Comments on: Tedford’s Evolution of the Offense: Part II: The Dunbar Year (2006) Continued http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/ Tell The Whole Damn World, This Is Blog Territory! Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:58:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: HydroTech http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2371 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:04:44 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2371 Ben & CA Pete, yes, I do agree Longshore's speed is a factor when it comes to the big picture overall playcalling. My point was that on the small scale analysis of the shotgun trap play his speed is irrelevant. Ben, you're right about blocking inside to out. That's the rule - generally. Sometimes though the "most dangerous" defender is actually an outside defender (or a defender who isn't the most inside defender). I think that might have been one of those cases in the trap play. In my opinion, the most dangerous defender was the MLB who was coming hard and fast down the B-gap. The LE was supposed to get picked up by someone on the OL, most likely the RG and thus the TE didn't consider him a part of the "most dangerous" analysis because he was supposed to be blocked. CA Pete, in fact, I do think you're right. It is the Tennessee LE that gets in the backfield. CA Pete, you're right about the blocking trying to seal off the backside. The OL did a fantastic job play-side, but Tennessee brought both the MLB and SLB on a strong side blitz. The only backside blocker was the TE who picked up one guy and possibly the wrong guy although it might have been a judgment call. Ben & CA Pete, yes, I do agree Longshore’s speed is a factor when it comes to the big picture overall playcalling. My point was that on the small scale analysis of the shotgun trap play his speed is irrelevant.

Ben, you’re right about blocking inside to out. That’s the rule - generally. Sometimes though the “most dangerous” defender is actually an outside defender (or a defender who isn’t the most inside defender). I think that might have been one of those cases in the trap play. In my opinion, the most dangerous defender was the MLB who was coming hard and fast down the B-gap. The LE was supposed to get picked up by someone on the OL, most likely the RG and thus the TE didn’t consider him a part of the “most dangerous” analysis because he was supposed to be blocked.

CA Pete, in fact, I do think you’re right. It is the Tennessee LE that gets in the backfield.

CA Pete, you’re right about the blocking trying to seal off the backside. The OL did a fantastic job play-side, but Tennessee brought both the MLB and SLB on a strong side blitz. The only backside blocker was the TE who picked up one guy and possibly the wrong guy although it might have been a judgment call.

]]> by: California Pete http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2368 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:31:16 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2368 It doesn't really matter, but I think that's actually the left defensive End blowing up the Marshawn running play, not the tackle. I'm not sure we can pin the blame, though, on any one Cal lineman. While there was good forward movement on the left side (the play side), it looks to my uneducated eye that the O-line was really trying to seal their defenders on the back side. None of them were able to do that, and even with the pulling tackle, Marshawn wouldn't have had much room to run even if he did make it to the line of scrimmage ahead of the pursuing back-side tackle/end. But then again, in Beast Mode, anything is possible. By the way, I concur with Ben. If Longshore's lack of foot speed limited the play-calling options, then it most certainly was a factor. It doesn’t really matter, but I think that’s actually the left defensive End blowing up the Marshawn running play, not the tackle. I’m not sure we can pin the blame, though, on any one Cal lineman. While there was good forward movement on the left side (the play side), it looks to my uneducated eye that the O-line was really trying to seal their defenders on the back side. None of them were able to do that, and even with the pulling tackle, Marshawn wouldn’t have had much room to run even if he did make it to the line of scrimmage ahead of the pursuing back-side tackle/end. But then again, in Beast Mode, anything is possible.

By the way, I concur with Ben. If Longshore’s lack of foot speed limited the play-calling options, then it most certainly was a factor.

]]> by: CalBandGreat http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2364 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:16:51 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2364 I come to your blog for the witty banter and non sequiturs, I stay for the football edification. Preesh. I come to your blog for the witty banter and non sequiturs, I stay for the football edification.

Preesh.

]]> by: Spazzy McGee http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2363 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:44:01 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2363 please explain again, but in much, much greater detail, thanks. (jk, don't. no srsly that's enough.) sir, i bow down to you as a mere football-knowledge tsetse fly bows at the feet of mothra. please explain again, but in much, much greater detail, thanks. (jk, don’t. no srsly that’s enough.)

sir, i bow down to you as a mere football-knowledge tsetse fly bows at the feet of mothra.

