Denver Offense 101

[powerfuldragon]

what's a cut block?

 

[real]

A block behind the offensive player is always a clip whether below the knees, or in the shoulder blades, wherever. There's a clear distinction between a
clip and a cut-block. Some cut'blocks are legal, clips never are.

"clips" aren't legal, but it is legal to cut a d-lineman from behind within three yards...or something like that

 

[Runner]

what's a cut block?

Here are 1000 words on cut blocking:

 

[TemeculaMike]

Do you have any statistics to back this up? What's the average number of injuries to d-linemen when playing the Broncos or Falcons as opposed to the league average? Just saying it's so doesn't make it true.

I believe this article was posted already in this thread (not sure): Jagodzinski adds cut blocks.

The Packers have practiced cut blocking several times this offseason in their minicamps and organized team activities, something they rarely, if ever, did under their last three coaching staffs. The offensive linemen practice it by running and diving at low-placed blocking dummies.

The cut blocking has caused controversy the past several years when defensive linemen have sustained knee and leg injuries against Denver and Atlanta, the two teams that ran Gibbs’ system before the Packers and Houston joined the group this offseason.

In December, for instance, Carolina defensive ends Julius Peppers and Mike Rucker each sustained a sprained ankle when cut blocked by Atlanta linemen. In 2004, Cincinnati defensive tackle Tony Williams and Jacksonville defensive end Paul Spicer sustained season-ending leg injuries on back-side cut blocks by Denver linemen.

***

The only live cut blocking the Packers will do is in games, because even in training camp, teams don’t cut block their own players. With the blocking dummies, they can simulate the technique of a cut block, but they can’t simulate hitting a moving target.

Statistics? No. To my knowledge this type of statistic is not readily available and I'm not crazy enough to compile it myself. My opinion on this issue is formed from the wisdom of NFL offensive coordinators (and the President of the NFLPA, and Joe Theisman) who are not crazy enough to practice cut-blocks on their own players. Its fairly clear that cut-blocks increase the risk of injury, otherwise, there is no reason not to practice it against your own teammates.

 

[Lucky]

Its fairly clear that cut-blocks increase the risk of injury, otherwise, there is no reason not to practice it against your own teammates.

If you've ever attended a NFL practice, you know that teams rarely go live in blocking and tackling. Again, we're talking about a cut block, a block everyone who played in youth league on up has executed. Not a chop block.

The best way to eliminate the chop block is to stiffen the penalties and fines against the chop block. Not legislate against a legit blocking technique. If defensive linemen are allowing offensive linemen to get into their legs, shame on the d-linemen. You're supposed to stay low in the game of football.

 

[TemeculaMike]

Houston has been a primary zone blocking team for 2 years already.

There are multiple types of zone blocking schemes. What we are talking about in the Gibbs style zone-blocking scheme that Denver has used for the last 10 years and Atlanta used last year. For the 2005 campaign, only two teams used the Gibbs zone-blocking scheme. This year that number will increase to 4, with Green Bay and Houston (likely) employing the cut-block as a primary tactic to remove defenders from a play.

While every team zone blocks - only two zone block the way Gibbs teaches it. A fundamental component of the Gibbs' scheme is the cut-block. Most teams use a cut block as an option of last resort - the Gibbs zone block scheme uses the cut block much more frequently.

Cut-blocks go against standard o-line wisdom, which is "stay on your feet." The Gibbs style zone blocking scheme uses the cut block for the sole purpose of freeing up running lanes. It is credited with allowing Denver to field 1,000+ yards rushers each year.

 

[real]

If you've ever attended a NFL practice, you know that teams rarely go live in blocking and tackling. Again, we're talking about a cut block, a block everyone who played in youth league on up has executed. Not a chop block.

The best way to eliminate the chop block is to stiffen the penalties and fines against the chop block. Not legislate against a legit blocking technique. If defensive linemen are allowing offensive linemen to get into their legs, shame on the d-linemen. You're supposed to stay low in the game of football.

Chop block...Cut block....It's the same thing....

And as far as d-line getting cut......It happens...even the best of the best get cut...If all they did was worry about getting cut, IMO they wouldn't be very effective

 

[Historyhorn]

A chop and a cut block are not the same things. A chop block is blocking a defender below the waist while he is engaged with another offensive player. It is never legal and is always considered a dirty play.

A cut block is a block below the waist, from the front (ie the defender can see you). It is usually legal in all circumstances except when executed from behind or via a "crackback" by someone who lines up outside and then comes back to cut a defender who doesn't know its coming. You also can't cut block on kick, fumble, or interception returns.

The cut block is a legal technique that most folks who have played football know and are familiar with executing.

The rub comes from Denver kind of pushing the envelope on blocks below the waist. Their cutblocks generally don't take place at the point of attack, but in eliminating the pursuit. That's what makes the 1 cutback slashing style so effective for Denver RB's. The RB needs the vision to pick the hole on the cutback and then haul butt N & S, because the backside pursuit will be on the ground.

