"Rules Clarification" and "Blocking"

[AE 87]

As I've watched the first several games, it has seemed to me that we haven't been running our bread and butter plays--triple and midline options--nearly as much as we did last season. I don't know this to be true; it just seems that way. A poster in a previous thread has talked about the failure of O-line to get upfield, but it seems that they're often running a different technique.

Regardless, it struck me this weekend that perhaps the rules clarification regarding crack-back blocking etc might be affecting us more that we've let on. What do y'all think?

 

[beej67]

Not in the least. One, we've been running plenty of our bread and butter option stuff. Maybe the counter a little bit more vs State, but that's because they're blitzers. And we've been running a TE alignment some too this year, I think largely just to give us extra blockers. But we're running the base stuff quite a bit.

And when we aren't succeeding at it, it's been largely because we can't get the MLB or the nose guard blocked, because our center and guards aren't getting the job done. The "Clarificaiton" was about WRs blocking back towards the inside, which is never on a MLB, that's on either an OLB or more likely a safety.

So no, barking up the wrong tree there. Nice thought, wrong tree.

 

[Allen Koholic]

I haven't seen us run any midline options, or at least I don't recall seeing any so far this season. Truthfully, most of what I've seen is Joshua dropping back and trying to avoid rushers.

 

[nvastinger]

As I've watched the first several games, it has seemed to me that we haven't been running our bread and butter plays--triple and midline options--nearly as much as we did last season. I don't know this to be true; it just seems that way. A poster in a previous thread has talked about the failure of O-line to get upfield, but it seems that they're often running a different technique.

Regardless, it struck me this weekend that perhaps the rules clarification regarding crack-back blocking etc might be affecting us more that we've let on. What do y'all think?

No, I don't think there's any truth to that at all. I think we've run about as much triple as usual. Against Wake I saw a few plays like the QB sweep that we've rarely run in the past, but I think PJ was fishing for something that we could execute correctly. I don't think we've run quite as much midline, but to me that's due to the very poor interior blocking we've seen and because the few times we have run it Josh has made the wrong read about 80% of the time. He almost always keeps it on the midline (probably because teams almost always took the B-back last year), and numerous times against UNC and Kansas he should have handed it off. That's the main reason we had to settle for a field goal at the end of the first half against UNC - he missed his read both times we ran the midline.

As far as crack-back blocking, that doesn't apply to the OL, and rarely applies to what the A-backs are doing. Those have been our biggest blocking problem areas. In fact I'd say WR cracking back have probably been our most consistently executed blocks the entire season.

 

[nvastinger]

I haven't seen us run any midline options, or at least I don't recall seeing any so far this season. Truthfully, most of what I've seen is Joshua dropping back and trying to avoid rushers.

We probably ran it 10 or 12 times in the first three games, with limited success. Lots of bad reads as I mentioned above. Not sure about the NC State game. Against WF I saw it once out of a modified formation, and it got diddly IIRC.

 

[andrew]

I haven't seen us run any midline options, or at least I don't recall seeing any so far this season. Truthfully, most of what I've seen is Joshua dropping back and trying to avoid rushers.

I saw some midline during the NC State game. But yeah, not nearly as much as last season.

 

[Allen Koholic]

I saw some midline during the NC State game. But yeah, not nearly as much as last season.

By and large, I haven't seen us run nearly as many plays this season, mostly because we suck. I don't think I've seen one true death march yet.

That midline absolutely decimated Clemson part 1 last season. That's the play I miss Jon Dwyer most on.

 

[beej67]

By and large, I haven't seen us run nearly as many plays this season, mostly because we suck. I don't think I've seen one true death march yet.

End of the 1st half vs UNC was our one good death march.

I think technically the final drive vs Wake counts as a death march, even though it was passing, because we left them no time to score.

 

[AE 87]

No, I don't think there's any truth to that at all. I think we've run about as much triple as usual. Against Wake I saw a few plays like the QB sweep that we've rarely run in the past, but I think PJ was fishing for something that we could execute correctly. I don't think we've run quite as much midline, but to me that's due to the very poor interior blocking we've seen and because the few times we have run it Josh has made the wrong read about 80% of the time. He almost always keeps it on the midline (probably because teams almost always took the B-back last year), and numerous times against UNC and Kansas he should have handed it off. That's the main reason we had to settle for a field goal at the end of the first half against UNC - he missed his read both times we ran the midline.

As far as crack-back blocking, that doesn't apply to the OL, and rarely applies to what the A-backs are doing. Those have been our biggest blocking problem areas. In fact I'd say WR cracking back have probably been our most consistently executed blocks the entire season.

