ADVERTISEMENT

The O line issues are largely scheme related

ken in sacramento

Well-Known Member
Jan 16, 2000
9,566
2,406
113
Go back and watch these games and run plays specifically. The O line is nudging the D lineman and quickly vacating their spot to get to the next level. Then they can’t find a linebacker to block. Meanwhile the D line is feasting in the backfield. This happens repeatedly. When we lined up under center and ran right at them, we got much better results.
This O line is overcoached and trying to do way too much. These aren’t nube freshmen. They can hold their own but we are moving them to a spot instead of attacking the defense in front of them.
Painful to watch.
 
So what zone blocking scheme are we trying to run? I didn't recognize it from any that Wolford ran.
Well, that — and they are slow and get knocked off the line of scrimmage a lot. Other than that, they are very good at whatever they are doing during a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscnoklahoma2
We’ve run inside and outside zone. We ran more outside against ECU. Last year we didn’t run zone much. We ran a lot of power and counter and some toss sweep as well as buck sweep.
So the problem is the OL coach's inability to teach the scheme and/or what each player's assignment is within that scheme.
 
Scheme aside, these guys have been playing OL for a while. Shouldn’t they know how to block by now?
 
Being able to block and knowing who to block are two different things. I have zero doubt they are able to block.
I don't think this is something you can teach in a scrimmage. This has to be some kind of drill where they do it over and over again with scout team players running formations/shifts/stunts at them.
How else will they learn their assignments?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rogue cock
I watched parts of lots of football yesterday games. Not all OL were great but they all created hole here and there and got some push from time to time. Have we had push on a single play this year?
They did some nice work in the EUI and ECU games. Better backs would have broken big runs multiple times in those games. Lloyd in particular has taken some well blocked plays for minimal yardage. UGA embarrassed them across the board.

Beyond the straight busts, there are two things that are problematic. They are still running into a heavy boxes. These guys see a lot of single high safety looks and LBs shooting gaps of the snap. It’s been that way, more or less, since Jake Bentley went down against UNC. Defenses are not the least bit concerned about the pass on early downs, no matter the personnel group. They would benefit a lot from coming out in 10 or 11 personnel on first or second down; throwing the ball more.

The other thing they do a lot is run away from the TE, and ask the TE to seal the back end. This causes two issue. The TEs aren’t great blockers and it takes away extra blockers at the point of attack. They flipped this at the end of the ECU game and ran the OZ action to TE side, with good results (and two TEs). If the TE can handle the end at the point, it allows the lineman to climb.
 
They did some nice work in the EUI and ECU games. Better backs would have broken big runs multiple times in those games. Lloyd in particular has taken some well blocked plays for minimal yardage. UGA embarrassed them across the board.

Beyond the straight busts, there are two things that are problematic. They are still running into a heavy boxes. These guys see a lot of single high safety looks and LBs shooting gaps of the snap. It’s been that way, more or less, since Jake Bentley went down against UNC. Defenses are not the least bit concerned about the pass on early downs, no matter the personnel group. They would benefit a lot from coming out in 10 or 11 personnel on first or second down; throwing the ball more.

The other thing they do a lot is run away from the TE, and ask the TE to seal the back end. This causes two issue. The TEs aren’t great blockers and it takes away extra blockers at the point of attack. They flipped this at the end of the ECU game and ran the OZ action to TE side, with good results (and two TEs). If the TE can handle the end at the point, it allows the lineman to climb.
I can’t like your post enough!
 
They did some nice work in the EUI and ECU games. Better backs would have broken big runs multiple times in those games. Lloyd in particular has taken some well blocked plays for minimal yardage. UGA embarrassed them across the board.

Beyond the straight busts, there are two things that are problematic. They are still running into a heavy boxes. These guys see a lot of single high safety looks and LBs shooting gaps of the snap. It’s been that way, more or less, since Jake Bentley went down against UNC. Defenses are not the least bit concerned about the pass on early downs, no matter the personnel group. They would benefit a lot from coming out in 10 or 11 personnel on first or second down; throwing the ball more.

The other thing they do a lot is run away from the TE, and ask the TE to seal the back end. This causes two issue. The TEs aren’t great blockers and it takes away extra blockers at the point of attack. They flipped this at the end of the ECU game and ran the OZ action to TE side, with good results (and two TEs). If the TE can handle the end at the point, it allows the lineman to climb.

i dunno. Considering the level of the opposition, we still got very little push. The discussion during both games was how little push the OL was getting.
 
On pass blocking, the scheme must be called “help the center”. In every game, not just one, but both guards are primarily concerned with helping the center and sometimes don’t even look at the outside gaps.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT