New Blocking Scheme

D

Dr Orangeblood

< 25 Posts
I've noticed several sports writers alluding to a new blocking scheme used in the OSU game. Anyone care to explain this and whether that is the key to our newfound rushing success?

&#60;P&#62;"Breaks balance out. The sun don't shine on the same ole dog's rear end every day"-DKR
 
My untrained eye saw several instances in which the OGs pulled and blocked, sort of like Mackovic's "trap blocking" style. Hayter would hit the line after the OG had pulled and after the FB had come up to help. This game him room to scoot through the hole.
 
They started running some traps and isolation plays instead of zone blocking. I never liked zone blocking as a player. It appears simple but with all the blitzes and stunts these days can get really complicated, and reducing complications and mistakes is why you go to zone blocking in the first place.

"Seriousness is the only refuge of the shallow" -Oscar Wilde
 
Chip Brown indicated that we changed to a "gap-blocking" scheme to offset all the stunting that the OSU defense was using. Sounds like up to this point, that had been pretty damn successful for them since they were #1 against the rush. I wonder how many of the rest of our opponents (esp OU) run that same sort of stunting defense and might be susceptible to the new blocking scheme?

Doc Oblood

&#60;P&#62;"Breaks balance out. The sun don't shine on the same ole dog's rear end every day"-DKR
 
Haven't finished viewing the tape yet, but I can confirm that we used traps where one or more of the OL pulls. This creates a seam and Hayter was hitting them very well. A couple of times the seam was rather tight, but because he continuously kept driving his legs he was able to break through to the linebackers and gain 5+ yards.

The less successful runs were stopped because either the pulling guard outright missed his guy, or one of the other linemen was pushed into him as he pulled. For instance, one time Dockery pulled to seal off the right (defensive left) DE and completely missed the guy.(as a former guard in HS, I can relate to how frustrating that can be!) He ended up blocking a whole bunch of air and the DE closed on the RB slowing him down until others broke free to help on the tackle. Another time the pulling guard had to arc his route because the DTs had gotten penetration. This screwed the timing on the play & the RB got killed. As the game progresses, our linemen tend to get better at the scheme and that's when we start to pull away.

Bottom line: our schemes have gotten better, and w/ time the line play and running game will no longer be an issue. I'm starting to like what I see. Now, if we can just change our punt blocking scheme!!!

"The best form of welfare for the troops is first class training." - Rommel
 
Thanks for the good thread, Dr. Orangeblood. The new blocking schemes may be the most interesting aspect of the OSU game.

Those are great points, imo, by Chattanooga Texan and Orange Ranger. Hope you guys start posting more often.

Some of us felt coming into this game that we needed to do at least three things effectively in order to establish a successful offensive identity: (1) throw downfield -- instead of relying solely on those short swing passes; (2) change the blocking assignments to the extent necessary to at least make the OSU defense have to think twice before they charged, and (3) get some diversity in the play selection for the same reason mentioned above in No. 2.

For many of us, I think, the issues with the offense had much less to do with the abilities of the players (particularly in the offensive line) than it had to do with how those players were being used.

In what may come to be known as the watershed "second half" for this season, we finally started making our opponent's defense have to "blink", and all of the sudden (surprise!) we started looking like we knew what we were doing.

Announcing your plan to the opposition in advance went out with Pickett's charge.

If the changes do help, it's just in time. The real watershed for this season would be to get through the next two games and do it with some fire in our bellies. Did you notice the way the Kansas State offense "attacked" Colorado right from the start in Boulder? They didn't go in there scared or worried about throwing downfield or mixing up the running plays and blocking assignments. They showed up in Boulder planning to win.

We need to go to Dallas with an attitude.

Hook 'em.


Edited by kchorn on 10/1/00 12:02 PM.
 
Thanks to all you knowledgeable posters who have replied (THPF,Chatanooga,et al). In reading this board I have always been most interested in posts that add to my understanding of the game. This is the kind of insightful analysis that we should see more often. Frankly, I'm a little tired of the negative slant of many of the posts that take slaps at our players and coaching staff without adding to any true understanding of our weaknesses and strengths. My hat is off to the coaches for their game planning (esp OC) and game adjustments with a young and largely inexperienced group of offensive players. Any thoughts on the "gap blocking" part of offensive line changes?

