10:28 PM
Well, ZBS linemen don't usually make the best Pass-Pro. So, maybe, one major reason we are shifting towards a power running game is so that we have the linemen that give us better pass protection. McDaniels seems to want his passing offense, which means he will have to get the bigger, power running type of linemen, thus a shift away from the ZBS (for the most part).

sisterhellfyre
11-10-2009, 10:28 PM
What is the main difference between a Zone Blocking scheme and a power running scheme? Why would Wiegmann and Hamilton be successful in a ZBS and not in a power scheme? I know they are a little on the small side (< 300 lbs.) but what are they being asked to do that is so different from lat year?

The zone blocking scheme looks like an evolution of the play that made OJ famous at USC: student body left, and student body right. It's a combination of that and an "aikido" approach to line play.

On the snap of a zone-blocked run, the line starts to move as a unit. Three, or maybe even four, of the o-line step and move in the same direction at the same time. Back when Alex Gibbs coached in Denver, he literally drilled the linemen on taking that first step-&-turn with the correct foot, at the same time, in unison as tight as a chorus line. Their assignments amount to "hit the guy in front of you but don't stop." As the line continues to move, an individual defender may be hit and blocked by several different people in succession. It's like a wave in motion, creating a "flow" of the play in one direction.

In zone-blocked runs, you'll also frequently see one (or two) blocker(s) assigned as a kickout blocker. His job is to cut off backside pursuit from the defense. This is where blocking tight ends and fullbacks prove their incredible value, usually working against a crashing LB or DE. Ideally, if a WR on that side also tangles up the corner, that should leave the RB one-on-one against an LB or DE assigned to play containment.

Zone runs call for patience and vision from the running back. TD was great at this. The RB has to flow with the motion of the line and decide when and where to attack. He could go straight ahead, work to get around the corner on the outside, or cut back against the flow of the play into an open crease. TD's cutbacks were deadly. They would have been legendary league-wide (on the order of Jim Brown or Gale Sayers) if his career had not been cut short by injury. I know I'll never forget watching TD break off back-to-back 60-yard touchdown runs against the Cowboys in Old Mile High. (I only saw it on TV, but still.)

When the runner makes a cutback against the grain, the defense is likely to be virtually helpless. That's where the "aikido factor" comes into play: not only are they out of position, they're going the wrong way. The bigger the defender, the worse it gets because that momentum has to be stopped and reversed. It's why Gilbert Brown was a complete ragdoll on skates by the fourth quarter of Super Bowl 32. He was flat worn out from being forced, over and over again, to work against himself.

Man-up power blocking schemes are what most people think of as traditional Xs and Os football. That's the kind of thing you see drawn up on chalkboards in football movies: the TE takes the OLB, the LT takes the DE, man for man and so on down the line. That's the basics of it. There can be lots of combinations for the direction of blocking or double-teams against individuals, but it comes down to specific "you got that guy" assignments. There are also variant combinations with various linemen running as lead blockers on specific plays, like guards pulling out to head around the corner of the line.

In most cases, plays with man-up power blocking also call on the runner to hit a specific hole which the linemen should have cleared by the time the runner gets there.

With all that in mind, I'd guess it becomes easier to see why Hamilton can work as a zone blocker, but not in a man scheme. As a zone blocker, he can use motion, technique and leverage to beat the (often) larger defensive linemen. He doesn't have to "man up" against them, strength against strength and pound against pound. It's a good thing, cuz Hamilton doesn't have the pounds to do it! He's also not the wily, sneaky technician bastard that Tom Nalen was at center. And if Ben also has a hamstring problem limiting his mobility?

Two words: "he's toast." The Broncos delivered their single biggest weakness on offense to the Ravens on a silver platter. Hamilton and Weigmann were just easy pickings, and it was more of the same against Casey Hampton (the Steelers' NT).

As Popps said, the Broncos' zone-blocking line is being asked, this year, to do things they've never done before. And things, honestly, that some of them are not well-suited for. Some of us have observed that the most successful running plays have come on the infrequent occasions when McD calls a zone run. On other running plays, we see RBs (Moreno in particular) running into the backs of his linemen. It's not necessarily that Knowshon isn't showing enough patience. He expects the hole to be open by the time he gets there, and all too often, that isn't happening.

Knowshon comes from an elite college program, and he probably got used to his O-line having things their way against most defenses. It's taking him longer than we'd like to adjust his runs toward more patience, but it's an old and hard habit to break after years of coaches yelling at him to execute his part of the play as hard and fast as possible.

This is all just my opinion, of course. I hope it helps a bit?

Bronco Yoda
11-10-2009, 10:34 PM
I respect the versatility mindset McD has but wonder if the ZBS can really be affective if you only employ it here and there.

