KSUFans Archives
Sports => Snyder's Electronic Cyber Space World => Topic started by: michigancat on October 01, 2006, 06:49:31 PM
-
Why is this offensive line so bad?
Horrible recruiting from Snyder?
Horrible coaching from Prince?
Ridiculously complicated schemes from Prince?
Something else?
Would this OL look this horrible under Snyder?
-
Are you talking about run blocking or pass protection?
They sucked last year as well. It was only the last two games of the year that they finally gave us some sort of run game.
-
They still managed 20 points in every game but two, and they won one of those.
-
Yeah, I'd lean (heavily) towards coaching.
It's basically the same players.
-
Yeah, I'd lean (heavily) towards coaching.
It's basically the same players.
Is Prince just a bad coach, or is he asking them to do things more difficult than Snyder did? Or both?
-
All indications are that he's a good OL coach...right?
Our OL coach always had a suspect resume.
I mean, crap.
OACHING EXPERIENCE
1984 Fort Hays State, student assistant coach (defensive line)
1985 Russell High School, assistant coach (assistant line coach)
1986 Hays High School, assistant coach (assistant line coach)
1987 Kansas, graduate assistant (defensive line)
1988 Middle Tennessee State, assistant coach (tight ends)
1989 Shawnee Mission North High School, assistant coach (offensive line coach)
1990-93 Dodge City Community College, offensive coordinator (offensive line)
1994-97 Southwest Baptist, offensive coordinator (offensive line/tight ends)
1998 Greenville College, assistant coach (offensive line)
1999-2003 Tabor College, head coach
2004-2005 East Central, head coach
2006 Kansas State, assistant head coach (offensive line)
-
Is Prince just a bad coach, or is he asking them to do things more difficult than Snyder did? Or both?
I think our run schemes are absolutely terrible. Thomas Clayton should be running in between the tackles and then trying to kick it outside, rather than those freaking stretch plays where he's trying to outrun the outside linebacker to a spot (that the OLB is nearly already at). Couple that with having lineman that don't pull well that far outside and a midget for a fullback. Also, when have we decided to run? We've never really committed to running, we've just assumed it won't work and let Dylan bounce pass the ball to our receivers.
-
Is it enough to just look at the players and see that they are fat and not at all athletic? They don't look too much like Ryan Young, do they?
-
The center is a former dtackle. He can't push anyone.
The pass blocking keeps getting better.
They were overrated rivals players.
-
maybe if we'd hired a head coach with some offensive line background then, er eh, oh yea, my bad
-
Trying to run a zone-blocking scheme with this oline and Clayton is a horrible idea. They should be telling the oline "Open the hole here" and telling Clayton "Here is where the hole will be. Hit it hard."
Our oline isn't athletic enough and Clayton doesn't have a good enough feel for picking holes to be trying to run a zone scheme.
-
A good question for the prince call in radio show.
-
Imagine how Edgerin James feels right now.
-
Our oline isn't athletic enough and Clayton doesn't have a good enough feel for picking holes to be trying to run a zone scheme.
Clayton has pretty much zero ability to move laterally, he couldn't get to a hole if he saw one unless it was right in front of him.
-
Our oline isn't athletic enough and Clayton doesn't have a good enough feel for picking holes to be trying to run a zone scheme.
Clayton has pretty much zero ability to move laterally, he couldn't get to a hole if he saw one unless it was right in front of him.
Ergo,
telling Clayton "Here is where the hole will be. Hit it hard."
-
Hey Bslimz, interesting comments on the zone blocking. Don't take this as sarcastic but what is your experience or knowledge/background on zone blocking or blocking schemes. Seriously, I had not heard this discussed and I am no expert on blocking schemes so I just wanted to know your basis. It seems like a really interesting point.
-
Don't give me any semantics, anecdotes, or comparisons...
Installing a new offensive scheme is hard.
-
Trying to run a zone-blocking scheme with this oline and Clayton is a horrible idea. They should be telling the oline "Open the hole here" and telling Clayton "Here is where the hole will be. Hit it hard."
Our oline isn't athletic enough and Clayton doesn't have a good enough feel for picking holes to be trying to run a zone scheme.
Which is why we need to run Patton more often. He is the RBOTF, he is quick enough to make the ONE cut, and hit the hole.
