Blocking Scheme?

[The Raven]

What kind of blocking scheme are we running? I know last year we *attempted* a zone blocking scheme without Harbs' approval. I'm hearing that we're running a similar scheme this year, with minor changes. I'm really not that big a fan of the zone blocking scheme. I wanna see more drive and man blocking schemes, though I realize a healthy mix would be beneficial.

Typically, teams run a zone-blocking scheme for one or two reasons. First, they have a RB wih great vision, and good at finding holes/cutback lanes. We have that in Ray Rice. Second, they have olinemen that are athletic and quick, instead of really big. In zone blocking schemes, the OL doesn't really make a hole, they just push the defense, while the RB looks for the holes and cutback lanes. In a man scheme, the OL makes one single hole, where the RB knows where to go. I prefer a man scheme because I prefer RBs to hit the hole hard, and not dance in the backfield looking for a hole. I think our OL are strong enough to create holes and Rice spent a lot of time (too much time imo) dancing and looking for a hole. That caused defenses to stuff him more, which really hurt his ability.

Sources:

[url="http://static.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/davie/1440703.html"]http://static.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/davie/1440703.html[/url]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_blocking"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_blocking[/url]

[url="http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/content/25768-o-line-schemes-zone-blocking-vs-drive-blocking.html"]http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/content/25768-o-line-schemes-zone-blocking-vs-drive-blocking.html[/url]

What are your thoughts? What scheme should we run?

[gabefergy]

We definitely ran a lot of zone blocking plays in week 3. I actually like the scheme, especially against 3-4 defenses it seems to negate the ability of the DLineman to effectively play 2 gaps. I also like the zone blocking when we are in 12 personnel or 3 WRs. It gives Ray RIce more space to operate and make cut backs IMO.

I think we will see both types of blocking schemes depending on personnel and what type of defensive fronts we are playing against.

[RoflDogs]

It's stupid to assume that there's a lot of dancing in the backfield for a zone scheme. The RB just has to wait for the hole to open, and when he does, it's one cut into the hole and accelerate, not much dancing (this cannot be attributed to scheme, but more to players).

We've been running a lot of zone in preseason

[flynismo]

Great. I see McKinnie being an awesome fit in a zone scheme. Not.

[PuRock]

Wouldn't be surprised if we see a mix. They've been experimenting with a ton of different things this TC. I would prefer to shy away from the zone blocking with the pieces we have.

[organizedchaos007]

[quote name='gabefergy' timestamp='1314727600' post='770972']
We definitely ran a lot of zone blocking plays in week 3. I actually like the scheme, especially against 3-4 defenses it seems to negate the ability of the DLineman to effectively play 2 gaps. I also like the zone blocking when we are in 12 personnel or 3 WRs. It gives Ray RIce more space to operate and make cut backs IMO.

I think we will see both types of blocking schemes depending on personnel and what type of defensive fronts we are playing against.
[/quote]
This...


Unfortunately I dont think our personnel on the Oline match up well with the zone scheme. I think our guards and Oher at RT is great for the zone scheme, but with Mckinney at LT, and an aging Birk at center, I think there is more risk than reward there. Rice's vision is amazing tho, and you could see that on those zone stretch plays they were running with him early in the Redskins game.

[Suggs Package]

[quote name='organizedchaos007' timestamp='1314734864' post='771125']
This...


Unfortunately I dont think our personnel on the Oline match up well with the zone scheme. I think our guards and Oher at RT is great for the zone scheme, but with Mckinney at LT, and an aging Birk at center, I think there is more risk than reward there. Rice's vision is amazing tho, and you could see that on those zone stretch plays they were running with him early in the Redskins game.
[/quote]

From the plays I've watched in the preseason, it seems like the Ravens are reserving their zone blocking schemes for stretch plays but otherwise are sticking to more normal typical schemes. I think those stretch plays will make our play-action fakes more effective. McKinnie is more athletic than it seems for someone his size (he could run a 5.1 40 at 345 pounds) but dude has to get in shape.

[organizedchaos007]

[quote name='Suggs Package' timestamp='1314736684' post='771173']

From the plays I've watched in the preseason, it seems like the Ravens are reserving their zone blocking schemes for stretch plays but otherwise are sticking to more normal typical schemes. I think those stretch plays will make our play-action fakes more effective. McKinnie is more athletic than it seems for someone his size (he could run a 5.1 40 at 345 pounds) but dude has to get in shape.
[/quote]
yea hes 370 lbs. and several years from that 5.1 lol. But I think your other analysis is spot on.