Your lineman have to be very disciplined and consistent, not giving visual cues to the defender as to their initial intention. You have to work together and use the cutblocks properly or it will work against you.

The reason we were so good at it was that we specialized in it. I do think we have the right backs for it still.

But like it's been said, we're in transition and at some point we're going to have to feel the pain.

sisterhellfyre
11-10-2009, 10:39 PM
I respect the versatility mindset McD has but wonder if the ZBS can really be affective if you only employ it here and there.

My guess would be that McD wants it all: guys strong enough for pass protection against bull rushers, big enough to win the shoving matches one-on-one, and mobile enough to run the zones. And smart enough to remember which is which and how to do all of the above. I admit it would play merry hell on a defense. It'll be interesting to see if he can pull it off.

lex
11-10-2009, 10:51 PM
My guess would be that McD wants it all: guys strong enough for pass protection against bull rushers, big enough to win the shoving matches one-on-one, and mobile enough to run the zones. And smart enough to remember which is which and how to do all of the above. I admit it would play merry hell on a defense. It'll be interesting to see if he can pull it off.

With the massive success of ZBS, more and more teams have started to do this, including in college. So this should better help you identify guys who are maybe versatile enough to do both. Back in the day when very few teams were doing this, there was, perhaps, a greater need to prioritize physical characteristics that you think are important due to a lack of film performing in the ZBS(essentially guess more). But again, now that you have more college teams (and prominent ones) you should be able to see guys who can do both, which diminishes the need to prioritize in a way that leads to tradeoffs.

ShutDownPoster
11-11-2009, 05:44 AM
I know I'll never forget watching TD break off back-to-back 60-yard touchdown runs against the Cowboys in Old Mile High. (I only saw it on TV, but still.)


Brings tears to my eyes whenever I think of those 2 plays...:notworthy

Rohirrim
11-11-2009, 06:43 AM
So, to sum it up:

ZBS = Aikido
Power blocking = Sumo

Garcia Bronco
11-11-2009, 06:46 AM
To be honest....they couldn't create running lanes last year either.

Garcia Bronco
11-11-2009, 06:46 AM
So, to sum it up:

ZBS = Aikido
Power blocking = Sumo

Except in this case ZBS actually works...unlike aikido.

elsid13
11-11-2009, 07:05 AM
OK this is excellent video on ZBS (can not embedded)

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-playbook/09000d5d80aec9cf

elsid13
11-11-2009, 07:07 AM
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Graphic/2007/08/05/1186329481_8559.gif

baja
11-11-2009, 07:08 AM
The zone blocking scheme looks like an evolution of the play that made OJ famous at USC: student body left, and student body right. It's a combination of that and an "aikido" approach to line play.

On the snap of a zone-blocked run, the line starts to move as a unit. Three, or maybe even four, of the o-line step and move in the same direction at the same time. Back when Alex Gibbs coached in Denver, he literally drilled the linemen on taking that first step-&-turn with the correct foot, at the same time, in unison as tight as a chorus line. Their assignments amount to "hit the guy in front of you but don't stop." As the line continues to move, an individual defender may be hit and blocked by several different people in succession. It's like a wave in motion, creating a "flow" of the play in one direction.

In zone-blocked runs, you'll also frequently see one (or two) blocker(s) assigned as a kickout blocker. His job is to cut off backside pursuit from the defense. This is where blocking tight ends and fullbacks prove their incredible value, usually working against a crashing LB or DE. Ideally, if a WR on that side also tangles up the corner, that should leave the RB one-on-one against an LB or DE assigned to play containment.

Zone runs call for patience and vision from the running back. TD was great at this. The RB has to flow with the motion of the line and decide when and where to attack. He could go straight ahead, work to get around the corner on the outside, or cut back against the flow of the play into an open crease. TD's cutbacks were deadly. They would have been legendary league-wide (on the order of Jim Brown or Gale Sayers) if his career had not been cut short by injury. I know I'll never forget watching TD break off back-to-back 60-yard touchdown runs against the Cowboys in Old Mile High. (I only saw it on TV, but still.)

When the runner makes a cutback against the grain, the defense is likely to be virtually helpless. That's where the "aikido factor" comes into play: not only are they out of position, they're going the wrong way. The bigger the defender, the worse it gets because that momentum has to be stopped and reversed. It's why Gilbert Brown was a complete ragdoll on skates by the fourth quarter of Super Bowl 32. He was flat worn out from being forced, over and over again, to work against himself.