-
Don't worry. Our OL coach coached at Eastern Oklahoma State last year. We'll be fine. :blank:
-
Our current scheme is a WAY different scheme than the old scheme.
There are currently two basic trends in Oline scheme/run blocking, a man scheme and a zone scheme. In a man scheme you have specific rules that essentually tell you which guy to block. I'm not going to get to complicated, but its pretty straight forward for the guys up front and the decision making is easier. Also easier for the running backs b/c they have a specific hole to run to and keys to read like their FB or a pulling guard that they know to follow. In a man scheme usually you have bigger, road grader type players at the tackles and more athletic players at guard if you pull alot. At center you usually don't want the biggest kid, but you want a smart kid b/c he'll call out adjustments when the defense lines up b/c they move around and don't always line up where you think they are going to be.
In a zone scheme the entire Oline essentually will step one direction or the other and wall off the first defender that attacks the gap they are assigned to. The RB has the freedom to pretty much pick the hole that opens up first, or cut back if defenses overpursue. Usually zone teams will have one big anchor for the QBs backside, and the rest of the Oline will be smaller (under 300), more athletic Oline that can move their feet and get the angles necessary in a zone scheme. The Denver Broncos turned this blocking scheme into an art form.
Zone blocking has progressively over the last 10-15 years taken over the NFL game and now college. K-State went to more zone under Snyder, but retained a lot of man aspects b/c we ran a lot of power football and pulled a lot of backside OL to get numbers at the point of attack.
Our new scheme is almost purely inside and outside zone. Inside zone is designed to stay between the tackles but sometimes will bounce outside, especially on cutbacks; outside zone is the stretch play we run which may end up outside the tackles at times, but could be inside on cutbacks.
IMO we haven't adjusted well at all. Our oline are poor at staying on blocks in this new scheme long enough to open solid gaps for our RBs and we often fail to pick up backside defenders which doesn't allow for the cutback lanes which you must have to keep a defense honest against pure zone schemes.
And as far as the complaints at RB, that has been a disappointment. Frankly, Clayton has been the best at reading and cutting back. I thought the smaller, quicker guys would bypass him, but that simply hasn't been the case yet. It has taken us much longer to adjust to this new scheme than I anticipated, but b/c the scheme is so different I can't say that I'm completely shocked by it. Nebraska gave us a good look at what a switch from a power running game to a pure zone scheme looks like, and we probably don't/didn't have as much talent in place as they did when Callahan first came in. NU is appearing to become a much better running team out of their WCO/zone based running attack this year for really the first time since Callahan got there.
-
Our current scheme is a WAY different scheme than the old scheme.
There are currently two basic trends in Oline scheme/run blocking, a man scheme and a zone scheme. In a man scheme you have specific rules that essentually tell you which guy to block. I'm not going to get to complicated, but its pretty straight forward for the guys up front and the decision making is easier. Also easier for the running backs b/c they have a specific hole to run to and keys to read like their FB or a pulling guard that they know to follow. In a man scheme usually you have bigger, road grader type players at the tackles and more athletic players at guard if you pull alot. At center you usually don't want the biggest kid, but you want a smart kid b/c he'll call out adjustments when the defense lines up b/c they move around and don't always line up where you think they are going to be.
In a zone scheme the entire Oline essentually will step one direction or the other and wall off the first defender that attacks the gap they are assigned to. The RB has the freedom to pretty much pick the hole that opens up first, or cut back if defenses overpursue. Usually zone teams will have one big anchor for the QBs backside, and the rest of the Oline will be smaller (under 300), more athletic Oline that can move their feet and get the angles necessary in a zone scheme. The Denver Broncos turned this blocking scheme into an art form.
Zone blocking has progressively over the last 10-15 years taken over the NFL game and now college. K-State went to more zone under Snyder, but retained a lot of man aspects b/c we ran a lot of power football and pulled a lot of backside OL to get numbers at the point of attack.
Our new scheme is almost purely inside and outside zone. Inside zone is designed to stay between the tackles but sometimes will bounce outside, especially on cutbacks; outside zone is the stretch play we run which may end up outside the tackles at times, but could be inside on cutbacks.
IMO we haven't adjusted well at all. Our oline are poor at staying on blocks in this new scheme long enough to open solid gaps for our RBs and we often fail to pick up backside defenders which doesn't allow for the cutback lanes which you must have to keep a defense honest against pure zone schemes.