]]> by: Ben http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2362 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:40:21 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2362 "Well, because Longshore rarely if not ever ran the zone-read, then his lack of footspeed was never really a factor." I guess it's a matter of perspective, but Longshore's speed IMO was a factor because it limited the range of possible plays. What I mean is this: the defense could get pretty confused if they saw a zone-read look, but didn't know which play was coming (either the true zone-read or the cutback). I'm just thinking that the cutback play could be devastating if the DE continually jumped the RB's initial trajectory (i.e. went after the RB in a zone-read play), but then the RB cut back, but this time w/ an added blocker (the pulling guard). BTW that cutback play w/ Marshawn is set up SO NICELY except for that stinkin' DT busting through. Makes me think 2 things: 1) Disruptive, athletic DTs can really blow up any sort of offense, no matter how fancy, and I love that! 2) Stevens made the wrong read on that play, he should have blocked the inside man (isn't that what you're always taught? The inside man is the most dangerous?) instead of the outside man. Better to make the defense chase you around a corner than stuff you from the inside. Also, there are plays out there designed to confuse a defense by pulling a guard in the opposite direction of the play (I learned it as a SUBA block; Set-Up-Block-Away), or by having a guard/tackle take his first step in the opposite direction if the LBs are trained to read the OL's first step. “Well, because Longshore rarely if not ever ran the zone-read, then his lack of footspeed was never really a factor.”

I guess it’s a matter of perspective, but Longshore’s speed IMO was a factor because it limited the range of possible plays. What I mean is this: the defense could get pretty confused if they saw a zone-read look, but didn’t know which play was coming (either the true zone-read or the cutback). I’m just thinking that the cutback play could be devastating if the DE continually jumped the RB’s initial trajectory (i.e. went after the RB in a zone-read play), but then the RB cut back, but this time w/ an added blocker (the pulling guard).

BTW that cutback play w/ Marshawn is set up SO NICELY except for that stinkin’ DT busting through. Makes me think 2 things: 1) Disruptive, athletic DTs can really blow up any sort of offense, no matter how fancy, and I love that! 2) Stevens made the wrong read on that play, he should have blocked the inside man (isn’t that what you’re always taught? The inside man is the most dangerous?) instead of the outside man. Better to make the defense chase you around a corner than stuff you from the inside.

Also, there are plays out there designed to confuse a defense by pulling a guard in the opposite direction of the play (I learned it as a SUBA block; Set-Up-Block-Away), or by having a guard/tackle take his first step in the opposite direction if the LBs are trained to read the OL’s first step.

]]> by: Tim http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2361 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:49 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2361 Found this page through the comment above. The second play in question is not a zone read, as you say. It is an inside zone trap play. Found this page through the comment above. The second play in question is not a zone read, as you say. It is an inside zone trap play.

]]> by: joffle http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2360 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:00:17 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2360 Thanks Hydrotech. Here's a link I came across just a couple days ago also on the zone read. It includes a clip of Rich Rodriguez explaining the play while simultaneously operating a whiteboard. <a href="http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html" rel="nofollow">http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html</a> Thanks Hydrotech. Here’s a link I came across just a couple days ago also on the zone read. It includes a clip of Rich Rodriguez explaining the play while simultaneously operating a whiteboard.

http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html

]]> by: joffle http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2359 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:58:32 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2359 Thanks Hydrotech. Here's a link I came across just a couple days ago also on the zone read. It includes a clip of Rich Rodriguez explaining the play while simultaneously operating a whiteboard. <a href="http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html" rel="nofollow">http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html</a> Thanks Hydrotech. Here’s a link I came across just a couple days ago also on the zone read. It includes a clip of Rich Rodriguez explaining the play while simultaneously operating a whiteboard.

http://varsityblue.blogspot.com/2008/04/basics-of-zone-read-play.html

]]> by: johno http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2357 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:18:12 +0100 http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/29/tedfords-evolution-of-the-offense-part-ii-the-dunbar-year-2006-continued/#comment-2357 You are unreal. This stuff is legit. Quite impressive. Thanks for the hard work guys! You are unreal. This stuff is legit. Quite impressive. Thanks for the hard work guys!

]]>