Question about blocking
- Thread starter stech81
- Start date
With Duke lining up almost a full 2 yards off the LOS this upcoming Saturday, if we try to cut their D-Line, we will have yet another frustrating day against their D. Like Texwood has already suggested in another thread, power block them high and knock them backwards. I mean, with at least 19 O-Line assistant coaches, you'd think we'd be able to teach this and execute effectively. 
I like less cut blocks whenever possible. Power blocking will lead to more holding calls potentially because your arms are potentially more involved. Cut blocking (IMO) is a high risk, high reward strategy. It is pretty much "either/or". You either cut effectively in space and take a defender out (high reward potential if everybody is effective) or you don't (high risk). Good defenders know how to use their arms to neutralize a cut block attempt and deem it ineffective. A power block OTOH can still be effective, though not as high a reward because the defender can still break off the block and make a play. It is less risky because even a poorly executed power block can still "get in the way" and force the defender to "get around the blocker".
I think power blocking is of course better for pass blocking...with the exception of when a 180 pound running back is in the backfield trying to pass block a 270 pound defensive end which is when a cut block makes far better sense. All teams cut block. All of them. I used to go through and find YouTube video of the crybabies at Virginia Tech and Cheaterville showing their fans where their guys cut block. It is legal in CFB and makes good sense in the right moments. As an overall guiding strategy? The military academies do a lot of it because restrictions on their guys' size and abilities to attract 300+ pound mammoth OL's often give them a size disadvantage and at least that is the theory as to why they may do more cut blocking than brute force up-high power blocking.
I like less cut blocks whenever possible. Power blocking will lead to more holding calls potentially because your arms are potentially more involved. Cut blocking (IMO) is a high risk, high reward strategy. It is pretty much "either/or". You either cut effectively in space and take a defender out (high reward potential if everybody is effective) or you don't (high risk). Good defenders know how to use their arms to neutralize a cut block attempt and deem it ineffective. A power block OTOH can still be effective, though not as high a reward because the defender can still break off the block and make a play. It is less risky because even a poorly executed power block can still "get in the way" and force the defender to "get around the blocker".
I think power blocking is of course better for pass blocking...with the exception of when a 180 pound running back is in the backfield trying to pass block a 270 pound defensive end which is when a cut block makes far better sense. All teams cut block. All of them. I used to go through and find YouTube video of the crybabies at Virginia Tech and Cheaterville showing their fans where their guys cut block. It is legal in CFB and makes good sense in the right moments. As an overall guiding strategy? The military academies do a lot of it because restrictions on their guys' size and abilities to attract 300+ pound mammoth OL's often give them a size disadvantage and at least that is the theory as to why they may do more cut blocking than brute force up-high power blocking.
Turn the scenario around and you get your answer IMO.
How is it best for a 180 pound cornerback to tackle a 240 pound running back? Up high? No way. The 240 pound bowling ball (see James Conner at Pitt) will run right over him. Tackle his ankles. Can't run without 'em.
Same applies on the other side of the scenario. How should a 180 pound running back block an oncoming 240 pound linebacker in pass protection who is blitzing? Up high? No way. The linebacker will abuse him. Take the linebacker's ankles out with a cut block. This is why the rule stays in the game. It gives the "little guy" a chance to block the far bigger guy.
290 pound offensive guard-tackle against 280-300 pound defensive tackle-end? I don't see the need as much.
How is it best for a 180 pound cornerback to tackle a 240 pound running back? Up high? No way. The 240 pound bowling ball (see James Conner at Pitt) will run right over him. Tackle his ankles. Can't run without 'em.
Same applies on the other side of the scenario. How should a 180 pound running back block an oncoming 240 pound linebacker in pass protection who is blitzing? Up high? No way. The linebacker will abuse him. Take the linebacker's ankles out with a cut block. This is why the rule stays in the game. It gives the "little guy" a chance to block the far bigger guy.
290 pound offensive guard-tackle against 280-300 pound defensive tackle-end? I don't see the need as much.
I forgot that Duke did that, but at my age you can understand why I forget things. ( What were we talking about?) And we now have 20 OL coaches but I feel the TE coach could help the defense. Seems to me that if they play 2 yards off the LOS this time it would be a good time to let Mills with his power to run up the middle.With Duke lining up almost a full 2 yards off the LOS this upcoming Saturday, if we try to cut their D-Line, we will have yet another frustrating day against their D. Like Texwood has already suggested in another thread, power block them high and knock them backwards. I mean, with at least 19 O-Line assistant coaches, you'd think we'd be able to teach this and execute effectively.
I'm just glad Jeremy Cash is no longer around for Duke to be that roving hybrid LB type who was blowing through holes and creating havoc on what seemed like every play the last 2 years. I'm sure Duke will have somebody else doing the same thing. They took a page out of Bud Foster's approach to defending CPJ's funky offense on that one.
Look for at least one guy to not only come up in the box right behind the D-Line, but bounce & bob around trying to create confusion for our blockers regarding assignments as well as JT5 not knowing if the guy is coming in or just spying JT5 everywhere he goes. This guy (Cash the last 2 years) did not typically take on the B-Back in the mesh. He normally went after JT5 trying to blow up the option just after the mesh.
