Offensive Line (educational)

Danno · 12-16-2013, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

Kromer had us blocking man, down hill. His replacement brought in the zone blocking. Ingalls or Sean decided we switch to zone. It's like 2012 but on the opposite side of the ball. Scheme and players are not a match.

I think its a perfect example of change for the sake of change backfiring on us.

We weren't great at run blocking in our previous man scheme, but we didn't totally suck either. So we changed to zone blocking thinking we'd improve, but we didn't, we actually got worse.

You'd think after the Spags debacle we'd learned our lesson about square pegs and round holes.

Crusader · 12-17-2013, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by Danno

I think its a perfect example of change for the sake of change backfiring on us.

We weren't great at run blocking in our previous man scheme, but we didn't totally suck either. So we changed to zone blocking thinking we'd improve, but we didn't, we actually got worse.

You'd think after the Spags debacle we'd learned our lesson about square pegs and round holes.

Zone is supposed to be a better scheme when you have players who are not great at man blocking in the running game. To block man you need maulers, especially in the middle but we don't have any since we lost Nicks, Faine, Goodwin etc. In the xone game you empoy a lot of double teams and cutblocks which usually makes it a better scheme for less physical linemen. I personally believe it is the implementation of the scheme that hasn't worked and not the scheme in itself.

12-16-2013, 06:12 PM	#1
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,757	Re: Offensive Line (educational) Originally Posted by TheOak Kromer had us blocking man, down hill. His replacement brought in the zone blocking. Ingalls or Sean decided we switch to zone. It's like 2012 but on the opposite side of the ball. Scheme and players are not a match. I think its a perfect example of change for the sake of change backfiring on us. We weren't great at run blocking in our previous man scheme, but we didn't totally suck either. So we changed to zone blocking thinking we'd improve, but we didn't, we actually got worse. You'd think after the Spags debacle we'd learned our lesson about square pegs and round holes.

12-17-2013, 02:33 AM	#2
Crusader Resident Swede Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Märsta, Sweden Posts: 8,045	Re: Offensive Line (educational) Originally Posted by Danno I think its a perfect example of change for the sake of change backfiring on us. We weren't great at run blocking in our previous man scheme, but we didn't totally suck either. So we changed to zone blocking thinking we'd improve, but we didn't, we actually got worse. You'd think after the Spags debacle we'd learned our lesson about square pegs and round holes. Zone is supposed to be a better scheme when you have players who are not great at man blocking in the running game. To block man you need maulers, especially in the middle but we don't have any since we lost Nicks, Faine, Goodwin etc. In the xone game you empoy a lot of double teams and cutblocks which usually makes it a better scheme for less physical linemen. I personally believe it is the implementation of the scheme that hasn't worked and not the scheme in itself.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/62877-offensive-line-educational.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	12-16-2013 02:41 PM	2
Offensive Line (educational)	This thread	Refback	12-16-2013 01:44 PM	11