Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The Zone-Blocking Scheme is headed towards extinction
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:51 am    Post subject: The Zone-Blocking Scheme is headed towards extinction Reply with quote

There's been a movement put in place to eliminate cut blocking, and I've been told by a few different sources, not linked below, that the thing has serious legs to it. After serious injuries to Eric Berry and Brian Cushing because of cut blocks, the competition committee is taking a look at banning them. It's doubtful that cut blocking gets banned for the 2013 season but by 2015 or 2016, it seems likely that cut blocking will be gone. It's a move that's finally made for the safety of defensive players and might swing the rules a little bit less in favor of offenses.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/23/report-league-will-consider-abolishing-all-blocks-below-the-waist-in-2013/

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/10/14/league-will-look-at-further-restrictions-on-cut-blocks/

https://twitter.com/SI_PeterKing/status/272115956992585728

http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-wants-to-ban-cut-blocks-2012-11

What that means is that our ZBS isn't going to be worth a lick if our guys can't block. It will be interesting to see what Ted does in the draft, because I guarantee he knows this is coming.

Thoughts??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
driftwood


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 6095
Location: Milwaukee
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

im not so sure that we run a ZBS anymore... (at least not primarily)

looks like it had been slowly getting phased out when Jag left to BC

i know MM still really wants to bring in 1 cut RB's for the system (which is fine), but i'm not so sure he truly runs a ZBS anymore
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13857
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They have been talking about this for 20 damn years!

If they do anything(and I view that as a big if) they might clamp down on the cut blocks past the first level. There will always be a place for the ZBS in the NFL though, I bet.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
They have been talking about this for 20 damn years!

If they do anything(and I view that as a big if) they might clamp down on the cut blocks past the first level. There will always be a place for the ZBS in the NFL though, I bet.


Fair enough, in your opinion how does banning cut blocking past the first level impact the Packers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13857
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
They have been talking about this for 20 damn years!

If they do anything(and I view that as a big if) they might clamp down on the cut blocks past the first level. There will always be a place for the ZBS in the NFL though, I bet.


Fair enough, in your opinion how does banning cut blocking past the first level impact the Packers?


Something that will need to be worked out with all teams in. The backside tackle and center both do a ton of it in this Packers fit. That would hurt the Texans more than anyone though.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
They have been talking about this for 20 damn years!

If they do anything(and I view that as a big if) they might clamp down on the cut blocks past the first level. There will always be a place for the ZBS in the NFL though, I bet.


Fair enough, in your opinion how does banning cut blocking past the first level impact the Packers?


Something that will need to be worked out with all teams in. The backside tackle and center both do a ton of it in this Packers fit. That would hurt the Texans more than anyone though.


Yep, and the backside guard does a fair bit in the second level because neither Lang nor Sitton are fast enough to chase down the LB.

My question is what does that do for draft value. Does that hurt a guy like Uzzi or Cooper and help a guy like Warmack or Frederick?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13857
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I highly doubt it will do anything at all to anyones draft board. They all have their place and you build fits in house that your players can excel at running. It's like the center play this year. Both Wells and Saturday did a ton of it, EDS, not so much.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BartStarving


Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 1060
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZBS will go away when running backs by committee goes away. I don't see that happening under the current Packer regime. They seem to like the Denver/Shanahan/small line/back per year mold of the late 90s. I'd love for McCarthy and company to prove me wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 12942
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like Pittsburgh might be moving to the ZBS? I don't think this is a big deal
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3285
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BartStarving wrote:
ZBS will go away when running backs by committee goes away.


Which is to say, never?

How many teams are there out there that don't employ a RBBC approach? The only playoff team that doesn't, by my count, is Minnesota and they happened to luck into the greatest RB prospect of this era.

I mean, even other teams with good #1 RBs still give considerable touches to their backups (Baltimore with Pierce behind Rice, Houston with Tate behind Foster, etc.)

It just doesn't make sense to not employ a stable of backs, unless you luck into a truly rare prospect like Peterson. Even so, with the punishment RBs take (moreso than any other position) putting all your eggs into one basket isn't wise.

Plus, why would man-blocking be a better alternative if you do have a truly special back?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HokieHigh


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 1854
Location: Blacksburg
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
BartStarving wrote:
ZBS will go away when running backs by committee goes away.


Which is to say, never?

How many teams are there out there that don't employ a RBBC approach? The only playoff team that doesn't, by my count, is Minnesota and they happened to luck into the greatest RB prospect of this era.

I mean, even other teams with good #1 RBs still give considerable touches to their backups (Baltimore with Pierce behind Rice, Houston with Tate behind Foster, etc.)

It just doesn't make sense to not employ a stable of backs, unless you luck into a truly rare prospect like Peterson. Even so, with the punishment RBs take (moreso than any other position) putting all your eggs into one basket isn't wise.

Plus, why would man-blocking be a better alternative if you do have a truly special back?


In fairness Minnesota spent a first round pick on their back-up RB as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 9947
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HokieHigh wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
BartStarving wrote:
ZBS will go away when running backs by committee goes away.


Which is to say, never?

How many teams are there out there that don't employ a RBBC approach? The only playoff team that doesn't, by my count, is Minnesota and they happened to luck into the greatest RB prospect of this era.

I mean, even other teams with good #1 RBs still give considerable touches to their backups (Baltimore with Pierce behind Rice, Houston with Tate behind Foster, etc.)

It just doesn't make sense to not employ a stable of backs, unless you luck into a truly rare prospect like Peterson. Even so, with the punishment RBs take (moreso than any other position) putting all your eggs into one basket isn't wise.

Plus, why would man-blocking be a better alternative if you do have a truly special back?


In fairness Minnesota spent a first round pick on their back-up RB as well.

*2nd rounder on Gerhart.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3285
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nfldraftguru1 wrote:
HokieHigh wrote:
In fairness Minnesota spent a first round pick on their back-up RB as well.

*2nd rounder on Gerhart.


They spent a premium pick on Gerhardt, but they don't seem to use him very much (except for third down blocking/catching.) Which is fair, because they have Peterson.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 9947
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
nfldraftguru1 wrote:
HokieHigh wrote:
In fairness Minnesota spent a first round pick on their back-up RB as well.

*2nd rounder on Gerhart.


They spent a premium pick on Gerhardt, but they don't seem to use him very much (except for third down blocking/catching.) Which is fair, because they have Peterson.

Really a waste.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3285
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nfldraftguru1 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
nfldraftguru1 wrote:
HokieHigh wrote:
In fairness Minnesota spent a first round pick on their back-up RB as well.

*2nd rounder on Gerhart.


They spent a premium pick on Gerhardt, but they don't seem to use him very much (except for third down blocking/catching.) Which is fair, because they have Peterson.

Really a waste.


I could really see Gerhardt having a sort of Chester Taylor career renaissance after he leaves MN as a free agent, it's not like he can't play, it's that they have some sort of futuristic cyborg playing RB ahead of him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group