Man-up power blocking schemes are what most people think of as traditional Xs and Os football. That's the kind of thing you see drawn up on chalkboards in football movies: the TE takes the OLB, the LT takes the DE, man for man and so on down the line. That's the basics of it. There can be lots of combinations for the direction of blocking or double-teams against individuals, but it comes down to specific "you got that guy" assignments. There are also variant combinations with various linemen running as lead blockers on specific plays, like guards pulling out to head around the corner of the line.

In most cases, plays with man-up power blocking also call on the runner to hit a specific hole which the linemen should have cleared by the time the runner gets there.

With all that in mind, I'd guess it becomes easier to see why Hamilton can work as a zone blocker, but not in a man scheme. As a zone blocker, he can use motion, technique and leverage to beat the (often) larger defensive linemen. He doesn't have to "man up" against them, strength against strength and pound against pound. It's a good thing, cuz Hamilton doesn't have the pounds to do it! He's also not the wily, sneaky technician bastard that Tom Nalen was at center. And if Ben also has a hamstring problem limiting his mobility?

Two words: "he's toast." The Broncos delivered their single biggest weakness on offense to the Ravens on a silver platter. Hamilton and Weigmann were just easy pickings, and it was more of the same against Casey Hampton (the Steelers' NT).

As Popps said, the Broncos' zone-blocking line is being asked, this year, to do things they've never done before. And things, honestly, that some of them are not well-suited for. Some of us have observed that the most successful running plays have come on the infrequent occasions when McD calls a zone run. On other running plays, we see RBs (Moreno in particular) running into the backs of his linemen. It's not necessarily that Knowshon isn't showing enough patience. He expects the hole to be open by the time he gets there, and all too often, that isn't happening.

Knowshon comes from an elite college program, and he probably got used to his O-line having things their way against most defenses. It's taking him longer than we'd like to adjust his runs toward more patience, but it's an old and hard habit to break after years of coaches yelling at him to execute his part of the play as hard and fast as possible.

This is all just my opinion, of course. I hope it helps a bit?

Question is why did McD scrap the ZBS that this line was built for and was one of the best in the NFL in favor of a system that our personal is not suited for and is failing at?

fontaine
11-11-2009, 07:20 AM
For the same reason he brought in Nolan: Because he through he could improve things.

But not every theory works in reality.

elsid13
11-11-2009, 07:21 AM
Question is why did McD scrap the ZBS that this line was built for and was one of the best in the NFL in favor of a system that our personal is not suited for and is failing at?

McDaniels didn't scrap the ZBS. Denver has run it a number of times this year and been successful with it. Because Denver has been playing 3-4 defenses last 3 games he has move to power/trap oriented scheme attack were he believe he can get advantage. Against SD, it work because the NT was missing , but the Ravens and Steelers NTs able to hold the point of attack.

McDaniels is very stubborn play caller and he didn't seem to adjust to well when game plan isn't working.

lex
11-11-2009, 08:14 AM
OK this is excellent video on ZBS (can not embedded)

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-playbook/09000d5d80aec9cf

I saw that too but thats more from a RBs perspective. But there are other videos that explain the ZBS (mostly how the double team works though).

lex
11-11-2009, 08:17 AM
McDaniels didn't scrap the ZBS. Denver has run it a number of times this year and been successful with it. Because Denver has been playing 3-4 defenses last 3 games he has move to power/trap oriented scheme attack were he believe he can get advantage. Against SD, it work because the NT was missing , but the Ravens and Steelers NTs able to hold the point of attack.

McDaniels is very stubborn play caller and he didn't seem to adjust to well when game plan isn't working.

Hey, something else stands out to me that supports your Hamilton is injured observation. On a lot of short yardage plays, theyve been running traps, which isnt ideal since it takes time to develop. But maybe he has been doing that because he has such little trust in the interior line (namely Hamilton) holding the point of attack?

Tombstone RJ
11-11-2009, 08:18 AM
Thank you for the response. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

What are the differences of a ZBS and a Power Scheme? How do they work and what makes one more desirable than the other for our personnel.

Try not to pay attention to lex, he thinks he knows football but he really doesn't.

What is the difference you ask?

The ZBS is exactly what it says it is: its blocking a zone, not a man. That is, you move to a certain area of the field and whoever is there, you put a body on him. This requires a quick, fast, athletic lineman who can get to the second level.

The power running game is just that, power. The oline blocks individuals, man on man or two on one. It's about overpowering the defensive line.

Hope this helps.

Rohirrim
11-11-2009, 09:05 AM
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Graphic/2007/08/05/1186329481_8559.gif

FB? What's that?




I kid. ;D

Gort
11-11-2009, 09:09 AM
McDaniels is very stubborn play caller

this. and i think he feels alot of pressure to get the running game going in order for the rest of the gameplan to work. everything else in the gameplan is probably predicated on a functional running game.