Re: Run Blocking - Part II
posted at 1/3/2014 8:12 AM EST
In response to zbellino's comment:
Is that missing a frame? It looks like Mankins gets a chip down before heading to the second level? It looks like an inside zone .... the other could be outside or inside zone (sometimes you'll hear announcers falsely say NE runs the "stretch" all the time, when they really run the stretch rarely, and favor outside zone with Ridley.) Also, the difference between the 34 and 43 fronts we see in the two plays confuses things as well. Post-mortem on run blocking is dizzying ... it's by far the most complex part of managing a line.
At any rate ... the story about play two is Mankins .. Cannon is practically irrelevant. Mankins thouroughly dominates the backside of the block, giving Blount his "read" to the interior guard.
That's the story of that one.
The man block was the play with Develin and Edelman from yesterday's thread.
Typically, two TES, or committed bodies on the line mean zone ... because that lends itself to it .... FBs and H-Backs let you run some more man, because you can really move them around like hammers.
Yep, you read that right. Mankins does chip on the first level before getting to the second level (see additional shot below). That was a great play by him. I thought Solder also blocked well on that one.
One thing to point out though, is that whoever was supposed to do what, the end result was a lot different in the Buffalo and Browns games. In the Buffalo game, Blount had a wide open lane behind the backs of Cannon, Solder, and Mankins. In the Browns game, the hole is poorly defined and I can't tell whether Ridley was better off doing what he did and following Svitek into the hole or whether he should have cut back and tried to get between Mankins and Solder. Either way, there wasn't much of a hole for Ridley and there was a huge one for Blount.
Blocking makes all the difference in whether the run works or doesn't work--that and what the defense does. Watching film, I see a real difference between games like Cinncinati, Cleveland, and Miami and what we saw in the last two games. Part of it is the blocking and part of it is the defense. How aggressive the LBs are attacking at the LOS seems to make a big difference on whether the run works or not for the Pats. For teams like Cinncinati, play action didn't seem to affect them, because I think they felt having the LBs be aggressive worked regardless of whether the play was a run or pass. If it was a run, the LBs closed the hole. If it was a pass, they were able to penetrate and get lots of pressure on Brady. Baltimore played it far more conservatively as did Buffalo, and the Pats were able to exploit that more conservative defense with the run.