Pro level skills for college level kids?

[fgbrault]

Is it possible that Coaches P & D are trying to implement pro level moves and schemes with players who , on the whole, simply do not have the skills to implement them? I am not qualified to judge their coaching, but I do wonder whether their years in the Pros is causing them to try to get the players to do things that you need pro level athleticism and skills to do properly. The changes in the coaching approach for offensive line coaching might be a case in point.

 

[freescooter]

Is it possible that Coaches P & D are trying to implement pro level moves and schemes with players who , on the whole, simply do not have the skills to implement them? I am not qualified to judge their coaching, but I do wonder whether their years in the Pros is causing them to try to get the players to do things that you need pro level athleticism and skills to do properly. The changes in the coaching approach for offensive line coaching might be a case in point.

Interesting idea, but I don't really think so. Enough college teams use zone blocking schemes...Notre Dame does I know. I think USF used it too, not that they are a great example. I think it is more a case of needing different types of linemen to play that style.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

NFL players don't have to worry about their academic work or limited practice time allowed by the NCAA.

That said, it can be taught to college kids by a coach who is an open minded good teacher of the scheme. A guy who can simplify a complex scheme. A coach who has the respect of his fellow coaches and players.

 

[Carl Spackler]

NFL players, and coaches, on the other hand, are constantly on the edge, of whether or not they are going to get a paycheck Jimmy. Just saying. Not sure why, just saying. Rutgers, runs a zone blocking offense, and they've got a running back behind it, that makes our backs that have had actual lanes on occasion, look like they're runnign with blinders on.
We are a offensive team right now, because we can't score points when we have possession of the ball. Is it becuase of the players, or coaches? It's both - it's everybody.

Systems, get way more emphasis than necessary. It's the players on the field, knowing what they need to do, and then doing it. I don't think we really have the issue at this point, of having players on the field that don't know what to do. That wasn't the case early in the season, as would be expected with a change in the way the offense is being played.

A while back I looked at some stats, trends - our ability to score points on offense has been in steady decline for a few years now, it spans two coaching staffs, two systems, and many, many players...... and this year, it went from a steady downward trend, into a straight up nose dive.

Turning that around, isn't going to happen on a dime.

There's one good thing right now for this program, and I think it will be trully the measure of how long this current coachign staff stays in place, and that's recruiting.

It's amazing that for as long as we've been competitive at the Big East, we've been so unbalanced in recruiting. That's got to get changed, and when you look at a player like Chandler Whitmer - I hope the kid stays alive long enough to see success......and you look at the speed of a kid like Joe Williams, and the ability of a true freshmen to see playing time on the OL, there is hope. I'm regretting keeping the red-shirts on the players brought in to play fullback, but those guys have got to be chomping at the bit to see the field next season.

We've been able to recruit some players that populate the NFL now. Who are they? A full back, a running back, several defensive players, a couple of offnesive linemen. We've been able to recruit serious speed and talent on the defensive side, not so much on the offensive side.

Well, to be at the level of success we want, regularly, in the college game - we need to recruit a hell of alot better than we have been for both sides of the ball. Two of our players that have made the NFL on offense - were walk ons.

There has been a major imbalance in our ability to recruit on both sides of the ball.

There is absolutely no reason, why we can't go into any offensive H.S. Player in the country right now with serious talent, speed, size, and offer them the immediate ability to compete and be a four year player.

We'll see if they can get the offense turned around in recruiting.

Mark my words on this. People are worried about replacing starters on defense, I"m not. We've recruited very, very well on defense for a long time, and we still are, and there's no reason for that to change.

BUT - if we cannot get the scoring trend turned back up on offense, on the field, the success of our season next year will hinge on one thing and one thing only - the ability to put somebody in Nick Williams role on special teams, and not have a drop off.

 

[freescooter]

NFL players don't have to worry about their academic work or limited practice time allowed by the NCAA.

That said, it can be taught to college kids by a coach who is an open minded good teacher of the scheme. A guy who can simplify a complex scheme. A coach who has the respect of his fellow coaches and players.

