Zone vs Man Blocking?
- Thread starter KC-GuRu
- Start date
I don't disagree that it can be softer, but what do you mean by gimmicky?
Man-blocking is definitely a more powerful way to get movement and create angles, but zone is incredibly easy to coach which makes it a good choice for a lot of schools. It also depends on the kind of backs you have. If you have a guy that has great vision and can cut on a dime, zone schemes allow him to create more plays instead of being forced into a certain gap.
Definitely pros and cons to both. I think it is more personnel driven than anything else.
Definitely pros and cons to both. I think it is more personnel driven than anything else.
Yeah I went straight to the Defensive side of the ball. I am out if you are talking offence lol. I will sit in the corner and not speak.
Zone blocking definitely as it advantages if you have a solid running back or two. Allows that kid to find holes and helps hide average line play.
If you like good ole' famous smash-mouth, impose your will on the defense, power schemes and man blocking will making any good lineman's heart happy. But you need pretty good lineman that are strong, athletic, and smart.
If you like good ole' famous smash-mouth, impose your will on the defense, power schemes and man blocking will making any good lineman's heart happy. But you need pretty good lineman that are strong, athletic, and smart.
Ask Kearney folks how zone blocking has worked for them the past three years? When Kearney played athletic teams with fast LBs...running goes down from 5.7 yards avg to less than two yards.
I say yes and no. Depends on your kids. Some groups are talented enough to do both because you have strong line play as well as strong running backs. Some coaches I know have both styles in their playbook and game plan based off what their own strengths are and what you feel you can do against the other defense. I say your bigger schools can accomplish both styles easier than smaller in most cases.
A football technique post on mosports - blasphemy...
At the high school level, it typically focuses on you having a guy that is the best athlete on the field and can make a quick cut and get downhill through a hole quickly. You are right that elite running backs in HS, especially small schools, are not prevalent. Zone in HS is about allowing your athletes to out athlete the other team a little bit.
I'd tend to agree with that definition then. Pure zone blocking at the high school level is fantastic...if you have some fairly athletic behemoths to do it. As RawMeat said, a lot of teams do some "kinda-zone" on the backside. I'm not a huge fan of zone as a complete schematic philosophy, but I think some of the concepts have their uses.
Is that when they changed OL coaches?
My question. Why not put a hat on a hat and let the "athlete out athlete everyone" by making a cut of the OL tail? Why run the zone and give the OL more to think about when blocking. Shouldnt matter how good RB is.
(Most) Highschool teams do not have the depth and skill to put a hat on a hat and win every matchup. Football would be an easy game if so. In theory, you always tell your players to "beat the guy across from you" but its not always that easy and simple. Again, this is speaking for 90% of HS teams, and not the other 10% that is more dominate year after year.
man if you do it right. (IE: play side down block or double if head up)
Zone takes too many reps for small schools IMO.
another thing that doesn't get mentioned enough in the zone vs. man blocking debate, is that it is much harder for the inside line backers to read zone blocks. And if it's a zone read, forget about it cause the inside line backers will be zone-flowing the wrong way. Makes it tough to play against.
plus it's much simpler than man blocking.
plus it's much simpler than man blocking.
Exactly. Why limit yourself (unless you have to for various reasons)?
what if you have slow and undersized linemen, running backs and receivers?
What if the dline keeps taking out your offensive linemens knees?
That's when you go to the turtle offense and try to develop a good kicker and special teams..
That reminds me of my very good friend and a HC for many years and who, when going through one of those years, would claim (privately of course) that by the time he got past the sick, the lame and the lazy he didn't have enough players for either side of the ball.
Used to say it didn't matter as long as you were great at one or the other. Now, I'd say it doesn't matter, because they both have lots of carry over.
I look at it like this. Old school man blocking and double teams, etc are perfect for under center quick hitting running plays. From the shotgun the backs take longer to reach the LOS so it’s difficult to stay on a block that long in that style.
zone blocking on the other hand is more about occupying the defender than it is blowing them off the ball and is better suited for shotgun offense.
Sometimes it’s what you are most comfortable teaching or what you like.
zone blocking on the other hand is more about occupying the defender than it is blowing them off the ball and is better suited for shotgun offense.
Sometimes it’s what you are most comfortable teaching or what you like.