Doc Oblood

&#60;P&#62;"Breaks balance out. The sun don't shine on the same ole dog's rear end every day"-DKR
 
Great post.
Did anyone see/notice if our gaurds and center were calling at the LOS b4 the QB starts his cadence?????
Scripting plays with pulls etc is a great start, allowing the guys to call them on the field is the next step for us to dominate IMO.
I know of the "G Block", which our coaches may be calling a "gap block". It's when the frontside gaurd kicks out the OLB (wide 5 in a 4 backer set). Just guessing here, but it could also mean flushing a defensive player in, through and out of a gap (if a DT is on an outside shade of a gaurd, and that is where the point of attack will be, instead of "reaching" him and turning him up field, just push him laterally all the way through the other side of the gap)?????????
In any event, all this stuff helps us get advantageous angles on the line and LBs, and in our next game we will play against great LBs, hope we continue to help our big boys out!!!!!!
Hook-em.

"What in the wide wide world of sports is a goin on here" -
Slim Pickins
 
We did not run any traps. I repeat: there were no traps. It was a simple counter play which had many of the elements of the old counter trey though WITHOUT pulling the backside tackle.

We pulled the backside OG while the playside OL blocked down. This created angles and allowed our big boys to push folks around at advantage.
About time.

The play was very simple:

The FB was always offset, sometimes to the play side, some times away. The beauty of this play is that it didn't matter. Depending on whether the play was being run towards the offset FB or away determined the blocking responsibilities of the pulling guard and FB.

For example: if the the play was run towards the offset FB, he had responibility for the outside OSU defender -- it could be a DE or LB. The backside pulling guard would then turn up the hole created and try to seal to the inside or hit the first unblocked enemy jersey he saw.

If the play is run to the other side of our offset FB, the pulling guard kicks out the outside man and the G turns it up inside to act as the seal.

The beauty of this arrangement is that it is tendency neutral -- the alignment of the offset FB or even the TE is irrelevant to the execution of the play. In short: it's a great play and it has a lot of advantages over the slower developing Counter Trey.

As with all plays with pulling, the most important blocks are not those of the pulled blockers, but the playside OL blocking down. They will determine the quality and width of the hole. The pulling folks simply act as screens.

Let me emphasize, it was one simple play that we put in -- we didn't change our blocking philosophy wholesale. That said, the impact of the play on our total offense was devastating.
 
Do you think we installed this series in the past week or was it something we started several weeks ago?

Hook 'em

The excellent is new forever.
 
Great thread.

Lets give credit to Davis for throwing some new plays in the mix. I really like the rocket pitch? (I think that is what the radio guys called it.) The passes to the FB were awesome. And it is nice to see the new OL blocking schemes-counter, pulling guards, etc. I hope this trend of adding new plays continues. It seems to keep the opposing defenses on their toes.
 
Scipio,
I thought traps would have been pretty difficult (dumb) with three DL on our gaurds and center. Sounds like a counter blocking scheme (regardless of RB's doing the typical counter action). But I have a question. Did the playside G and T both block down or did they double team the DL between them and get a good upfield push?????
I didn't get to see the game out here in no-man's land, so any help is appreciated.
Thanks

"What in the wide wide world of sports is a goin on here" -
Slim Pickins
 
now the question is will we continue going with these blocking schemes when we face a defense not perceived to stunt like OSU. I heard that was the primary reason we went to that described by Scipio. If we face a more "straight" D, do we have to put up with the crap we've seen the past six games?

TouchdownLinks.com
 
Homer-from what I could see the center seemed to be calling some of the blocking schemes at the LOS. Sounds like Scipio is saying that a lot of the assignments were pretty well pre-determined (at least for that particular counter play call) depending on the FB's position relative to the flow of the play.

Scipio-excellent description, I might be able to visualize it without having to diagram it. I am wondering exactly what SlickStreet asked- is a similar scheme likely to be effective for a defense that doesn't do all the stunting/slanting that OSU does and which if any of our remaining opponents have a similar defensive philosophy?
Very interesting to me that such subtle and apparently simple adjustments could make such a difference.

&#60;P&#62;"Breaks balance out. The sun don't shine on the same ole dog's rear end every day"-DKR
 
The additions to the line play was a welcome change. Some friends and I were laughing after the game about Hayter's first big run. The hole was so cavernous that he paused first before bolting forward for 20+ yards. I don't know if it was a sense of disbelief, or just a moment to enjoy. Thanks for the discussion.

