Zone Blocking Question

[NorthernLights]

I have a serious question and I'm sorry if it has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up, but my depression is lifting.

My question is whether Denver will keep the zone block with the change in the coaching staff?

The reason I am asking is because Denver has been very successful using it and I honestly wouldn't mind seeing them go away from it. This has nothing to do with how controversial it is because I know it is completely legal.

New England didn't use it but they have been really successful with the quick hit passing attack and I am concerned about them going to that philosophy with Cutler. We've got several months ahead of us, so might as well talk about something. Your thoughts?

[lex]

All signs point to yes. At least thats what one would infer by keeping Dennison. Also, Ive heard McDaniels wanted to run ZBS in NE but didnt have the personnel for it so it was more toned down. So, without giving you a definitive yes, it seems likely.

[TXBRONC]

I have a serious question and I'm sorry if it has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up, but my depression is lifting.

My question is whether Denver will keep the zone block with the change in the coaching staff?

The reason I am asking is because Denver has been very successful using it and I honestly wouldn't mind seeing them go away from it. This has nothing to do with how controversial it is because I know it is completely legal.

New England didn't use it but they have been really successful with the quick hit passing attack and I am concerned about them going to that philosophy with Cutler. We've got several months ahead of us, so might as well talk about something. Your thoughts?

As Lex said all indications seem to point to us keeping the zone blocking scheme because Rick Dennison our offensive line coach was retained.

Northern one thing I would like to point out, zone blocking isn't controversial, its cut blocking that's been controversial.

[elsid13]

I have a serious question and I'm sorry if it has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up, but my depression is lifting.

My question is whether Denver will keep the zone block with the change in the coaching staff?

The reason I am asking is because Denver has been very successful using it and I honestly wouldn't mind seeing them go away from it. This has nothing to do with how controversial it is because I know it is completely legal.

New England didn't use it but they have been really successful with the quick hit passing attack and I am concerned about them going to that philosophy with Cutler. We've got several months ahead of us, so might as well talk about something. Your thoughts?

Both NE (McDaniels) and Carolina (our new OC) ran the ZBS. They mixed in more traps then Denver did under shanahans but I think we will see ZBS staying in Denver.

[Dean]

Just as the Broncos were trying to emulate the Pats passing attack, the Pats were trying to emulate the Broncos rushing attack. McDaniels, now, has the coaces that directed and taught the system as well as the linemen who made it go. It appears likely that the zone blocking scheme will be our rushing offense.

On a side note, I'm not sure what percentage of running plays will be called.

[Lonestar]

Just as the Broncos were trying to emulate the Pats passing attack, the Pats were trying to emulate the Broncos rushing attack. McDaniels, now, has the coaces that directed and taught the system as well as the linemen who made it go. It appears likely that the zone blocking scheme will be our rushing offense.

On a side note, I'm not sure what percentage of running plays will be called.

I think the run first mentality of year past is toast even with a stud RB.. I think we will run only to keep the defense honest and when they do not respect it by not keeping the safety near the LOS..

I think they will take what is given and if they double up the WR we will see the running game stronger..

Since Josh is from a Passing background I believe that will be primarily pass to set up the run and then when we have a kill the clock late in the game we will see more running..

[G_Money]

Shanahan was from a passing background. It didn't stop him from employing a devastating running attack.

If he hadn't believed that any idiot could run in this scheme, and blown Alex Gibbs off the team, who knows?

I do expect a lot of 2nd half running, but we used to do that with John here. Nothing like an 11 minute drive to start the second half, score a TD, and extend our lead while leaving the other team with almost no chance to score enough to win.

I miss those days. ;) Hopefully McDaniels finds a real RB and they can come back.

~G

[lex]

Shanahan was from a passing background. It didn't stop him from employing a devastating running attack.

If he hadn't believed that any idiot could run in this scheme, and blown Alex Gibbs off the team, who knows?

I do expect a lot of 2nd half running, but we used to do that with John here. Nothing like an 11 minute drive to start the second half, score a TD, and extend our lead while leaving the other team with almost no chance to score enough to win.

I miss those days. ;) Hopefully McDaniels finds a real RB and they can come back.

~G

I hope youre right. I truly do. But honestly, I have a feeling that between Murray, Spiller and Best, next year there will be at least 2 viable candidates as RBs. If we focused on one interior offensive lineman and then defense, i would be ok with targeting one of these guys. I think Spiller is a candidate to carry a bigger load next year. In fact, Swinney has already said as much. If he could put on 10 lbs and run between the tackles while not losing speed, Id love to draft Spiller next year.

Id also be cool with drafting Wells at 12. But I agree. I would definitely like to see a lack of hubris when it comes to drafting RBs.

[dogfish]

i just recently read a snippet in PFW that said mcdaniels will keep the ZBS. . . .

[NameUsedBefore]

I don't see any logical reason to abandon it even if he wasn't a fan of it elsewhere. It clearly works here and he'd be a terrible coach not to take advantage of what is already there.

[Lonestar]

I don't see any logical reason to abandon it even if he wasn't a fan of it elsewhere. It clearly works here and he'd be a terrible coach not to take advantage of what is already there.

well for the time being we certainly have enough mediocre RB's to see if it still works..

[NameUsedBefore]

well for the time being we certainly have enough mediocre RB's to see if it still works..

Well, the problem last year wasn't that the RB's weren't producing, but that we wouldn't exit a game with the same running back we came in with. Anytime we brought a RB we had settled on he looked pretty good to me, but then he'd get injured and we'd have to fare with the backup. Hell, once Tatum Bell was settled, who clearly was out of shape and nowhere near his old self, he ran for what, 80 yards on 8 carries before we had to abandon the run?

[Lonestar]

Well, the problem last year wasn't that the RB's weren't producing, but that we wouldn't exit a game with the same running back we came in with. Anytime we brought a RB we had settled on he looked pretty good to me, but then he'd get injured and we'd have to fare with the backup. Hell, once Tatum Bell was settled, who clearly was out of shape and nowhere near his old self, he ran for what, 80 yards on 8 carries before we had to abandon the run?


I was making a joke at the 85 RB's on the roster mostly on IR..

[Cugel]

Since the OL are highly skilled at running the ZBS there's no reason to change it. Over time, Goodman and McDaniel may try and find some bigger linemen for "BEEF packages" for short-yardage because Denver has not been able to just line up and overpower people at the point of attack.

I was always amazed that anybody bothered to look for the run in goal line defense against the Broncos, when they only seemed to score by passing the ball or play-action fakes. That wasn't quite as true this year, but still they had trouble running the football in short-yardage.

[Dean]

I couldn't find how many of the 15 rushing TDs were goal line situations but I would hazzard a guess that most were.



