There is a ton of fail in this post. Sounds like something by a guy who has a play on a piece of paper that says can't be stopped. I've got news for you- THOSE LITTLE X's ON THE PAPER MOVE!
Bill Bleil
- Thread starter mkadl
- Start date
There is a ton of fail in this post. Sounds like something by a guy who has a play on a piece of paper that says can't be stopped. I've got news for you- THOSE LITTLE X's ON THE PAPER MOVE!
100% correct. The best way to describe zone blocking for those that have never been around it is to compare it to how a quarterback checks off receivers during pass plays. There are only a certain number of situations where you know 100% "this is my guy" regardless of what happens. There is a proper timing and almost a cadance involved with zone blocking especially when working up to the second level. Go to fast and the LB comes underneath you and disrupts the play, go to slow and they go over top of you and disrupt the play. You basically check off zones as you do your foot work through the play and react to what happens. If not properly prepared slants/stunts/blitzes can disrupt zone blocking when the Oline hesitates or makes the wrong decision. However when properly prepared zone blocking can dominate a game regardless of who is behind you. There is a lot that goes into zone blocking and my view is that the Oline makes a lot of mental mistakes with their reads. I have seen too many times where a d-lineman who slants is not being passed off to the next lineman and we end up having two on a slanting DL going away from the play or a proper line call is not made about crashing and pulling into a zone based upon which spot the DL is lined up which leaves a wide open lane for a LBer to disrupt the play. Just appears ISU's line really struggles with proper decision and timing while progressing through their footwork which puts them in bad positions and makes proper technique very hard.
As stated before I don't know the ins and outs of ISU's offense but spending as much time as I did playing in college as well as coaching zone blocking in high school team camps as well as spending a spring ball as a volunteer student assistant OL coach while finishing my degree I have a very good understanding of the core basics of zone blocking. Just some thoughts I have as an outsider looking in.
Tre4ISU, FarminCy, in your estimation, why is it ISU's up-front guys are having the problems they are having? Coaching?
Not enough time in the program? Something else?
With the ton of guys coming back in 2013, and expecting some of the guards to shuffle to tackle as CPR stated last fall, do you expect better things of this group after spring ball and summer camp? Or, is it impossible to predict how much (if any) progress this group can make over the next eight months?
Thanks. I enjoy reading both of your perspectives.
Not enough time in the program? Something else?
With the ton of guys coming back in 2013, and expecting some of the guards to shuffle to tackle as CPR stated last fall, do you expect better things of this group after spring ball and summer camp? Or, is it impossible to predict how much (if any) progress this group can make over the next eight months?
Thanks. I enjoy reading both of your perspectives.
I don't know about the playbook but when prepared even a very complex zone blocking scheme is one of the simplest things to do on game day. Just have to be prepared for all scenario's and know how to react and it is easy to run. We only really had three blocking plays, inside zone, outside zone, and fly. Each play fell into one of those three categories and you handled your calls and what your zone progression was based on which category it was. Now there are lots of sets that can be thrown at you from the D that you need to react to that can get complicated but the base part of zone blocking is easy to implement.
CPR said this very thing a couple of months ago during his Monday call-in show. That is, guards playing out of position last fall moving to tackle for spring ball.
Not sure what the exact cause is. I'm not saying that the Oline is way out of position on every play, that isn't even close to what is happening. But there are alot of times where they are out of position by about half a second at the point of contact. That too me just falls back to hesitation with their decision making as they progress through their footwork. Which can be coaching or just the fact some players can't process their decision fast enough. Time will tell what the issue is. Hopefully with more experience these small errors that have big consequences will stop over time.
There have been ongoing technique issues with the OL ever since Bleil came on board and they became worse this past season. The run blocking was atrocious this season. Farniok and Burris (before he got injured) both noticeably regressed this season compared to last season. The OL was, by far, the most underachieving unit on the team given their physical talent and experience.
If CPR isn't going to change the offense, then Bleil needs to be replaced because it's become obvious over the past 4 years he cannot adequately coach up the available talent. If the offense is changed to more of a North-South rushing attack, then maybe he can be retained.
So, it's a matter of something(s) small, in your opinion? Are our guys big enough and tough enough? That is, do we start with enough size and the right attitude, it's something else that troubles the O-line, such as technique and decision-making.
Are our O-line kids tough? Gotta have that before anything else, I'd guess. Are we good in this area?