[Ravensfan23]

As for the Preseason, I think you guys have to account for the amount of youth and changes on our Oline, for the zone blocking scheme.

IMO, it's a bit easier for the oline to cut a guy off, instead of man block him, which allowed guys like Mattison, Reid, Cousins, Harewood, and other to have a better chance of having success with run blocking.

As for the season, I think the person who said we'll see a bit of both was spot on.

When we are playing a fast flowing, overly aggressive, run blitz heavy type team, we'll probably see a good deal of zone blocking, to take advantage of cutbacks.

When we are playing a 4-3 team like the Colts who are quick, but we are bigger and stronger then, we'll probably just lean on them all game.

I actually like the potential of our oline, especially in the run blocking aspect. But more importantly, I love our RBs and they way they attack the LOS.

Rice has tremendous vision and big play ability.
Leach is a mauler.
Both Ricky and Allen are very powerful guys, who don't waste time when the ball is in their hands. They see the hole, hit it and truck anyone in their way.

I really like how our running game is shaping up.

[scrock]

Whatever blocking scheme works thats the one I want to run haha

Seriously though, with Oher moving back to RT and Yanda right next to him I can see us running a lot of plays to the right side.

McKinnie would play LT better than Oher, he started playing that position as a rookie and now that he's grown an matured he should bring some stability to the blindside. With Birk back and practicing and getting him back in time for week 1 I think our OL will hold up well against the Steelers. I just hope if Troy is coming on a blitz that someone picks him up ...ENTER Vonta Leach

thank you!!!!

[Thepurplehaze]

For some reason I see McKinnie and Birk (if he plays) getting torched the first game...

[The Raven]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314727972' post='770983']
It's stupid to assume that there's a lot of dancing in the backfield for a zone scheme. The RB just has to wait for the hole to open, and when he does, it's one cut into the hole and accelerate, not much dancing (this cannot be attributed to scheme, but more to players).

We've been running a lot of zone in preseason
[/quote]

In the zone blocking scheme, it is not really the oline's job to make the hole. The RB has to find something. That's the main reason I don't like it. The Oline's job is to make holes.

I don't mind running zone on stretch plays, but I'd rather keep the majority of the playbook man-blocking.

Our linemen are suited for zone, except McKinnie and Birk. But, they are more than capable of blocking man to man. Yanda, Grubbs, and Oher are all more than capable of blocking their man. I like running double team blocks or deuce-combo's up to the backers, which is a zone thing, but I really wanna see man blocking. It's really more efficient when there's a single predetermined hole the RB can just run to. For example, Allen and Williams would be better suited running behind a man scheme, as they are more of a straight ahead RB. I also wanna see some trap block schemes. Our guards are good at pulling, and Oher is athletic as well. We could really trap the heck out of some teams.

[RoflDogs]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314748618' post='771351']

[b]In the zone blocking scheme, it is not really the oline's job to make the hole.[/b] The RB has to find something. That's the main reason I don't like it. The Oline's job is to make holes.

I don't mind running zone on stretch plays, but I'd rather keep the majority of the playbook man-blocking.

Our linemen are suited for zone, except McKinnie and Birk. But, they are more than capable of blocking man to man. Yanda, Grubbs, and Oher are all more than capable of blocking their man. I like running double team blocks or deuce-combo's up to the backers, which is a zone thing, but I really wanna see man blocking. It's really more efficient when there's a single predetermined hole the RB can just run to. For example, Allen and Williams would be better suited running behind a man scheme, as they are more of a straight ahead RB. I also wanna see some trap block schemes. Our guards are good at pulling, and Oher is athletic as well. We could really trap the heck out of some teams.
[/quote]

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard

[Guest ArmyRaven52]

I am a fan of the old school put a hat on a hat and push him back style of football. I think it would also serve us well because of RR's quickness. I know it could be utilized very well in a zone blocking scheme as well, but I like the thought of him being one on one with a corner or safety much more than a D lineman or linebacker.

Once rice gets there he gets to the second level extremely quick and is so low that most people don't see him until he is 4 or 5 yards up the field.