Actually, unless I'm completly out of my head, the lead A-Backs often crackback in our triple option. They run around the outside and then crack a corner, LB or safety who's flowing from the inside toward the play. If I understand the rule clarification correctly, in previous years, they only had to be largely perpendicular to the line of scrimmage but this year directly perpendicular (or something like that). In other words, they can't crackback at a slight angle, making it more difficult to get to the blocks.

 

[bigsexy1211]

If you start inside the defender, its ok to go low. If you start outside the defender, he has to cross your face before you can cut. Simple rule really. It has not changed. It was just "clarified".

 

[GTBandit22]

We haven't run much midline because everyone besides UNC and NC State has used 3 down lineman. You can still run midline against that, but it is a much more difficult read, and is ran much further outside.
We really need to block better on the interior. Teams are scraping hard to the outside and trying to take away the middle with two guys, and it's working....No dive presence= no rocket toss.
The drop from Will Jackson to McRae/Krisch is noticable and is killing the offense.

 

[beej67]

We haven't run much midline because everyone besides UNC and NC State has used 3 down lineman. You can still run midline against that, but it is a much more difficult read, and is ran much further outside.
We really need to block better on the interior. Teams are scraping hard to the outside and trying to take away the middle with two guys, and it's working....No dive presence= no rocket toss.
The drop from Will Jackson to McRae/Krisch is noticable and is killing the offense.

That's it.

 

[gtzulu]

If you start inside the defender, its ok to go low. If you start outside the defender, he has to cross your face before you can cut. Simple rule really. It has not changed. It was just "clarified".

How do you know so much? Are you a football coach? Your posts are very informative.

 

[optionqb]

Actually, unless I'm completly out of my head, the lead A-Backs often crackback in our triple option. They run around the outside and then crack a corner, LB or safety who's flowing from the inside toward the play. If I understand the rule clarification correctly, in previous years, they only had to be largely perpendicular to the line of scrimmage but this year directly perpendicular (or something like that). In other words, they can't crackback at a slight angle, making it more difficult to get to the blocks.

You can crackback block from the side as long as your head is in front of the tackler AND initial contact is made above the waist. You cannot, however, perform a cut block while cracking from the side. That is an illegal crackback.


You can cut any defender as long as you approach him from an angle that is roughly perpendicular to the line of scrimmage.

 

[AE 87]

You can crackback block from the side as long as your head is in front of the tackler AND initial contact is made above the waist. You cannot, however, perform a cut block while cracking from the side. That is an illegal crackback.


You can cut any defender as long as you approach him from an angle that is roughly perpendicular to the line of scrimmage.

No, I'm pretty sure that this is exactly the rule that was clarified to eliminate the word "roughly."

 

[beej67]

No, I'm pretty sure that this is exactly the rule that was clarified to eliminate the word "roughly."

As I understand it, this rule sought to put to paper a better description of what "roughly" was supposed to mean.

 

[nvastinger]

Actually, unless I'm completly out of my head, the lead A-Backs often crackback in our triple option.

No, you're right, I just would say the majority of the time they're blocking towards the outside so it's not an issue.

 

[AE 87]

No, you're right, I just would say the majority of the time they're blocking towards the outside so it's not an issue.

Cool. Perhaps, that's why I've gotten the impression that we've had more "rushing lanes" open up rather than having the play go around the end this year than last.

 

[optionqb]

No, I'm pretty sure that this is exactly the rule that was clarified to eliminate the word "roughly."

I said "roughly" because their is plenty of grey area for a referee to consider. Is 1 degree from the perpendicular a penalty? 10 degrees? 30 degrees?

I've talked to a couple of high school referees and they allow a blocker's body to be on a line up to about 45 degrees from the LOS perpendicular.

The A-back can run up field (at a corrnerback, for example) and as long as he is going "more upfield than sideways" (hence, at an angle within 45 degrees of the LOS perpendicular), then the ref will -supposedly -not call an illegal block. Of course as you start to execute a block with your body on a line closer to the 45 degree deviation, then you run a greater risk of having a penalty called.

 

[AE 87]

I said "roughly" because their is plenty of grey area for a referee to consider. Is 1 degree from the perpendicular a penalty? 10 degrees? 30 degrees?

I've talked to a couple of high school referees and they allow a blocker's body to be on a line up to about 45 degrees from the LOS perpendicular.

The A-back can run up field (at a corrnerback, for example) and as long as he is going "more upfield than sideways" (hence, at an angle within 45 degrees of the LOS perpendicular), then the ref will -supposedly -not call an illegal block. Of course as you start to execute a block with your body on a line closer to the 45 degree deviation, then you run a greater risk of having a penalty called.

I know what you meant. I'm saying that I think that this is exactly the kind of latitude for the referees that this offseason's clarification was intended to eliminate. The reason for my post was that it seemed to me that a lot of CPJ's blocking angles from last year were taking advantage of exactly the lattitude that you bring up.