This is what has been really confusing to me about the play calling. Zone blocking is built for more vertical running plays by splitting the lineman out and letting them progress through their footwork and be patient for a seam to develop. When you run vertical the timing and decision making issues of the OL aren't as dramatic as they are when you run horizontal. It has boggled my mind that ISU seemed to abandon the vertical running game as the season went.
I think you walk a fine line when you are trying to build the style of offensive line we are, with some "projects" for lack of the better term. Speaking generally, you are trying to make TEs OTs, OTs OGs and then a lot of the better spread centers will be undersized. David Molk won the RImington at 280 lbs and probably doesn't have a huge NFL future. The thing is, the skillset is pretty different. This year you have 6'6 guys trying to play guard and at the weight they are at, that's tough IMO. Thats from the physical side of it. I mean, a LT is a LT is a LT in pretty much any system. That guy doesn't change in skillset much but the rest can. CPR wants a mobile line, but you still need to have the strength and power piece. Like I said, fine line.
I also don't think there's a cohesiveness about the group. They should all work in tandem all the time. Tom Farniok, IMO, looked like a guy who could be a 3 time all conference player last year. This year he was not. I don't know why this is. Certainly injuries affect this.
I don't think Bleils that good of a coach. That's just what I see. The evidence is KO, HH, Bykowski, Farniok etc. KO is on the all rookie team. He was pretty good last year but he wasn't nearly what he is now. Bykowski should have an NFL career based on talent but you don't see improvement.
I think they lost faith in the interior line to be honest. The OTs weren't all that bad. They looked bad when the middle pushed there was no pocket to help them.
I disagree - if you are calling the same running play for Woody as you are for Shontrelle you are doing it wrong.
And if you are calling the same passing play for a blocking TE vs. a receiving TE you are also doing it wrong. Or calling for the RB to run behind the TE if it is a TE who catches better than he blocks.
That's what I have felt the second half of the season. Zone blocking schemes require that you have enough faith in the guy next to you that you let a slanting DL go or come off that double team at the second level. Just doesn't appear there is a lot of faith in each other right now. At times there was a lot of talking to each other after blown plays and that tells me that both guys thought they were right on their read and blaming each other. That is an issue that falls back on preparation by the coaching staff when in the second half of the season starting OL are bickering about who made the right read.
I don't know if that's what is actually happening but for the most part when Olineman are talking to each other after a play it is because one thinks the other screwed up and vice versa.
When the O is clicking and the OLine is playing good, outside of line calls it is very rare to say more than 10-20 words to each other the entire game while on the field. Everyone does their job so there is nothing to discuss. Obviously side lines are a different story.
Agreed. Both running and passing plays the interior line was first give up penetration on most plays. It was pretty frustrating to see DT's and LB's coming through the interior line and disrupting outside running plays they were getting through so fast. Based on how fast the interior was getting penetration at times is why I have to believe it was decision making as the number one factor.
Yeah. Let's say for arguments sake we run a similar rushing attack that Oregon does. We do, but let's say we are successful for fun. Now, Those great rushing attacks have been beaten by Stanford and Auburn recently. The other losses weren't probably on the offense. Now, what did those teams do?
Auburn: Oregon decided they were going to try and take Auburns best DL out of the game by optioning off, therefor making him wrong and not having to block him. The problem was, Fairley was just too good and could make plays on both sides of the option so it didn't work.
Stanford: Completely won in the interior. Their DTs were able to get upfield and disrupt most running plays even if they were going to the outside. If it was them it was linebackers. KSU has pretty damn good DE and Oregon had success running the football despite that.
My point is that if you take away the middle of a rushing attack like Oregons or ours or any system like it, you will disrupt the running game. It's a matter of how aggressively you have to do that. If they are sending 2 LBers up the middle, then there is obviously room to do other things. If they are doing it with just DTs, then you have huge problems because you simple will not have enough blocking to cut off the backside and the defense can flow. There lies our problem, I believe.
For the record and no Hell hasn't frozen over, but I completely agree with you on this.
I endorse this message.
To my educated, but not expert, opinion- a lot of our running problems seemed to be up the middle. It seems like we had trouble at times both with DTs blowing up the play or with the defense bringing extra linebackers and us not being able to make them pay.
Another year of experience for Farniok and Tuftee, plus a healthy Dika, should help I hope.