Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 63
  1. #11
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "thevikingfan" wrote:
    oh yea its a horrible scheme it only allowed us to rush for 2400 yards and have the most 10,20 and 40 yard runs last season its also why we sent 2 linemen to the probowl and had herrera have a breakout season,Terible just terrible
    how has that passing game been again? I can't quite remember.

  2. #12
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    The zone blocking isn't a bad scheme when you have the right players in it. We just don't IMO.

    As Singer stated, you need to have smaller, more agile blockers and we don't have that type of player on the outside which is our biggest problem.

    Denver has had the system since Shanahan took over. They were average the first year, went 13-3 the next and then went on to win 2 SB's withing the first 5 years in the system. As was said, GB brought in several rookies in the past few years and still ran that system well enough to go to the playoffs the last 2 years and get 1 play from the SB.

    We either don't have the proper personnel to execute it, the wrong coaches teaching it, or my guess is a combination of both.
    The idea that you need smaller players to make is successful is not correct.
    It benefits smaller players more than large man-handling ones, but you can still successfully implement it successfully with larger people.
    Also, it is better for the running game than the passing game (obviously).

    We are entering the third year of the scheme.
    I am not a fan of zone blocking either, but I am less of a fan of changing schemes continuously.
    Given that this is the blocking scheme our entire team is used to now, and we are teetering on the brink of having a GREAT season, changing it now would be a bad decision.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  3. #13
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    The zone blocking isn't a bad scheme when you have the right players in it. We just don't IMO.

    As Singer stated, you need to have smaller, more agile blockers and we don't have that type of player on the outside which is our biggest problem.

    Denver has had the system since Shanahan took over. They were average the first year, went 13-3 the next and then went on to win 2 SB's withing the first 5 years in the system. As was said, GB brought in several rookies in the past few years and still ran that system well enough to go to the playoffs the last 2 years and get 1 play from the SB.

    We either don't have the proper personnel to execute it, the wrong coaches teaching it, or my guess is a combination of both.
    The idea that you need smaller players to make is successful is not correct.
    It benefits smaller players more than large man-handling ones, but you can still successfully implement it successfully with larger people.
    Also, it is better for the running game than the passing game (obviously).

    We are entering the third year of the scheme.
    I am not a fan of zone blocking either, but I am less of a fan of changing schemes continuously.
    Given that this is the blocking scheme our entire team is used to now, and we are teetering on the brink of having a GREAT season, changing it now would be a bad decision.
    I agree with you in that I don't want to keep changing schemes, but if this is what we committed to and are going to stick to, then if the talent isn't going to be able to thrive in it, then I would make it a priority to make sure they were replaced by guys who will.

    But as far as whether changing it would be a bad decision, that depends. If we plan on keeping the current talent, and if that talent would be more effective if we changed what we asked them to do and if it could be done with minimal disruption, then it would be a good idea. I guess you have to trust the coaches, but they are just human and can be wrong in their decisions just like any other person.

  4. #14
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,859

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    You also have to consider the talent in the passing games on teams like New England which causes the defense to respect the receivers and drop back off the line of scrimmage putting less bodies in front of the OL.
    With the lack of respect in our passing game it makes the blocking assignments much more difficult when facing 8-9 guys at the line of scrimmage on a regular basis.
    Assignments are more difficult to interpret, TE's and RB's need to do their job,.....

    Gaining respect in the passing game will not only continue to help our running game, it will help the OL in pass protection as well.
    When going against a pass weak team, there is not a lot of downside to maintaining a lot of personnel on the line of scrimmage as it also helps fill lanes against the running game.

    Until TJ and our WR's show they can be competitive in this league our pass protection will continue to be challenged.
    This means a legitimate deep threat as well.
    The dink and dunk stuff won't bring much pressure off the line.
    Everybody is selling out in a relatively small space.

    That being said, we could do a better job of pass blocking, I'm just trying to add another aspect to it.
    Its easy to see a QB getting pressure and blaming the line for letting it happen, but if you want to compare to other teams you need to look at the whole picture.


  5. #15
    VikingMike's Avatar
    VikingMike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "Overlord" wrote:
    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    The zone blocking scheme is essentially a run blocking scheme.
    Pass blocking is still about reading the defense, getting your assignments right, and then being more badass than the guy across from you.
    We struggled at times last year, and I think we're expecting/hoping for big improvements this year from Birk on the first part and our tackles on the last part.

    Anyway, the article seems a year too late.
    The fit of the zone blocking scheme was a concern all of 2006 and going into last year, but our top 3 running backs each averaged at least 5.4 yards/carry in 2007.
    I also took a look at the top running backs last year by average, and 5 of the top 6 run in zone blocking schemes (J. Norwood, A. Peterson, C. Taylor, S. Young, R. Grant - link).

    If I have one complaint with our zone blocking scheme it's that we don't seem to cut block enough.
    The cut blocking by the backside guys cuts off a lot of the pursuit and opens up some cut back lanes.
    I don't understand why about half the teams taking up the zone blocking scheme don't do it now, but I can only imagine that they're sensitive to the injury concerns.
    Rules haven't changed though, so I'm not a fan of that reasoning (if that is what they're thinking).

    Excellent post. While Birk looked lost at times last year, I'm not sure it was the scheme's fault.

    What concerns me more than this matter is the predictability of the defensive matchups. But with a formidable pass rush, many of these other "shortfalls" will work themselves out much more easily IMO.
    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H.L. Mencken

    Come from the land of the ice and snow...