Jimmy, we're running a "pro set" but that doesn't mean were running a system as complex as they run in the NFL. That would be nuts even for Deleone. We're running out of similar sets and similar, but stripped down plays just as every college team does.

 

[fgbrault]

Interesting idea, but I don't really think so. Enough college teams use zone blocking schemes...Notre Dame does I know. I think USF used it too, not that they are a great example. I think it is more a case of needing different types of linemen to play that style.

Thanks. It gives me hope that when lineman recruited by Coach P fill those positions things will get better.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Thanks. It gives me hope that when lineman recruited by Coach P fill those positions things will get better.

That implies that P & D will be around for years to come. That gives me nightmares.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Jimmy, we're running a "pro set" but that doesn't mean were running a system as complex as they run in the NFL. That would be nuts even for Deleone. We're running out of similar sets and similar, but stripped down plays just as every college team does.

Let's both be fair, neither of us knows exactly what or how things are being taught to the players during the week. My observation is based on things I've heard second hand and what my eyes tell me on Saturday. I can't count the number of times I saw OLinemen looking for people to block. That's a major problem. I like my OLinemen to block.

 

[fgbrault]

Thanks for all your comments. Very enlightening.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Let's both be fair, neither of us knows exactly what or how things are being taught to the players during the week. My observation is based on things I've heard second hand and what my eyes tell me on Saturday. I can't count the number of times I saw OLinemen looking for people to block. That's a major problem. I like my OLinemen to block.

One of the things that goes into a zone blocking system, the type that we appear to be employing, is that the movement patterns are so completely different in the offensive line than they are in the zone/read option system. On a running play, some players are going to be moving in a certain way - to the play side, others need to turn and move in different ways.

The concept of blocking an "area" vs. blocking a "man", is a very simplistic, and inaccruate way to look at it. The zone/read option offense is much more of a true zone blocking concept when you think about goign to an "area" vs. a "man", than what we are doing now - from what i can tell. In that Chip Kelly offense, that's based on simplcicity itself, the offensive linemen simply all move as a unit, with their movement reactive to how a single position on the DLine is lined up at the snap. The line simply moves in essentially the same way as a blocking wedge would move in ancient times, except arms aren't interlocked.

There was as a good example in the NFL game last night, about how a zone blocking system breaks down when players aren't in tune. Collinsworth, who I think is one of teh best commentary guys I've ever heard, pointed it out on replay..... Dallas was moving the ball well, and called a running play b/w G and T to the left close to the goal. The Dallas LT - who's younger than most of our starting OL, engaged the lineman across from him in a combo block with Witten the TE. THe G was engaged with the other DL and the hole was wide open, with an Inside backer about 3-4 yards off teh LOS looking to fill. The job of the LT was to clear the zone of that LB....to chip on the DL, and block the LB - come off the combo block and get to the second level - zone blocking

That's exactly what he did, but he did it too fast, for the RB to get in behind him and for Witten to get enough leverage from his starting stance, with his feet in and under him to keep the DL blocked long enough, so the DL makes the tackle in the tackle in the backfield.

Our TE's right now, are goign to have a shot in the NFL, because they are being taught, to block this way at the point of attack.

What I want to know, and will never find out, is if the offensive coaching staff, knew we didn't have the footspeed for our linemen to get their bodies turned and moving in the directions they need to go, and get the blocks, especially in the interior line, and went ahead (to get our lumps so to say) anyway.

 

[J187Money]

Carl - what's your assessment of the talent of this year's OL v. prior year's OL. Is it a talent issue? Or square peg / round hole with scheme?

 

[businesslawyer]

NFL players, and coaches, on the other hand, are constantly on the edge, of whether or not they are going to get a paycheck Jimmy. Just saying. Not sure why, just saying. Rutgers, runs a zone blocking offense, and they've got a running back behind it, that makes our backs that have had actual lanes on occasion, look like they're runnign with blinders on.
.