And as far as the complaints at RB, that has been a disappointment. Frankly, Clayton has been the best at reading and cutting back. I thought the smaller, quicker guys would bypass him, but that simply hasn't been the case yet. It has taken us much longer to adjust to this new scheme than I anticipated, but b/c the scheme is so different I can't say that I'm completely shocked by it. Nebraska gave us a good look at what a switch from a power running game to a pure zone scheme looks like, and we probably don't/didn't have as much talent in place as they did when Callahan first came in. NU is appearing to become a much better running team out of their WCO/zone based running attack this year for really the first time since Callahan got there.
Brought a tear to my eye...that's beautiful.... :thumbsup:
-
Thanks KSU_Fan for your explanation. I have heard zone and man blocking schemes mentioned many times along with comments on the different type of linemen required but I never really knew exactly what they were saying. Your explanation was quite helpful. It's kind of what I thought intuitively, given the names, but you described it well.
-
Now the question I have for FAN is whether he thinks KSU has the personnel to run a purely zone scheme.
I'm of the opinion they don't, and they should go to a power run game until they do...we're gonna get a qb killed out there.
Only other solution I see at this point is going 4 wide shotgun....and using draws, screens, etc...to get your "running yardage"...
Too bad coach snyder can't come in and put his early 90's offense in...
-
Too bad coach snyder can't come in and put his early 90's offense in...
I loved that offense.
-
Wow, ksu_FAN! That's got to be the more insightful thing I've ever read on a KSU football board. You are one of very few people who seem to know the game well. Oh, how I wish there were more of you (and that I were one of them).
-
I'm just glad he took the time to post it...I've got a little experience with the zone blocking schemes, but not a ton...and haven't paid close enough attention in recent years to post like that about it...but he nailed it.
-
Here's a pretty good discussion on the topic...
http://espn.go.com/ncf/columns/davie/1440703.html
-
some high schools are even running zone blocking these days. i would be interested to know if any of our skinny o-line recruits played in a zone scheme in high school.
i think we're really missing fisher in this offense, he is better suited to this type of running.
i also think it's crap ass stupid to pull clayton and have true frosh leon patton run on a third and short the next series.
-
The words small, slow, and fat come to mind. :katpak:
-
Our current scheme is a WAY different scheme than the old scheme.
There are currently two basic trends in Oline scheme/run blocking, a man scheme and a zone scheme. In a man scheme you have specific rules that essentually tell you which guy to block. I'm not going to get to complicated, but its pretty straight forward for the guys up front and the decision making is easier. Also easier for the running backs b/c they have a specific hole to run to and keys to read like their FB or a pulling guard that they know to follow. In a man scheme usually you have bigger, road grader type players at the tackles and more athletic players at guard if you pull alot. At center you usually don't want the biggest kid, but you want a smart kid b/c he'll call out adjustments when the defense lines up b/c they move around and don't always line up where you think they are going to be.
In a zone scheme the entire Oline essentually will step one direction or the other and wall off the first defender that attacks the gap they are assigned to. The RB has the freedom to pretty much pick the hole that opens up first, or cut back if defenses overpursue. Usually zone teams will have one big anchor for the QBs backside, and the rest of the Oline will be smaller (under 300), more athletic Oline that can move their feet and get the angles necessary in a zone scheme. The Denver Broncos turned this blocking scheme into an art form.
Zone blocking has progressively over the last 10-15 years taken over the NFL game and now college. K-State went to more zone under Snyder, but retained a lot of man aspects b/c we ran a lot of power football and pulled a lot of backside OL to get numbers at the point of attack.
Our new scheme is almost purely inside and outside zone. Inside zone is designed to stay between the tackles but sometimes will bounce outside, especially on cutbacks; outside zone is the stretch play we run which may end up outside the tackles at times, but could be inside on cutbacks.
IMO we haven't adjusted well at all. Our oline are poor at staying on blocks in this new scheme long enough to open solid gaps for our RBs and we often fail to pick up backside defenders which doesn't allow for the cutback lanes which you must have to keep a defense honest against pure zone schemes.
And as far as the complaints at RB, that has been a disappointment. Frankly, Clayton has been the best at reading and cutting back. I thought the smaller, quicker guys would bypass him, but that simply hasn't been the case yet. It has taken us much longer to adjust to this new scheme than I anticipated, but b/c the scheme is so different I can't say that I'm completely shocked by it. Nebraska gave us a good look at what a switch from a power running game to a pure zone scheme looks like, and we probably don't/didn't have as much talent in place as they did when Callahan first came in. NU is appearing to become a much better running team out of their WCO/zone based running attack this year for really the first time since Callahan got there.
The problem with man blocking schemes are that your O-linemen have to be able to beat the D-linemen across from them in a 1-on-1 situation or they have to be athletic enough to get to LBer's before they can get to the intended hole and fill it. Penetration is OK in this scheme as long as it is not around the hole. Thus, if you are running between the RG and RT a guy can come upfield between the LG and LT and not cause a huge problem as long as a body is put on them.
The problem with a zone scheme is the OL needs to wall off the D and you really can not have a single guy on the entire line let their man get through or the play is screwed. This is especially true with a RB that runs on rails and lacks the ability to cut back. Cutting back is a key ingredient to zone schemes. It is contrasting to man schemes where sometimes letting guys through is essential (trap or counter) or will not hurt (explained above).
-
Now the question I have for FAN is whether he thinks KSU has the personnel to run a purely zone scheme.
Not completely. For one, these guys that we have have been trained in a zone/man mixed scheme for 2 or 3 years, so it would make sense they would struggle. 2nd, their bodies/feet probably aren't built for a pure zone scheme. Again, we ran some zone, especially with Sproles, in the past. However, we've always had a lot of man aspects with the way we pull people ane run power football that we don't really do at all any more. That's a major switch. Frankly, I expected the growing pains on offense that we've seen b/c of that, maybe not to the extent we saw last saturday, but I did expect some major struggles offensively.
The thing I've been surprised about is that we haven't done more with formations and shifting. Those are things that the NFL does, a lot of that is intended to move defenses around so you can get the angles you need to wall off defenders or to give you a numbers advantage and give the offense an advantage. We don't do that enough IMO, and that certainly doesn't help.
PurpleReign had some great insights there as well into zone vs man as to allowing penetration and what you can do to counter that (traps/counters). Those are things you really can't do in zone schemes
-
The thing I've been surprised about is that we haven't done more with formations and shifting. Those are things that the NFL does, a lot of that is intended to move defenses around so you can get the angles you need to wall off defenders or to give you a numbers advantage and give the offense an advantage. We don't do that enough IMO, and that certainly doesn't help.
PurpleReign had some great insights there as well into zone vs man as to allowing penetration and what you can do to counter that (traps/counters). Those are things you really can't do in zone schemes
This is the part that baffles the hell out of me. We run the most vanilla offensive sets I've ever seen. We rarely run any misdirection, counters...nothing that would keep the defense honest. The reverse that figurs ran for a touchdown is the only plays that I remember any misdirection running. Also, we don't shift as much as I thought. It's like we're running an offense that says "we're better than you, so we can just line up and run" but the only problem is that we aren't better than the other team. Lastly, we were allegedly supposed to be a good screening team....we are probably the worst screening team in the Big 12.
-
Great points on shifting...we saw a little of that early in the Louisville game with Clayton splitting out and getting him the ball in open space...but of course, we had to run trick plays and let Coach Ron call the plays after that.
-
It's like we're running an offense that says "we're better than you, so we can just line up and run"...
That's what I've thought at times as well. I posted yesterday that Prince has stated there are basically 2 types of coaches, coaches who scheme and coaches who are heavy on fundamentals. He said he and his staff are fundamentalists. Granted, you have to be both, but they seem to be coaching that way, like we've just got flat-out better plays when we don't. Snyder was a master of scheming defenses by formation and using QB run game and a diverse offense to attack defenses. We don't seem to attack at all and just "hope" what we do works. Well its not, and if we aren't going to concede our philosophy with no QB run game or power run game, then we better start throwing out multiple formations and shifting a ton. If we don't, we're going to have a lot more Baylor-esque performances.
-
Well its not, and if we aren't going to concede our philosophy with no QB run game or power run game, then we better start throwing out multiple formations and shifting a ton. If we don't, we're going to have a lot more Baylor-esque performances.
Hopefully they will take advantage of Freeman's arm and attempt to stretch the field, too. When they stack the box, give Moreira and Nelson a chance to catch a couple Trash Can fades. Having the mere threat of a deep ball might relieve some pressure.