  6. #16
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "tastywaves" wrote:
    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    You also have to consider the talent in the passing games on teams like New England which causes the defense to respect the receivers and drop back off the line of scrimmage putting less bodies in front of the OL.
    With the lack of respect in our passing game it makes the blocking assignments much more difficult when facing 8-9 guys at the line of scrimmage on a regular basis.
    Assignments are more difficult to interpret, TE's and RB's need to do their job,.....

    Gaining respect in the passing game will not only continue to help our running game, it will help the OL in pass protection as well.
    When going against a pass weak team, there is not a lot of downside to maintaining a lot of personnel on the line of scrimmage as it also helps fill lanes against the running game.

    Until TJ and our WR's show they can be competitive in this league our pass protection will continue to be challenged.
    This means a legitimate deep threat as well.
    The dink and dunk stuff won't bring much pressure off the line.
    Everybody is selling out in a relatively small space.

    That being said, we could do a better job of pass blocking, I'm just trying to add another aspect to it.
    Its easy to see a QB getting pressure and blaming the line for letting it happen, but if you want to compare to other teams you need to look at the whole picture.


    OK, but before they brought in Moss, Welker and Stallworth last year, who did they have that struck fear in defenses?
    They put up great numbers and won multiple SB's without a franchise type RB or WR and even pulled one of their main WR's to play DB due to injury.


  7. #17
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    Tom Brady?
    The eagles top recievers were Todd Pinkston and Freddie Mitchell, yet McNabb was good enough to force other teams to respect the pass.

  8. #18
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    Deion Branch?
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  9. #19
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "HEY" wrote:
    good article! Does anyone knows if New England or other good o-lines in NFL use the same scheme as the Vikings.

    Maybe the zone scheme is bad when pass blocking...
    The zone blocking isn't a bad scheme when you have the right players in it. We just don't IMO.

    As Singer stated, you need to have smaller, more agile blockers and we don't have that type of player on the outside which is our biggest problem.

    Denver has had the system since Shanahan took over. They were average the first year, went 13-3 the next and then went on to win 2 SB's withing the first 5 years in the system. As was said, GB brought in several rookies in the past few years and still ran that system well enough to go to the playoffs the last 2 years and get 1 play from the SB.

    We either don't have the proper personnel to execute it, the wrong coaches teaching it, or my guess is a combination of both.
    The idea that you need smaller players to make is successful is not correct.
    It benefits smaller players more than large man-handling ones, but you can still successfully implement it successfully with larger people.
    Also, it is better for the running game than the passing game (obviously).

    We are entering the third year of the scheme.
    I am not a fan of zone blocking either, but I am less of a fan of changing schemes continuously.
    Given that this is the blocking scheme our entire team is used to now, and we are teetering on the brink of having a GREAT season, changing it now would be a bad decision.
    I agree with you in that I don't want to keep changing schemes, but if this is what we committed to and are going to stick to, then if the talent isn't going to be able to thrive in it, then I would make it a priority to make sure they were replaced by guys who will.

    But as far as whether changing it would be a bad decision, that depends. If we plan on keeping the current talent, and if that talent would be more effective if we changed what we asked them to do and if it could be done with minimal disruption, then it would be a good idea. I guess you have to trust the coaches, but they are just human and can be wrong in their decisions just like any other person.
    I agree that if your installing a new scheme you need to acquire players who fit it. Have we done that?

    Hutchinson: apparently doesn't fit the scheme
    Cook: apparently doesn't fit the scheme
    Hicks: Fits the scheme but sucks?
    Chase Johnson: ???
    Dan Mozes: ???
    John Sullivan: ???
    Dwight Smith: Fits the scheme but sucked.
    Griffin: I would say he likes to be more physical than the cover 2 allows
    McCauley: Tough because he is being asked to cover WRs much better than him.
    Allen: I would say he fits the scheme because he can rush the passer without help from LB blitzes, which is what the cover 2 calls for.
    Robison: Same as Allen
    Edwards: Same as Allen

    Defensively, I have very little problems with the Cover 2. Bad passing stats but we are almost always in a position to win games because of out D. Conservative, yet our D make big plays, and scores TDs.

    Offensively, I would like to know the real difference zone blocking makes in pass protection. Obviously, the running game is not a problem.

    The real crucial part of this article that no one has mentioned yet is adjustements other teams make against us, how we don't change out strategies at all. Is it really smart to line Winny up in Nickle all the time? Should Leber, Greenway, and Henderson rotate more? Is the two-TE set the only solution for shoddy pass-blocking?
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  10. #20
    jargomcfargo's Avatar
    jargomcfargo is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,776

    Re: Schemes could hurt Vikings

    The article is pretty good.
    The biggest concern, for me, is the lack of adjustments and inflexibility of the schemes.
    That will all change when the coaching staff changes.
    I'm not advocating that change, yet. But until that time, I think the team will improve within it's current schemes.
    The zone blocking doesn't have much to do with our pass blocking woes; and is quite successful in the running game.
    What takes a quarterback to the next level is not arm strength or mobility or any of that stuff. Its the ability to play on critical downs. Manage third downs, or red zones or four-minute or two-minute situations"
    Dilfer

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Davidson: Four Blocking Schemes Will Be Used
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-30-2011, 03:37 AM
  2. Defensive Schemes (3-4, 4-3, 4-6)
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-13-2009, 09:09 AM
  3. Unconventional Defensive Schemes
    By mountainviking in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-17-2008, 09:35 AM
  4. Chiefs won't get to see all the Vikings schemes
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-02-2007, 07:15 PM
  5. Coaches and Schemes
    By VikesfaninWis in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-16-2006, 04:42 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •