Fixes on O

[RonJohn]

Blocking assignments here were more the playside, but in either case, there was no downfield blocking carried out...the closest thing was 73 getting swung out at the 3 yard mark past the LOS.

Someone like longestday would need to break the play down because I'm not an expert. However I think 73 was assigned to the m lb on that play. He interrupted the m lb enough that he couldn't make a play on the QB. If the m lb had been lined up two yards further back, or if the m lb had taken a step backwards then 73 would have been more than 3 yards downfield to cover his assignment.

To understand if changes would be more tweeks or major changes I would need to see diagrams of both blocking responsibilities. If 73 is responsible for the m lb, this can't be a pass play because you can't be certain pre snap of the m lb will be within 3 yards or not. If 73 is given a different assignment to protect against being too far downfield then a running back or wr needs to pick him up in case the QB runs. That would mean you lose a receiver or an outside blocker.

Not trying to say your idea is bad, I would just need to see more details about how you would want the blocking scheme to work.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Techster]

Someone like longestday would need to break the play down because I'm not an expert. However I think 73 was assigned to the m lb on that play. He interrupted the m lb enough that he couldn't make a play on the QB. If the m lb had been lined up two yards further back, or if the m lb had taken a step backwards then 73 would have been more than 3 yards downfield to cover his assignment.

To understand if changes would be more tweeks or major changes I would need to see diagrams of both blocking responsibilities. If 73 is responsible for the m lb, this can't be a pass play because you can't be certain pre snap of the m lb will be within 3 yards or not. If 73 is given a different assignment to protect against being too far downfield then a running back or wr needs to pick him up in case the QB runs. That would mean you lose a receiver or an outside blocker.

Not trying to say your idea is bad, I would just need to see more details about how you would want the blocking scheme to work.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Agree about 73 "reaching" out beyond 3 yards to the MLB and making it illegal...but that's the thing. He doesn't need to. He could have just as easily slide (to the right) and sealed off before he went into the illegal 3 yard mark. Even then, Josh would have already read whether it was a pass or run.



Is it a lot to ask? Sure, but I think most RPO's are to a certain extent...but that's what practice and repetition is about.

 

[Techster]

S

To understand if changes would be more tweeks or major changes I would need to see diagrams of both blocking responsibilities. If 73 is responsible for the m lb, this can't be a pass play because you can't be certain pre snap of the m lb will be within 3 yards or not. If 73 is given a different assignment to protect against being too far downfield then a running back or wr needs to pick him up in case the QB runs. That would mean you lose a receiver or an outside blocker.

Not trying to say your idea is bad, I would just need to see more details about how you would want the blocking scheme to work.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Just saw this. Our blocking schemes and assignments vary. Not sure why some are so locked into the idea that we only zone block. From my understanding, we are not a pure "zone blocking" scheme, we actually combo block a lot...but it all depends on the front, the play, etc. Pretty good breakdown halfway down here:

https://www.xandolabs.com/index.php...terior-exterior-blocking1&catid=94&Itemid=162

Offensive Line Blocking Foundation

Regardless of the splits coaches use along their front, it’s essential to understand the blocking schemes associated with veer and option concepts. This area of the study we found to be of high interest- was coaches teaching gap blocking concepts, man blocking concepts or zone blocking concepts to their front? In its purest sense, the veer option concept is designed to read the C gap play side defender and block everything back away from him.

So when I hear "We can't do that...it changes our offense!"...well no it doesn't. Assignments for each OL isn't always static, and that's what makes CPJ's blocking tweaks so revered. To your point about knowing what 73's assignment was...well, I'm sure CPJ would say "It depends."

 

[AE 87]

Just saw this. Our blocking schemes and assignments vary. Not sure why some are so locked into the idea that we only zone block. From my understanding, we are not a pure "zone blocking" scheme, we actually combo block a lot...but it all depends on the front, the play, etc. Pretty good breakdown halfway down here:

https://www.xandolabs.com/index.php...terior-exterior-blocking1&catid=94&Itemid=162

Offensive Line Blocking Foundation

Regardless of the splits coaches use along their front, it’s essential to understand the blocking schemes associated with veer and option concepts. This area of the study we found to be of high interest- was coaches teaching gap blocking concepts, man blocking concepts or zone blocking concepts to their front? In its purest sense, the veer option concept is designed to read the C gap play side defender and block everything back away from him.

So when I hear "We can't do that...it changes our offense!"...well no it doesn't. Assignments for each OL isn't always static, and that's what makes CPJ's blocking tweaks so revered. To your point about knowing what 73's assignment was...well, I'm sure CPJ would say "It depends."

Who's saying we zone block?

I'm saying that most of our blocking assignments for our core running plays are NOT zone blocking.

We run play action pass plays where we keep the OL at home, and the QB has the option to keep it and run.

 

[RonJohn]

So when I hear "We can't do that...it changes our offense!"...well no it doesn't. Assignments for each OL isn't always static, and that's what makes CPJ's blocking tweaks so revered. To your point about knowing what 73's assignment was...well, I'm sure CPJ would say "It depends."

I never said "We can't do that...it changes our offense". I simply said that in order to know if your changes would be minor tweeks or a major change to this play I would need to understand the play, the assignments, and what your modifications do to all of those assignments and the defensive reactions to them.

I'm not sure that 73 shifting to the right would work to prevent the MLB from making a play. If 73 did shift he would run into the other offensive lineman and defensive lineman who are engaged to his right. The MLB would potentially be able to get around them and make a play on the QB.

A lot of teams who run RPOs don't actually decide whether to pass or run after the snap. It is decided pre-snap depending on the defensive alignment. In the play that you linked to, it doesn't look like the QB ever considered passing. It looks like he read an option to the RB and then immediately ran.