-
Well its not, and if we aren't going to concede our philosophy with no QB run game or power run game, then we better start throwing out multiple formations and shifting a ton. If we don't, we're going to have a lot more Baylor-esque performances.
Hopefully they will take advantage of Freeman's arm and attempt to stretch the field, too. When they stack the box, give Moreira and Nelson a chance to catch a couple Trash Can fades. Having the mere threat of a deep ball might relieve some pressure.
This is my hope...sincere hope...I just wish they had started the project sooner.
And I'd kill for a power run game...and maybe some shotgun to let that 6'6" beast see the field a little better.
-
Just make sure all posts and articles are redinsi approved.
-
Just make sure all posts and articles are redinsi approved.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
(http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com/images/Records%20Page/fantasyland.JPG)
-
Just make sure all posts and articles are redinsi approved.
:ksu: :woohoo: :nahnah: :hope: ;) :) :tongue: :dancin: :loly: :loly: :loly: :loly: :loly: :loly:
:katpak: :katpak: :katpak: :katpak: :katpak: :katpak: :katpak:
-
This website has a massive inferiority complex.
-
i get the sense that the coaches are really wanting to see the team get consistent with the base offensive plays before getting creative.
if the guys are blowing assignments and not holding blocks in the base formations, what do you think is going to happen when they start getting creative with formations?
-
i get the sense that the coaches are really wanting to see the team get consistent with the base offensive plays before getting creative.
if the guys are blowing assignments and not holding blocks in the base formations, what do you think is going to happen when they start getting creative with formations?
Here's the problem, you can't just run a stretch left, a stretch right and an iso up the middle with a midget for a fullback and not mix in difference shifts, formations, looks for the defense. We don't give the defense very many different looks in our running game. Mix in a counter, a misdirection, something to keep the defense honest; those things should be "basic". Every defense from here on out is just going to load the damn box and play press coverage...they are going to fly to the ball and beat our backs to a spot because we haven't really shown anything different.
-
Here's the problem, you can't just run a stretch left, a stretch right and an iso up the middle with a midget for a fullback and not mix in difference shifts, formations, looks for the defense. We don't give the defense very many different looks in our running game. Mix in a counter, a misdirection, something to keep the defense honest; those things should be "basic". Every defense from here on out is just going to load the damn box and play press coverage...they are going to fly to the ball and beat our backs to a spot because we haven't really shown anything different.
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a61/catzacker/soulglo.gif)
:lol:
I can't take your posts seriously.
-
when you bitch about the midget at fullback, you really show how little you know about the issue.
the fullback doesn't matter, and isn't part of the problem -- he's not in the &@#%ing game but for a handful of snaps.
and again, if they can't block the basic set for crap, what makes you think they'll block your counter, misdirection, etc. for crap? the defense will still load up against the run, right?
and if you want to throw deep, you need to block, right? again, the base blocking just isn't there.
-
when you bitch about the midget at fullback, you really show how little you know about the issue.
the fullback doesn't matter, and isn't part of the problem -- he's not in the &@#%ing game but for a handful of snaps.
and again, if they can't block the basic set for @#%$, what makes you think they'll block your counter, misdirection, etc. for @#%$? the defense will still load up against the run, right?
and if you want to throw deep, you need to block, right? again, the base blocking just isn't there.
If you're going to try to run down my intelligence, you should try to atleast read what I wrote. We have run plays with a fullback, an in large part they are unsuccessful. And if you watched the Illinois State game, you would have seen what happens when all you do is run left and run right...the LB's run to a spot before the lineman can even get there..it wouldnt' matter if the lineman did everything right. Yes, that was the first game, but against Marshall and FAU we ran misdirection plays and it kept the defense from just running to a spot. And if all we can do is run zone left and zone right, we're f'ing screwed.
-
Don't worry. Our OL coach coached at Eastern Oklahoma State last year. We'll be fine. :blank:
Yeah, and one of Bill Snyder's OL coaches was working in a toll booth the year before he took the job.
-
mangino was hired as a Grad Ass't, then worked his way up to a full time position, by proving himself. The way it should be when you hire inexperienced people. Nice try though.
-
Looks like we should have run some posts by Mr. White and Stevie too.
How about if a coach is gonna talk about championships, he makes sure his OL can run a simple dive play for positive yardage first?