Way too simple and not fair. Last year, McCombs make Jameson look like he was running with blinders on. Maybe Jameson got much better and McCombs got much worse, but there are other more likely rational for what you just described.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Carl - what's your assessment of the talent of this year's OL v. prior year's OL. Is it a talent issue? Or square peg / round hole with scheme?

It's both. Our guys are smaller, slower and weaker than what we've had in the past. And the new scheme makes you look real bad if you screw up. Early on, the players didn't know their assignments and admitted it. I'm not so sure that's the case anymore.

Simply put, if our players, at this point in time, still can't get their assignments right? that's immediate grounds for removing Deleone. I can't believe that's actually still the case - that they still don't know who and when to block, but anythign is possible.

You get the illusion that we have players that don't know what they're doing, or who to block, when defenders are running around and through them, and the players on the field are yelling at each other in each others faces to play better.

Blocking isn't some incredibly complex thing. You got to keep your feet down when you make contact, and you got to be able to move your feet very fast in between movements, and get them back on the ground.

The second an offensive linemen gets unbalanced on his feet, is the second he gets beat. Somebody put up a nice article on zone blocking a few weeks ago - Rutgers article.

the differences in what we are doing now, is that we have linemen that need to move independantly of each other for plays to work now, where in the past, the entire line, including the TE's all moved the same way.

The rest is all just communication on the line. To my knowledge, we have a guard that is making the primary line calls. Ideally, it should be your center doing that, or the QB.

If the guard is the only guy capable of doing it? that's what you got to do I guess.

My problem with deleone is not OLine coaching and technique - it's his inability to generate a consistent offensive drive by destroying our own momentum with his tactics.

 

[sdhusky]

Way too simple and not fair. Last year, McCombs make Jameson look like he was running with blinders on. Maybe Jameson got much better and McCombs got much worse, but there are other more likely rational for what you just described.

3.9 yards per carry for Jameson and 4.2 for McCombs?

Fact is that Jameson is WAY more talented than McCombs.

 

[businesslawyer]

3.9 yards per carry for Jameson and 4.2 for McCombs?

Fact is that Jameson is WAY more talented than McCombs.

I agree with the last statement. But you would not have had the same conclusion from watching each of them play last year. So, most likely, a huge part of judging a TB is how good a job the OL and schemes are doing at giving him a running lane.

 

[sdhusky]

I agree with the last statement. But you would not have had the same conclusion from watching each of them play last year. So, most likely, a huge part of judging a TB is how good a job the OL and schemes are doing at giving him a running lane.

Without a doubt.

I think McCombs is a good to very good college back with a good to very good Oline. He is below average with a struggling oLine.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I agree with the last statement. But you would not have had the same conclusion from watching each of them play last year. So, most likely, a huge part of judging a TB is how good a job the OL and schemes are doing at giving him a running lane.

There are many other ways to judge a TB. How good the OL players are, and how good the blocking schemes are doing at generating running lanes, is measured by YPC.

We're sucking wind. Bad. Defenses have no respect for our running game, and are simply sending 6 players to fill gaps every time we line up on offense, and it's working we can't get a back more than a step over the line of scrimmage on any given running play, and if it's a passing down, they're getting pressure on the QB.

I don't know why I'm thinking about it, but against USF late, I'm not sure what play it was exactly, but we were lined up and USF was coming on the blitz, hard, double A gap pressure. It was clear as day. Whitmer knew it, everybody knew it. The play was over before it started. I don't think it was the INT, maybe it was I don't know.

Why nobody called a timeout? That's what's got me perplexed, but that's nothing new or unexpected - the timeout thing - I knew that was coming when Pasqualoni was hired.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

There are many other ways to judge a TB. How good the OL players are, and how good the blocking schemes are doing at generating running lanes, is measured by YPC.

We're sucking wind. Bad. Defenses have no respect for our running game, and are simply sending 6 players to fill gaps every time we line up on offense, and it's working we can't get a back more than a step over the line of scrimmage on any given running play, and if it's a passing down, they're getting pressure on the QB.

