Serious cut-blocking question.

[StoneWalled]

With the Denver emphasis on going low to block, wouldn't that help a 3-4 team in keeping O-linemen tied up? Maybe the answer to this is obvious but, it seems to me that if your D-line's objective is to keep the O-linemen from getting to the LBs then why wouldn't you just let them dive low and try to pin them to the ground once they get there? If the front 3 didn't try to flow to the ball, helping them out by tripping over them, and just knelt, stood, sat or layed on the O-linemen where they are, then there would be a pretty big mess between the RB's and LB's and some pretty good sight-lines to locate the runner. If the RB were able to navigate the pile then he'd have some pretty good pursuit coming his way. I guess the objective of the O-linemen is to roll or bear crawl to the next level but if a 300+ lb. D-lineman is riding his back then the Bronco just may get busted. Possible

 

[Hemi_1]

Sometimes I just post and really have no comment. This is one of those times.

 

[Wandering Athol]

They generally only cut to the backside of the running play to eliminate pursuit.

Just b/c you have zone blocking doesn't mean that the offense and RB don't have an idea as to what part of the D-line they will initially attack.

 

[StoneWalled]

They generally only cut to the backside of the running play to eliminate pursuit.

Just b/c you have zone blocking doesn't mean that the offense and RB don't have an idea as to what part of the D-line they will initially attack.

I didn't think it was a random roll in the mud but, if you're blocking left and that becomes a stalemated wall then the backside cut to the right should be met by the second and third levels. No?
I realize that if this was so easy it would be implemented by all but, I am just trying to understand why this has been so successful for Denver when playing 3-4 D's when it seems to me that it is kind of playing right into the hands of the defense. We don't want blockers leaving the line and they seem content to trip up defenders at the line. I can see where cut-blocking on the second level works against any other scheme that would be happy to let blockers run by cleanly. It just doesn't seem to be what we're looking for from the 3-4.
Maybe we'll see some 4-4w/ 3deep.

 

[Wandering Athol]

I didn't think it was a random roll in the mud but, if you're blocking left and that becomes a stalemated wall then the backside cut to the right should be met by the second and third levels. No?
I realize that if this was so easy it would be implemented by all but, I am just trying to understand why this has been so successful for Denver when playing 3-4 D's when it seems to me that it is kind of playing right into the hands of the defense. We don't want blockers leaving the line and they seem content to trip up defenders at the line. I can see where cut-blocking on the second level works against any other scheme that would be happy to let blockers run by cleanly. It just doesn't seem to be what we're looking for from the 3-4.
Maybe we'll see some 4-4w/ 3deep.

The objective of this running scheme is not to hit home runs, but to clip off 4-6 ypc. It is not as important for your O-linemen to deal with second and third level support, as it is to make sure there are ZERO plays of negative or very short yardage, in this case, caused by DL or blitzing backside pursuit.

You need a sure-handed, slashing RB (even better if he's a bull), who can make a quick determination of which hole to pursue, and falls forward for positive yardage upon contact. Since you're eliminating offensive linemen from releasing downfield, it is fairly important to get good blocking at the WR & TE positions. See Mike Anderson, Ed McCaffrey and Rod Smith for reference.

The name of the game is ball-control, and to wear down the opposing teams LBs until they start missing tackles, and then hopefully you'll spring one later in the game. See Terrell Davis for reference. Cut blocking is also intended to give second-thoughts to defenders pinning their ears back on the pass rush.

This gamplan is particularly effective (but not necessary) if you can spell your RBs while providing a change of pace to throw off the timing of the defenses LBs trying to hit the hole at the same time as the RB, AND if the opposing team does not have much depth/versatility at the LB position.

 

[OSKIE]

With the Denver emphasis on going low to block, wouldn't that help a 3-4 team in keeping O-linemen tied up? Maybe the answer to this is obvious but, it seems to me that if your D-line's objective is to keep the O-linemen from getting to the LBs then why wouldn't you just let them dive low and try to pin them to the ground once they get there? If the front 3 didn't try to flow to the ball, helping them out by tripping over them, and just knelt, stood, sat or layed on the O-linemen where they are, then there would be a pretty big mess between the RB's and LB's and some pretty good sight-lines to locate the runner. If the RB were able to navigate the pile then he'd have some pretty good pursuit coming his way. I guess the objective of the O-linemen is to roll or bear crawl to the next level but if a 300+ lb. D-lineman is riding his back then the Bronco just may get busted. Possible

Denver has struggled with 3-4 teams for the past few years. For whatever reason though the Pats haven't posed the same obstacles. I just went back and looked at the #'s from the past few games. Portis ran for over 100 on you guys twice. Tatum Bell ran for well over 100 with only 13 carries and Mike Anderson avg 4 yards per carry!

 

[ItsGood_ItsGood]

SW,
I know enough about the "two gap" assignments, which form the basis of the front of a 3-4 alignment to know that if you (the NT or the DEs) can't handle your assignment, say the OL is pushing you off the ball, the right thing to do is to "die in the hole." Stuff the gap/hole any way you can.

I think that you're right, that that would be the correct way to handle the cut back. As long as you plug the gap, you've done your job. It's then up to the LBs to read & react to stop the RB.

To that end, IMHO the 2nd most important Patriot on the field (excuse me, that's Football Field) will be Vince Wilfork. The Pats' defense CANNOT play a great game unless VW plays a great game.

 

[Hemi_1]

Re: Re: Serious cut-blocking question.

Denver has struggled with 3-4 teams for the past few years. For whatever reason though the Pats haven't posed the same obstacles. I just went back and looked at the #'s from the past few games. Portis ran for over 100 on you guys twice. Tatum Bell ran for well over 100 with only 13 carries and Mike Anderson avg 4 yards per carry!

Yup sounds about right to me. Denver has a very good running attack. Or at least one we have trouble stopping. Who knows, maybe this year you will find out differently.