I also think our personnel this year will not allow for that. However we have very powerful men all along the line and in 3 of the 5 positions we have on the line we hav e top 3 at their position in any scheme. The other 2 is why we have to run man because they don't move well laterally but when they put their heads down and move forwards they can do some damage.

[The Raven]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314814571' post='771805']

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard
[/quote]

Read the links I provided sir......

If you could only read an article... [img]http://content.boards.baltimoreravens.com//public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]

From the second article.

"Creating movement on the defensive line is more important than opening a specific hole in the defense."

Quote from the third article

"The main difference between Drive blocking and Zone blocking is that with [b]Drive blocking you are trying to open a hole in a specific place [/b]and with Zone blocking [b]you are putting bodies on bodies and let the running back find the hole[/b]."

Man, would ya look at that! It's amazing what you can learn when you read.

@ ArmyRaven52

I agree completely. I much prefer the old school style of football. Lineman make the holes, and RBs need to hit it hard. With the zone scheme, because the RB has to look for the hole, he cant hit it as hard. With a man scheme, he knows where it should be, and can go full speed into it.

[BloodRaven]

We run multiple schemes from week to week, zone, gap iso and man. With limited athleticism across the line we're probably better suited to man.

[RoflDogs]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314837014' post='772111']

Read the links I provided sir......

If you could only read an article... [img]http://content.boards.baltimoreravens.com//public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]

From the second article.

"Creating movement on the defensive line is more important than opening a specific hole in the defense."

Quote from the third article

"The main difference between Drive blocking and Zone blocking is that with [b]Drive blocking you are trying to open a hole in a specific place [/b]and with Zone blocking [b]you are putting bodies on bodies and let the running back find the hole[/b]."

Man, would ya look at that! It's amazing what you can learn when you read.

@ ArmyRaven52

I agree completely. I much prefer the old school style of football. Lineman make the holes, and RBs need to hit it hard. With the zone scheme, because the RB has to look for the hole, he cant hit it as hard. With a man scheme, he knows where it should be, and can go full speed into it.
[/quote]


So you are saying that we could put 5 High School kickers on the OL, and if the RB can't find holes, it's his fault?

That's just stupid

[T3hRaven]

I would prefer to run a man blocking scheme considering how much success we had with that before Cam got this stupid idea that we have a finesse offensive line. With the exception of Birk, our OL is more than strong enough to take a man and drive him to get the hole open for Ray Rice, especially on the right side with Oher and Yanda. I guarantee Ray Rice's production and average yards per carry would be back where it should be with this simple commitment to a different blocking scheme.

It's the right move for the team though, so the chances of Cam doing that are hovering around 0%.

[gabefergy]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314854900' post='772308']


So you are saying that we could put 5 High School kickers on the OL, and if the RB can't find holes, it's his fault?

That's just stupid
[/quote]

Once again, if you actually understood the differences in the schemes you would see how ridiculous a comment you just made. It's still the job of the Olineman to open up holes, but the way that happens is not the same. Instead of focusing on 1 gap in a Drive or Man blocking scheme, the Zone scheme stretches out the defensive front by lateral or diagonal movement and allows the RB to find the lanes. The Olineman are still blocking the Defensive players, but the movement is different and it gives the RB more options. RBs must have good vision and have the ability to make fast and decisive cuts.

[The Raven]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314854900' post='772308']


So you are saying that we could put 5 High School kickers on the OL, and if the RB can't find holes, it's his fault?

That's just stupid
[/quote]

"Thats the most rediculous thing I've ever heard"

Read the articles, and then read Gabefergy's post above, and then if you want to continue debating this, we'll continue. Like I've already said, I hate zone blocking, for the most part. There are parts I like, but I don't like it.

[The Raven]

[quote name='BloodRaven' timestamp='1314847697' post='772251']
We run multiple schemes from week to week, zone, gap iso and man. With limited athleticism across the line we're probably better suited to man.
[/quote]

I like Iso, and gap. I need to do more research with those schemes though.

I agree, Mckinnie and Birk aren't quick enough to play in a zone scheme.

[RoflDogs]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314748618' post='771351']

In the zone blocking scheme, it is not really the oline's job to make the hole.
[/quote]

That's what I said was ridiculous because if the OL doesn't make holes, then who does?