I don't know why I'm thinking about it, but against USF late, I'm not sure what play it was exactly, but we were lined up and USF was coming on the blitz, hard, double A gap pressure. It was clear as day. Whitmer knew it, everybody knew it. The play was over before it started. I don't think it was the INT, maybe it was I don't know.

Why nobody called a timeout? That's what's got me perplexed, but that's nothing new or unexpected - the timeout thing - I knew that was coming when Pasqualoni was hired.

I think that was the play that where Whitmer got buried before he dropped back. He had no chance.

 

[tduconn]

Everyone made some valid points, but I think Carl inferred the current skills of the O-line is not capatible for the system being used. I believe a lineman was quoted as saying (when asked "what happened?") something like "we saw something new".

Three games to go and we hear "we saw something new?" It may be they just don't know who, how, or what to block......and nine games in, that's the problem.

Is it :
(A) zone blocking scheme? I don't know but if this is what the coaches believed was needed to escalate the program to a higher/more competitive BCS level, has it failed because:

(B) lack of talent

(C) poor coaching

(D) a little bit of B & C

I'm leaping at an assumption, based on what some have suggested in this thread and others, that other teams using (A) have had better success......therefore I vote for (D), but believe the "talent" may be largest concern.

Now, I say that based on another assumption, without knowing ins and outs of coaching, both RE and PP are intelligent in their own rights.

That being said, what's the reason RE didn't use scheme (A).......assuming he also, in his gut, may have thought (for arguments sake) that is what the program had to aim for to be more competitive

We all know how talking heads rate our recruits.

I'm afraid we just need better all around talent, with the coaches that can better employ, teach, and coach the complexities of college FB

 

[J187Money]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_blocking

Zone blocking is a technique in American football that is a simple and effective scheme for creating lanes for running plays.

(apparently not so simple lol)

 

[huskymedic]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_blocking

Zone blocking is a technique in American football that is a simple and effective scheme for creating lanes for running plays.

(apparently not so simple lol)

I could only wish I had these zone blocking problems... Some basic theory explained by "Phony"

 

[Carl Spackler]

I could only wish I had these zone blocking problems... Some basic theory explained by "Phony"

That's a nice football discussion. We used to have stuff like that around here.

 

[huskymedic]

That's a nice football discussion. We used to have stuff like that around here.

Pretty much... we've turned into a microcosm of society here. Don't like the message or if it doesn't fit personal agenda - go personal.

Here's another discussion on zone blocking concepts from a higher level JUCO program on the west coast (2005 national champs) - while not as simple as the "knock the guy in front of you down and lay on him" concept - it makes sense. We either have the wrong personnel (notice I didn't say not talented), the wrong teacher, or the players are recalcitrant to change.

 

[jdb50]

Back in the day didn't we replace Ambrose with Moorhead because of our lack of offensive productivity? Was it the bowl game against Wake that led to this? If I remember when Moorhead came in he wanted to go more up tempo/ no huddle and there was some grumbling from the O-line. We certainly didn't face plant the way we have with the present change of O-line strategy.

 

[UConnMatt813]

In high school my team switched to a zone blocking approach in between my junior an senior years. It's not so simple. It's a totally different way of blocking, a different mindset, if you will. The way it was explained to us at the time was to simply to "go with the play." in other words, if were running a sweep to the right, block the man in front of you to the right. This would allow for many cutback lanes to open.

The problem we had was when there was a d-line shift, or linebackers moving, or personnel changes (I.e. Base 4-3 to nickel.). It was hard for us to make those adjustments mid-play or at the line of scrimmage. Countless times we'd end up having 3 guys going out to block one defender. Or if the defense had a "star" player, the scheme didn't allow for a double team. I'm sure (or at least hope) gdl at the college level has a more complex scheme than
we had.

My point is just that it's a very complex way of blocking if you're unfamiliar. Maybe the o-linemen were recruiting play in high schools that employ a zone blocking scheme? I sure hope so, bc I can't take another year of watching this.