Or, (and this is really pushing it), make sure his team isn't the first one in Big 12 HISTORY to not score a TD versus Baylor.
-
If you're going to try to run down my intelligence, you should try to atleast read what I wrote. We have run plays with a fullback, an in large part they are unsuccessful. And if you watched the Illinois State game, you would have seen what happens when all you do is run left and run right...the LB's run to a spot before the lineman can even get there..it wouldnt' matter if the lineman did everything right. Yes, that was the first game, but against Marshall and FAU we ran misdirection plays and it kept the defense from just running to a spot. And if all we can do is run zone left and zone right, we're f'ing screwed.
i could give a crap less about the fb, it's not important to this offense. it's not even a tertiary component of the run game.
the fact that you trotted it out gives you the ass clown of the week award.
you're so &@#%ing ignorant about zone running it's sad. the basic idea of zone running is that many of the running plays have multiple run lanes for the back to chose from, many of them have three different options for the back to choose from. if the defense does what you suggest....run to a point before the line and rb get there....then we would be racking up mad yardage.
wn - i agree, if rp wants to talk championships, he needs to have an offense that can execute basic running plays. asking an offense that can't run it's base plays to run plays they've practiced less is not a formula for success. rp is stuck with trying to get the offense to learn the basics this year.
-
wn - i agree, if rp wants to talk championships, he needs to have an offense that can execute basic running plays. asking an offense that can't run it's base plays to run plays they've practiced less is not a formula for success. rp is stuck with trying to get the offense to learn the basics this year.
And this is exactly where he and Franklin could help his boys out by some variation in things we can control, ie. formations, shifts, and motions. Get the defense moving around so he can get some bodies on someone to see if we can open a seam or two. Like I said, I fully expected the growing pains in the execution of the blocking schemes, but I didn't expect the simplicity on some things that you can control outside of that. I hope they haven't been so naive to think that we can simply line our guys up into 2 or 3 formations and run a brand new scheme and be successful.
-
If you're going to try to run down my intelligence, you should try to atleast read what I wrote. We have run plays with a fullback, an in large part they are unsuccessful. And if you watched the Illinois State game, you would have seen what happens when all you do is run left and run right...the LB's run to a spot before the lineman can even get there..it wouldnt' matter if the lineman did everything right. Yes, that was the first game, but against Marshall and FAU we ran misdirection plays and it kept the defense from just running to a spot. And if all we can do is run zone left and zone right, we're f'ing screwed.
i could give a @#%$ less about the fb, it's not important to this offense. it's not even a tertiary component of the run game.
the fact that you trotted it out gives you the ass clown of the week award.
you're so &@#%ing ignorant about zone running it's sad. the basic idea of zone running is that many of the running plays have multiple run lanes for the back to chose from, many of them have three different options for the back to choose from. if the defense does what you suggest....run to a point before the line and rb get there....then we would be racking up mad yardage.
We're supposed to have an H-back in this offense and we don't. And as I said, when we've tried to use the FB for ISO's it's worked terribly. We can't get one yard when we need it.
And I perfectly understand the zone blocking scheme...there is supposedto be multiple holes, but they get filled pretty quickly when the entire freaking team can flow to the ball because we don't give them any reason to think otherwise. That's the point..we don't even give ourselves a chance because we can't show the defense basic counters/misdirection...we don't show multiple looks...we don't show very many shifts. The defense pins its ears back whether its a run or pass because they get the same looks nearly every time. And all the defense are doing what I suggest. Part of it is the RB's fault for not reading the blocking, part of it is the coaching. Our RB's are taught to show a hip to the inside and try to get to the outside (there was a GPI.com article in which Franklin was yelling at the RB's about this very thing).
-
KK compared our offense to green bay's :crybaby:
-
KK compared our offense to green bay's :crybaby:
Didn't everyone there get fired last year?
-
KK compared our offense to green bay's :crybaby:
Didn't everyone there get fired last year?
yes, but we managed to grab franklin prior to that.
-
We're supposed to have an H-back in this offense and we don't. And as I said, when we've tried to use the FB for ISO's it's worked terribly. We can't get one yard when we need it.