"We Don't Rent Pigs"
Lonesome Dove
 
Montana --
I've never seen the Longhorns run or practice that specific play until Oklahoma State. We put it in the arsenal sometime as early as last week. I'm frankly very excited at the play's potential to open up our offense in a big way.

Homer --
It's definitely a counter blocking scheme, whether our backs were taking a counter step before getting the ball is not something I observed. I will rewatch the tape and find out. As for whether we were doubling the playside DT and obliterating him and using that as a screen on his cohorts down the line or if we were truly blocking down mano a mano varied from play to play. For the most part, it looked like we were trying to do a true blockdown, but occasionally I saw the playside DT doubled and destroyed. As you know, either method works.

RE: Blitzing.

Can it work against blitzing and stunting? God yes. If I'm a DL stunting and someone lined up playside blocks down on me, I'm going to get my **** driven. The best way to disrupt pulling linemen and counters is to get penetration inside with a stunting LB or a slanting DT. If you can disrupt the backside guard's pull, the play is dead in the water. It really becomes a guessing game and you need high quality DT's. And because our play is tendency neutral (meaning we can run it weak, strong, to the offset FB, away from the offset FB) a bad guess by a stunting LB may mean a massive hole.

Remember, these junk gap defenses we've been seeing rely on outnumbering you at a set point and getting penetration. By blocking down and pulling a backside G, we can address all of their defenders and the only unblocked defender will be someone on their team AWAY from playside. That means someone has to run through a lot of traffic to make a clean tackle.

I really wish I could diagram this play somehow for everyone because it really is beautiful both in its simplicity, it's flexibility and how it suits our personnel.

Good job Greg Davis. Nice to see the running game spiced up.
 
One of the points that has been missed in this discussion (as has been all year), is the impact of a receiving corps a defense has to respect. With oSu knowing they had a bad secondary, and we had tall and fast WRs, they couldn't blitz as much they might have liked. As I've argued in other threads, the line hasn't been as bad with regard to the sacks, as has our young receivers not running the right routes on blitzes. Nor had they been able to get separation from DBs the likes they had ever seen before in game action. Hence, Stanford and other teams have capitalized on our young WRs, and run all sorts of blitzes and run blitzes because they felt like their DBs could handle man coverage against our WRs. As soon as defenses begin to respect Roy, BJ, Brandon, Montrell, Sloan, et al. They will continue to blitz and stunt.
But the nice thing is that this game will give both the WRs and O-Line the confidence it needs going against the best team it will have seen all year. But count on this against OU: OU has a better secondary than oSu and will blitz early and often until one of WRs give them a reason not to. Then they will settle back and play zone and the running lanes will more easily open up. In any event, whatever it takes to get the O-line believing in themselves again, I'm all for it.
 
Thanks Scipio, you can e-mail if you prefer. All this talk of pulling, has me as excited as a 12 year old seeing a spike on opening day.

"What in the wide wide world of sports is a goin on here" -
Slim Pickins
 
I don't know if you guys noticed, but during most of the time when Hayter was ripping off those runs, there were some new names in there on the line. I Know I saw Big, Holloway, and Baker on the left side , I am not sure who was playing on the right side, except I did see Stevens back at TE, and he was pushing guys 10 yds downfield.
Maybe Other than Big, the second string Off is better than the first!
Anyone tape the game and lend some comments?
 
These were counter plays, but Hayter just hit the hole immediately rather than taking the counter step. He saw the hole & he attacked it & the OLine did their best job all year. Hope to see more of it.

Hook'em!
 
...just so all of you know.

Not only has this thread been caught by the OU bbs, but it has also been refered to at least twice on sports radio up in Oklahoma.

..... Stoops is smart & will probaly pick up these sorts of things on game film anyway, but lets not make his life any easier.

!?!?!


"Never follow good wine with water...unless you're out of good wine."
 
Prime -
I appreciate your caution, but any OU coach who can't make the same observations I did in ten minutes of film study is incompetent.

If this helped OU in any way, their coaches are so bad that we'll win going away.
 
I know I've posted this elsewhere, but I was really impressed with the blocking of Chad Stevens, who played the Fullback position for almost half the snaps in the 2nd half. He really seems to like slamming into the DLmen.

The one thing we can draw from this is that these guys must have really practiced the running game in the week preceding this game. You could tell a big difference in the timing of the OL, Fullbacks and RBs.