Look for at least one guy to not only come up in the box right behind the D-Line, but bounce & bob around trying to create confusion for our blockers regarding assignments as well as JT5 not knowing if the guy is coming in or just spying JT5 everywhere he goes. This guy (Cash the last 2 years) did not typically take on the B-Back in the mesh. He normally went after JT5 trying to blow up the option just after the mesh.
Oh and one more thing...
...in case I haven't said it in a while (and it feels that way), let me remind all that the screen pass is still the greatest play in the game of football. Well, perhaps just after the QB kneel down for the winning team with 30 seconds left and the opponent without timeouts. But, I digress.
We may run a screen pass about 4 or 5 times all season. Still think if we could run it effectively, it would be one way to attack these strong defensive teams who have big DL's who run like cheetahs (see Clemson).
...in case I haven't said it in a while (and it feels that way), let me remind all that the screen pass is still the greatest play in the game of football. Well, perhaps just after the QB kneel down for the winning team with 30 seconds left and the opponent without timeouts. But, I digress.
We may run a screen pass about 4 or 5 times all season. Still think if we could run it effectively, it would be one way to attack these strong defensive teams who have big DL's who run like cheetahs (see Clemson).
I also like the screen pass but I have a feeling I may not like it as much after seeing Puke run it about 15 times Saturday unless the quick slant over the middle is open. ( Like it won't be )
Literally every pass play last year i thought was about to be a screen.. It was sad
Not only do opportunities for screens come up in every game, the slip screen to the wideout with and without a blocker should be available. If the defense keeps lining up 5 & 10 yards off the ball....
Agree. They will line up at least 1 yard back from the LOS than most defenses. Smash 'em and then get big Mills going right behind 'em. 3+3+3 = 4th and 1. Just like CPJ likes it. 3+3+3+3 = first down. Wears down a defense as well.
I like the 30 yards and a cloud of dust offense of '09 and '14 like anybody else. But, grinding it with some good old fashioned patented Paul Johnson Death Marches is a thing of beauty as well.
I watched a good bit of the Navy-Memphis game this past Saturday afternoon. Navy does such a great job with their bigger QB of following his blocking backs and just gashing the opposing D at or inside the hashmarks. He accounted for 5 TD's, ran for 201 yards + 3 TD's, threw 3 of 4 times for 75 yds and 2 TD's. That's a helluva line for a QB right there.
^^^THIS^^^
I'm a big CPJ fan, but Duke has defensively out-schemed Paul Johnson. Playing the D-line so far off the LOS does two things. First, it makes it damn near impossible for our O-line to cut them. Secondly, it leaves their unblocked defensive linemen in great position to read and react to the play. If Duke comes out in that look again, and we run our normal stuff, then I have to question the intelligence of our head coach.
I'm a big CPJ fan, but Duke has defensively out-schemed Paul Johnson. Playing the D-line so far off the LOS does two things. First, it makes it damn near impossible for our O-line to cut them. Secondly, it leaves their unblocked defensive linemen in great position to read and react to the play. If Duke comes out in that look again, and we run our normal stuff, then I have to question the intelligence of our head coach.
So let me see if I get this right . Y'all are saying those screen passings last year where we let the DL come thur and tried to hit the WR 30 yards down field were not screen passes ?
And those TO's where JT get hit in the backfield were not run to setup those long screen passes?
And those TO's where JT get hit in the backfield were not run to setup those long screen passes?
Last edited:
The answers to those questions are simple...
1) If it worked, CPJ was a genius...the smartest man in the room...apparently, we lined up correctly.
2) If it didn't work, the players didn't line up right and while he (CPJ) takes responsibility - "well some of it" that is - bottom line is it is the player's fault.
As Metallica once sang.... Sad, But True.
1) If it worked, CPJ was a genius...the smartest man in the room...apparently, we lined up correctly.
2) If it didn't work, the players didn't line up right and while he (CPJ) takes responsibility - "well some of it" that is - bottom line is it is the player's fault.
As Metallica once sang.... Sad, But True.
Not all at one time, mate. Spread them out. If CPJ has his way, next seasons we'll have 47 O-Line assistants to which we can blame losses to each one over the next decade. If we lose to Duke this weekend (pity the thought), I plan to blame Paul Johnson. I'm a rebel.
I really Believe we will beat Puke by 17. I just have that feeling. Or maybe it's just gas.
Here's my thought: If Dook can learn and shut us down with their athletes, then any P5 team can, and more and more are doing it. Miami was one of the first to figure it out. They've been tough most years since 2009. The answer is to line up off the LOS, play off our OL with your hands as they dive at your feet, then make the tackle. Interlaced with that is 8-9 in the box, so the gaps are filled with LB's.
Another issue is that the stance to make those cuts puts too much weight forward to be able to step back in pass pro quickly enough. It all in the ballistics.
The answer, IMHO, is drive blocking with the occasional cut blocks.
