James Cregg/zone blocking

He definitely needs to do a better job in both the run and pass game. I know injuries played a part but people regressing is on him.

Who the frick is bruiser? Cushenberry was the only one that played consistently well all year

quote:

---

bruiser

---

G. Brumfield

quote:

---

individually, it seems like charles regressed and bruiser didn't really get any better

---

I wouldn't say Charles regressed. I was highly critical of him at OG last year (Ingram was much better beside Clapp) and he really needed to learn the finer points of OT. What you saw was him doing that. He's very vulnerable to an inside move after the DL pushes upfield due to base and posture. That's his most glaring weakness. The lack of experience is masked by the fact that he is super athletic/agile. I does appear he did not get better, but I can't help but wonder if his injury isn't part of that.

quote:

---

scheme wise: we turned way too many people loose while lineman slid down and didnt block anyone

---

From the game notes thread right after the game:
I see some schematic things. For example, in the first qtr there was a run play where Deculus did a combo block (sucessfully), but the guy he combo'd off of made a TFL. If the DL you are releasing on the combo is in position to make the play, you either better have someone to combo with or the love tap on the first combo prevents him from being involved. In this case, he made a TFL. That's just bad calls. Being a run play, and a common one, I doubt seriously that was a line adjustment. That's bad design. This isn't the first this year I've seen that... by far.

quote:

---

overall: zone blocking doesn't really suit our personnel, they're heavy and not that athletic,

---

disagree. It's a myth that zone blocking was for smaller spread OL. Size/speed has nothing to do with it. It's about not having blown assignments where the D deceives you into trying to put a hat on somebody at the wrong angle, or all together. It's about getting not the mostest to the point of attack, but getting enough to the point of attack (in numbers). And slide blocking, 3, 5, or 7 man is what we do the most. That basically adds a blocker to multiple gaps, from there on out after that 'slide' it's still old fashioned putting a hat on somebody.

In short, most... well alot... zone blocking is simply that first move determining assignments and then it's the same old thing from there.

If our guys can pull, which I admit there's some pretty big issues there, they are fast/agile enough to zone block.

I'll refer to above: see play designs that are sometimes just bad. In the above example either somebody blew an assignment (Foster?) and didn't engage for Deculus to peel off and get his LB block OR the design assumed that DE was too slow to get into the play. How many times have we seen AU and Bama LBs just crash in and make a tackle from the side in the backfield. Our designs, often, are not accounting for backside seals. That's because we're jamming as many into the point of attack as we can. Without push that delays the RB (who's already dancing) and makes that free player who had a good chance to make the play turn into superman and just devastate the RB.

I've seen teams from Bama to SLU chase our pullers and make TFL. Part of that is on RB, part of that is design, part of that is scheme (e.g. there was no misdirection to make that LB think twice ever in the game), part of it is linemen either engaging out of the hole (because another OL failed to push his man) or they pull up in a hole to kick or seal block just to find out the RB is running towards the sideline.

Now all that isn't to necessarily defend Cregg. We OBVIOUSLY have not seen acceptable results. And I agree, he needs to pick it up. I've seen progress, decent to good, on the individual level. I have not seen progress (or enough) bringing those individuals into a highly effective blocking squad. He's missing some big pieces as far as bringing it together.

Yeah for 12 games of the season. Quinnen Williams made him his bitch for 60 minutes.