And I perfectly understand the zone blocking scheme...there is supposedto be multiple holes, but they get filled pretty quickly when the entire freaking team can flow to the ball because we don't give them any reason to think otherwise. That's the point..we don't even give ourselves a chance because we can't show the defense basic counters/misdirection...we don't show multiple looks...we don't show very many shifts. The defense pins its ears back whether its a run or pass because they get the same looks nearly every time. And all the defense are doing what I suggest. Part of it is the RB's fault for not reading the blocking, part of it is the coaching. Our RB's are taught to show a hip to the inside and try to get to the outside (there was a GPI.com article in which Franklin was yelling at the RB's about this very thing).
you make absolutely no sense. if the defense is filling all the holes in the zone, then they're not flowing to the ball or vice versa, because the running lanes are in two or three places, but the ball is only in one.
&@#%, you are so lost on this subject.
the problem is simple. the line misses assignments and when they hit their assignments they aren't held long enough. that means there are no lanes, no where for the rb to go.
misdirection? when your ol is missing or not holding blocks, misdirection isn't going to do crap.
name one &@#%ing play that works when the ol doesn't consistently hit their blocks and hold them for a reasonable amount of time. every play requires that the line perform with some form of consistency. if the line breaks down, the play breaks down.
how you don't get this is the miracle of ages.
-
All indications are that he's a good OL coach...right?
Our OL coach always had a suspect resume.
I mean, @#%$.
OACHING EXPERIENCE
1984 Fort Hays State, student assistant coach (defensive line)
1985 Russell High School, assistant coach (assistant line coach)
1986 Hays High School, assistant coach (assistant line coach)
1987 Kansas, graduate assistant (defensive line)
1988 Middle Tennessee State, assistant coach (tight ends)
1989 Shawnee Mission North High School, assistant coach (offensive line coach)
1990-93 Dodge City Community College, offensive coordinator (offensive line)
1994-97 Southwest Baptist, offensive coordinator (offensive line/tight ends)
1998 Greenville College, assistant coach (offensive line)
1999-2003 Tabor College, head coach
2004-2005 East Central, head coach
2006 Kansas State, assistant head coach (offensive line)
kk went to shawnee mission north. any idea when he graduated?
-
I think he graduated around '84.
-
We have a player problem.
IT's NOT COACHING.
Fixing the RG position would be a step forward.
Better pass protection = more yards.
-
We're supposed to have an H-back in this offense and we don't. And as I said, when we've tried to use the FB for ISO's it's worked terribly. We can't get one yard when we need it.
And I perfectly understand the zone blocking scheme...there is supposedto be multiple holes, but they get filled pretty quickly when the entire freaking team can flow to the ball because we don't give them any reason to think otherwise. That's the point..we don't even give ourselves a chance because we can't show the defense basic counters/misdirection...we don't show multiple looks...we don't show very many shifts. The defense pins its ears back whether its a run or pass because they get the same looks nearly every time. And all the defense are doing what I suggest. Part of it is the RB's fault for not reading the blocking, part of it is the coaching. Our RB's are taught to show a hip to the inside and try to get to the outside (there was a GPI.com article in which Franklin was yelling at the RB's about this very thing).
you make absolutely no sense. if the defense is filling all the holes in the zone, then they're not flowing to the ball or vice versa, because the running lanes are in two or three places, but the ball is only in one.
&@#%, you are so lost on this subject.
the problem is simple. the line misses assignments and when they hit their assignments they aren't held long enough. that means there are no lanes, no where for the rb to go.
misdirection? when your ol is missing or not holding blocks, misdirection isn't going to do @#%$.
name one &@#%ing play that works when the ol doesn't consistently hit their blocks and hold them for a reasonable amount of time. every play requires that the line perform with some form of consistency. if the line breaks down, the play breaks down.
how you don't get this is the miracle of ages.
Why do teams run screens? It's not only a good play, but it is also used to, in part, help slow down a team's pass rush. Similarly, if a defense is flowing hard to one side of the field, a misdirection play will, in part, help slow down their path to the ball. Yes, the o-line has trouble just blocking a simple zone play. Yes, if they were assignment sound maybe they'd get it blocked correctly....but maybe, just maybe a coach could try to help his o-line out by mixing in some different looks to the defense to keep the defense honest. Also, a misdirection/counters/traps aid in blocking because you are using angles. You are describing the problem (o-line not staying on their blocks or missing their blocks)... I'm addressing, in part, one cause of the problem (a lack of a scheme) and a possible solution (mix in some misdirection/counter/traps). You have to show the defense more than just a few looks.