Daddy likes!!
 
Broadcast this:

OU is the bane of any well intentioned college football program, or the families that consider sending their children there.

Their legacy of cheating, drug dealing, and semi-automatic weapons in the dorms is well known. They have made great strides over the past few years to dispell those past offenses. In general, they still suck.

"We Don't Rent Pigs"
Lonesome Dove
 
Well, ActionUT, I think that covers it.

Some "Sunday Night Thank You Awards" go to:

(1) all of the folks who contributed to this thread -- this, imo, is what makes the board worthwhile.

(2) Scipio - you've got the gift, and we all appreciate the explanation (it helps us in the discussion, but if it helps OU -- although all of us who posted on this thread greatly appreciate the "honor" of being recognized by the Sooner faithful -- they should replace the OU coaching staff immediately following the game, but not before).

(3) PhxHorn - He is the one, in truth, who long ago in our OL/running game discussions suggested that this type of blocking scheme would help our offensive line and our rushing game in general.

It's a great group to share thoughts with -- even though we may occasionally exchange misguided barbs. Thanks to all of you (and LHG) for the contributions to our collective enjoyment of UT football.

Let's hook 'em in Dallas.
 
I had what was probably the most annoying game-following experience ever, dealing with crappy web-tv while at my in-law's in Philly (the web tv was definitely the annoying part). Let's just say that my understanding of what happened on Sat was somewhat "thin".

As a result, I've gleaned all I know about the game from posts, esp this one. Thanks a ton. I'm one excited hombre to see this offense on Sat v OU.

By way of contributing to the discussion, there has been some speculation as to what brought these new blocking schmes out in the Offense. It might be as simple as that OSU was the first team we faced who was supposed to have a good run defense. Since it's sounded all year long like we've been taking the run a little lightly (I think Phx Horn has touched on this), maybe OSU woke the coaches up and drove them to innovate and expand.

Again, great post.

matt
 
All I can say is, y'all learned different terminology than I did some 30 years ago.

As I learned it, a counter play was one where the motion of the offense went away from the point of attack trying to influenced the defense to vacate or lower numbers at the point of attack. Then the back (often with a pulling lineman) was sent back against the flow of the defense to the (hopefully) vacated area.

A trap, (again, as I learned it,) was a play were a player at the point of attack was left unblocked, allowing him to over pursue, (generally, come across the los) setting him up to be trapped by an easy angle to block him, usually (but not always) with a pulling lineman.

The play Scipio is describing is one where the line blocks down, leaving the de unblocked. He moves into the backfield where he is easily blocked or screened out of the play, by the pulling guard or fullback, and the back cuts up in front of him.

I just watched the tape of every running play again. There was no counter motion of any kind by any back on any of the plays. The fullback was always moving towards the point of attack. Sometimes the wingback was also moving towards the point of attack. Y'all may call this a counter, but I don't know why. We'd have called it a trap.

Not that it is relevant, but the TV guys (who admittedly were watching a different game than the one I was watching anyway) also described this as a trap. (I only say that as on observation, not as an appeal to someone who may have had a clue. They also once called the same play a counter trey, which it wasn't.)

When the fullback lined up towards the point of attack, and the wingback motioned into the point of attack, it more resembled a pure power play than a trap.

I only saw one play that looked like a counter, but it may actually have been a draw to Hayter in the first half for about 10 yards. Williams ran a very similar play that looked like a draw on the last drive. I'm sure that Hayter's was the one I thought was a counter as I watched the game.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter what you call it, so long as it gives the D something to think about and thereby slows the blitz, which it will.

To those worried that OU has figured it all out, OU will also have noticed the counter to this (trap/counter, you fill in the blank) which was that fullback pass which was run twice successfully. It is a true counter. The play moves one way, and the qb uses play action and sends the fullback counter to the flow of the D. It worked great twice. It will keep OU's D coordinators honest as they consider how to stop this play.

Hook'em!
 
Lam --
Good points all. I made a much more thorough post on Go Big 12 where I called it Kinda Sorta A Counter and a Quasi counter. As you point out, there is no backfield counter step by our HB. I would not call it a trap as there is no attempt to influence, which, by definition, is what a trap is. Again, we may just speaking past each other with different terminology.

Nevertheless. It's a good play and it's resurrected our running game. I'll call it anything anyone wants if Davis will just keep running it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top