And I am very aware of what zone blocking is >.>

[The Raven]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314893387' post='772484']

That's what I said was ridiculous because if the OL doesn't make holes, then who does?

And I am very aware of what zone blocking is >.>
[/quote]

I know its rediculous, this is why I don't like the scheme. They're just supposed to move people, and let the RB run where he thinks there's a lane.

[PurpleReign92]

[quote name='Suggs Package' timestamp='1314736684' post='771173']

From the plays I've watched in the preseason, it seems like the Ravens are reserving their zone blocking schemes for stretch plays but otherwise are sticking to more normal typical schemes. I think those stretch plays will make our play-action fakes more effective. McKinnie is more athletic than it seems for someone his size (he could run a 5.1 40 at 345 pounds) but dude has to get in shape.
[/quote]
I agree with you that McKinnie is more athletic at the line of scrimmage.. I notice that Grubbs tends to leave his position and block for the running back... What kind of a block would it be if Grubbs runs 10 yards deep to block for Ray Rice and then Leach rolls off of Ben Grubbs to block another 20 yrds deep? Potentially giving holes enough for Ray Rice to run 30+ yards and giving us the field position we need to get that 3 pts...

[The Raven]

[quote name='PurpleReign92' timestamp='1314919640' post='772916']
I agree with you that McKinnie is more athletic at the line of scrimmage.. I notice that Grubbs tends to leave his position and block for the running back... What kind of a block would it be if Grubbs runs 10 yards deep to block for Ray Rice and then Leach rolls off of Ben Grubbs to block another 20 yrds deep? Potentially giving holes enough for Ray Rice to run 30+ yards and giving us the field position we need to get that 3 pts...
[/quote]

It sounds like you might be describing a pull... Is he pulling around the line? Or is he going straight?

[RoflDogs]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314918780' post='772902']

I know its rediculous, this is why I don't like the scheme. [b]They're just supposed to move people[/b], and let the RB run where he thinks there's a lane.
[/quote]

Which is called creating a hole

[The Raven]

[quote name='RoflDogs' timestamp='1314936226' post='773966']

Which is called creating a hole
[/quote]

Wrong. Do you, or have you played OL? Ever coached OL? Moving people does not mean making a hole. For example, what if the tacke blocked somebody into the hole? What if the guard moved somebody the wrong way? What if he blocked him into the play? By your logic, he moved someone, therefore, he made a hole. However, he moved someone [i]into[/i] the hole. Just read the articles sir, because they also seem to suggest that moving people isn't necesarily making a hole............

[Suggs Package]

[quote name='PurpleReign92' timestamp='1314919640' post='772916']
I agree with you that McKinnie is more athletic at the line of scrimmage.. I notice that Grubbs tends to leave his position and block for the running back... What kind of a block would it be if Grubbs runs 10 yards deep to block for Ray Rice and then Leach rolls off of Ben Grubbs to block another 20 yrds deep? Potentially giving holes enough for Ray Rice to run 30+ yards and giving us the field position we need to get that 3 pts...
[/quote]


I think you're talking about an "On, Inside, Second Level" blocking scheme. Some people call it "OIL" and its one of the basic schemes. Pretty much Grubbs has the option to block the man in front of him. If there is no man, he blocks the area nearest the hole for the RB. If he's too far from the play, then his assignment is to block the second level. Leach would essentially follow the same model. That only works when there's is no tackle on the LG.

A strategy to get Grubbs to the second level initially is to pull a RG or RT over to replace his position on the field.

[RoflDogs]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314960591' post='774093']

Wrong. Do you, or have you played OL? Ever coached OL? Moving people does not mean making a hole. For example, what if the tacke blocked somebody into the hole? What if the guard moved somebody the wrong way? What if he blocked him into the play? By your logic, he moved someone, therefore, he made a hole. However, he moved someone [i]into[/i] the hole. Just read the articles sir, because they also seem to suggest that moving people isn't necesarily making a hole............
[/quote]

I have played OL before (albeit unwillingly). Your logic is flawed because if a hole is created, it means a lineman moves somebody to make that hole

[PurpleReign92]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1314924163' post='773271']

It sounds like you might be describing a pull... Is he pulling around the line? Or is he going straight?
[/quote]
Ben Grubbs is actually leaving the line of Scrimmage as the QB toss has been made!