Scoring Touchdowns Kicking Other
Rk Team G Pts/G TotPts Pts Pts/G Rsh Rec PRet KRet INT FUM Blk FG Blk Pnt XPM FGM SFTY 2-PT
1 New Orleans Saints 16 28.9 463 463 28.9 20 34 3 0 0 0 0 0 53 22 1 0
2 San Diego Chargers 16 27.4 439 439 27.4 13 34 0 1 2 1 0 0 46 27 1 2
3 Arizona Cardinals 16 26.7 427 427 26.7 14 31 0 1 2 1 1 1 44 25 0 1
3 New York Giants 16 26.7 427 427 26.7 19 23 0 0 2 0 1 0 41 36 3 1
5 Green Bay Packers 16 26.2 419 419 26.2 11 28 2 0 6 1 0 0 46 27 0 2
6 Philadelphia Eagles 16 26 416 416 26.0 15 23 1 1 2 3 0 0 45 33 1 0
7 Carolina Panthers 16 25.9 414 414 25.9 30 15 0 0 0 2 0 0 46 28 0 1
8 New England Patriots 16 25.6 410 410 25.6 21 21 0 1 0 0 0 0 40 36 0 2
9 New York Jets 16 25.3 405 405 25.3 20 22 0 1 3 2 0 0 41 24 0 2
10 Atlanta Falcons 16 24.4 391 391 24.4 23 16 1 0 2 1 0 0 42 29 1 1
11 Baltimore Ravens 16 24.1 385 385 24.1 20 16 0 0 5 1 0 0 41 28 3 1
12 Minnesota Vikings 16 23.7 379 379 23.7 15 22 1 0 0 2 1 0 40 29 3 0
13 Indianapolis Colts 16 23.6 377 377 23.6 13 27 0 0 2 3 0 0 43 20 0 2
14 Chicago Bears 16 23.4 375 375 23.4 15 20 0 1 1 3 0 2 41 26 1 1
14 Tennessee Titans 16 23.4 375 375 23.4 24 13 0 0 3 0 0 1 40 29 0 1
16 Denver Broncos 16 23.1 370 370 23.1 15 25 0 0 0 2 0 0 39 25 0 2
17 Houston Texans 16 22.9 366 366 22.9 16 21 2 0 1 0 0 0 37 29 0 1
18 Dallas Cowboys 16 22.6 362 362 22.6 12 29 0 1 1 0 0 0 42 20 1 0
19 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 16 22.6 361 361 22.6 13 18 1 1 3 1 0 1 35 32 0 1
20 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 21.7 347 347 21.7 16 19 0 0 2 1 0 0 36 27 1 0
21 Miami Dolphins 16 21.6 345 345 21.6 18 20 0 0 2 0 0 0 40 21 1 0
22 San Francisco 49ers 16 21.2 339 339 21.2 10 21 0 1 1 1 2 0 34 29 0 1
23 Buffalo Bills 16 21 336 336 21.0 16 14 1 1 3 0 0 0 34 30 0 1
24 Jacksonville Jaguars 16 18.9 302 302 18.9 17 15 0 0 2 1 0 0 33 19 1 0
25 Seattle Seahawks 16 18.4 294 294 18.4 10 18 0 0 2 2 0 0 30 24 0 0
26 Kansas City Chiefs 16 18.2 291 291 18.2 9 23 0 0 2 1 0 0 31 16 0 1
27 Detroit Lions 16 16.8 268 268 16.8 10 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 25 21 1 2
28 Washington Redskins 16 16.6 265 265 16.6 12 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 25 26 0 0
29 Oakland Raiders 16 16.4 263 263 16.4 9 13 3 2 0 0 0 0 25 24 2 0
30 Cleveland Browns 16 14.5 232 232 14.5 6 11 0 1 2 0 0 0 18 30 0 2
30 St. Louis Rams 16 14.5 232 232 14.5 8 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 19 31 0 0
32 Cincinnati Bengals 16 12.8 204 204 12.8 6 11 0 0 1 2 0 0 18 22 0 0




© 2009 NFL Enterprises LLC. NFL and the NFL shield design are registered trademarks of the National Football League.The team names, logos and uniform designs are registered trademarks of the teams indicated. All other NFL-related trademarks are trademarks of the National Football League. NFL footage © NFL Productions LLC. PRIVACY POLICY

[Lonestar]

I couldn't find how many of the 15 rushing TDs were goal line situations but I would hazzard a guess that most were.

I can remember that two of Hillis were from like 12 and then 19 to 21 yards out.. those are the only ones I can remember. But then I missed a bunch of them because of the HOU and BRETT'S games were the rage down here..

[elsid13]

I couldn't find how many of the 15 rushing TDs were goal line situations but I would hazzard a guess that most were.

I just looked at the NFL Situational Splits for all Denver players that scored TDS. All but one were in red zone. They don't give you goalline situation, you have to look at the individual games.