From the defensive perspective, if the point of attack is away from you, you flow toward the ball parallel to the line of scrimmage. The Denver OL take those flowing DL and Backers and cut block as they flow away. The Defenders are rarely looking for the block as they are keying on the play moving away. The blocks are usually from the side with the helmet in front of the knee. The RB moves toward the point of attack and then makes his move to the backside where there should be some DL and Backers, but if the play works right, those guys are on the ground, leaving a lane into the secondary.

This is highly effective in that players pursuing the play become wary of the cut blocks as they flow to the ball. The pursuit slows down, and creates more opportunities for that single cutback.

It skates the edge of being legal, but it certainly has proven to be effective. I'll be interested to see if the Texans employ that same "zone blocking" philosophy or style as employed in Denver. If so, get ready for some complaints from opponents, but also get ready for D Davis to have a record breaking year.

Go Texans

 

[Double Barrel]

If it's legal, do it. We need all the help we can get.

The cut block may not be nice, but it is a valid technique until the NFL decides to outlaw it.

 

[real]

A chop and a cut block are not the same things. A chop block is blocking a defender below the waist while he is engaged with another offensive player. It is never legal and is always considered a dirty play.

That statement is not true...They are the same thing...Cutting while a defender is engaged is a hi-low block...

 

[infantrycak]

That statement is not true...They are the same thing...Cutting while a defender is engaged is a hi-low block...

No--a chop block and cut block are two different things--one not legal and one that is. aj has explained it many times--doesn't seem to make a difference.

 

[Lucky]

Chop block...Cut block....It's the same thing....

No, it's not. A cut block is a block below the waist where the blocker's head is in front of the defender. A chop block is a block below the waist from behind or to the side of the defender OR a block below the waist against a defender already engaged by another blocker.

This year that number will increase to 4, with Green Bay and Houston (likely) employing the cut-block as a primary tactic to remove defenders from a play.

The cut block is used mainly on the backside of the play, against defenders attempting to pursue. It's not the primary blocking technique at the point of attack.

The best thing the cut block does for the Texans offense is that it gives the opposing defense just another thing to think about. I haven't seen the preponderance of evidence that cut blocking causes X more injuries than other blocking techniques. I think the reason cut blocking bothers defenses is because, as TemeculaMike pointed out, it is practiced by only a handful of teams. Most of these linemen are used to getting up out of their stance and moving upfield. They're not used to staying low and taking on the low block. Mario Williams was targeted with low blocks earlier this season at NC State. It wasn't until he learned to defeat these blocks that Mario's season turned super.

 

[infantrycak]

There are multiple types of zone blocking schemes. What we are talking about in the Gibbs style zone-blocking scheme that Denver has used for the last 10 years and Atlanta used last year. For the 2005 campaign, only two teams used the Gibbs zone-blocking scheme. This year that number will increase to 4, with Green Bay and Houston (likely) employing the cut-block as a primary tactic to remove defenders from a play.

Houston has been running zone blocking for 2 years. What they have not been doing effectively is sealing off the back side edge--which is sometimes, but by no means always done but cut blocking. It is a vast overstatement to say cut blocking is the hallmark or primary part of zone blocking. Zone blocking is a concept of movement and engagement along the entire line and from the back field with the RB not having a designed running lane. The cut block is only used to seal off the back side edge of the play to provide the RB with a cut back running lane.

 

[TemeculaMike]

It looks like we are all on the same page - we just disagree with the consequences of the Gibbs style zone blocking scheme. Ultimately, I think we are just one injured "star" player away from having the block outlawed. A number of prominent figures around the league are already calling for its removal from the game.

If it gets banned, teams that are centered around "tripping" up backside pursuit with the cut-block by using smaller/quicker o-linemen will be in a world of hurt.

 

[Lucky]

If it gets banned, teams that are centered around "tripping" up backside pursuit with the cut-block by using smaller/quicker o-linemen will be in a world of hurt.

I don't see something that's been taught from day 1 being banned. But if so, I don't see a huge impact on the Texans in the future. Both linemen the team drafted this year (Spencer & Winston) are huge. And 2 of the young vets on the team, Pitts & Wand, are both 320+ lbs. I don't see a big concern either way.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

I don't see something that's been taught from day 1 being banned. But if so, I don't see a huge impact on the Texans in the future. Both linemen the team drafted this year (Spencer & Winston) are huge. And 2 of the young vets on the team, Pitts & Wand, are both 320+ lbs. I don't see a big concern either way.

You remember Pink Floyd's Brick in the Wall? Well, it looks like evertime you turn around, we've added "just another brick in the wall"..........another frigging BIG brick. Indeed we will be playing a "variation" of the Denver offense in that, when we eventually get it all together, we will have an array of MOBILE and HUGE O linemen probably giving us the BIGGEST, BADDEST, HARDEST "WALL" in the NFL.........with or without cut blocking.

 

[aj.]

At this point I'd settle for adequate.