Question for Oneback

Coach Joe, why would you want your fullback to block the BSDE on the wide zone? Don't most coaches leave him unblocked because he shouldn't be able to run down your tailback?

Not if I'm coaching, we are going to ALWAYS block the BSDE. You will be surprised how many DE's these days can make that play!

Coach Easton

Coach, could you please explain on what the Broncos do differently with their wide zone play?

Is it more of an offtackle play than a sweep?

BH,

As i understand it, on wide zone the RB takes a drop step and takes a direct path to the TE's rear end. QB opens to 4 or 8 o'clock and intersects his path.

We use the QB to block the backside DE with boot action. It's not literally a block of course, rather if the DE doesn't respect the bootleg, the next call on 3rd down is obvious.

luvdemlinemen,

do you have to have another blocker to the strongside, like a FB when running wide zone or can it be run toward the TE from a one back offense?

BH,

We are just putting in the inside & outside zone this year, so i don't have a ton of first-hand experience with it, but i've been studying the heck out of alex gibbs tapes and reading every post by coach mountjoy (oneback) on the board, and they both run to the strong side from a single back set (using the covered/uncovered rules coach mountjoy has posted previously).

Gibbs favorite formation is a pro set with FB offset weak (provides a balanced formation for passing threat), and they run the heck out of the strong side zone (FB seals BS DE). In gibb's scheme, with the RB reading the outside defensive lineman, it does not seem necessary to motion another blocker outside the TE because the OT will seal the read lineman inside if he slants inside and the RB will run off the TE's block on the OLB. If the read lineman does not slant inside, the play will be cutback automatically, making the block outside the OT less critical. Gibb's REALLY emphasizes that this is not designed to be a bounce play....they do not force the ball outside like some teams do.

We tend to run a reasonable percentage of our plays from twins away from the TE and are planning on occasionally bringing one of the WR's across the formation to give us an overload when we run outside zone strong from our single back formation. We'll occasionally motion the WR there too when we run weak and use him to seal the backside (outside the TE) just to avoid showing a tendency, not really a necessary block, but.....

Anyhow, there are a ton of great posts by coach mountjoy on the board about running outside zone from a single back formation. Good luck.

Coach -

The inside/outside zone was the foundation of our running game last year. We didn't block the DE all year and the DE almost never made the play. A good play fake by the QB will momentarily freeze that DE and that is all the time that the back will need.

In the second round of the playoffs, we ran into a DE who was simply an animal physically but very undisciplined with his technique. The first few times we ran zone away from him, we picked up good yardage. About the fifth time we ran the play, the DE sprinted right down the line and tackled our back for about a three-yard loss. On the next series, we ran a naked QB boot off of the zone. The DE again bit hard on the running back, overpursued, and our QB easily broke contain and ran for about a 40 yard TD.

It was our experience this past season that few DEs are enough of the "total package" to consistently stop either the inside or the outside zone and corresponding play-action.

Luvdemlinemen,

Just reread my last post, just wanted to clarify that I'm AGREEING with your thinking. Thats the trouble with the written word sometimes, it does not appear to say what you really are trying to convey.

Coach Easton

Interesting article about Joe Gibbs (1987) I just found in my inbox:

THE RICHMOND NEWS LEADER
Copyright (c) 1987, Richmond Times-Dispatch

DATE: Tuesday, August 4, 1987 TAG: 8702030408
PAGE: 25 EDITION: Metro
SECTION: Sports LENGTH: 87 lines
SOURCE: By Paul Woody
News Leader sports writer
DATELINE: CARLISLE, PA.
MEMO: (ljb)

GIBBS: `SKINS ONE-BACK OFFENSE IS REALLY TWO

Chalk-talk time, sports fans.
Inquiring minds want to know, when is a one-back offense really not a one-
back offense?
When is an offense predictable?
Why should Washington Redskins players be offered voluntary testing for
acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)?
Joe Gibbs, coach of the Redskins, played answer man for these questions
yesterday.
Gibbs has heard so many questions about his one-back offense and had it
called predictable so many times, he went to the extraordinary step yesterday
to call a press conference to explain his reasoning behind the Redskins'
offense. Gibbs even used a chalkboard to draw diagrams.
"Most of the teams you see in the NFL are predictable," Gibbs said. "You
look at the teams that line up with two backs, like the (Los Angeles) Raiders
and the (New York) Giants. Ninety percent of the time, you know who's going to
get the ball. Marcus Allen (Raiders) and Joe Morris (Giants).
"What frosted me about the 1983 Super Bowl (actually in January of 1984
against the Raiders) was that they lined up in three formations and didn't
move once they got into one of them. Talk about predictable, that's 1912. And
they beat us, and nobody said a word to them."
All right, fine. What's that got to do with the one back offense?
Plenty.
As Gibbs explained it, the Redskins' one back is no different, really,
from other teams' two-backs. All the Redskins do is put their blocking back
closer to the line of scrimmage, put him in motion at times and give him a
better blocking angle on his opponent.
"He's (Don Warren in this case for the Redskins) doing the same thing as
the blocking back for the other team," Gibbs said. "What we need to do is
put a 20 number on him.
"We've got a saying in football, `That's a good way to get your neck
shortened.' That's what you do when you run a long way to make a block,
especially on someone like Lawrence Taylor (the Giants' premier linebacker and
author)."
A predictable offense, Gibbs said, is one that isn't producing. And the
Redskins, he said, are producing yards and points.
"People ask about putting George (Rogers) and Kelvin (Bryant, both running
backs) in at the same time. If one of them was a blocker, that would be
fine," Gibbs said. "But they're runners, and I think it would almost be a
sin to ask either one of them to be a blocking back.
"We're better off putting one over here."
And Gibbs drew an arrow on the chalkboard to a rectangle he'd drawn on the
side.
"On the bench," he said.

Have any of you coaches who have played against this scheme considered widening the TE's split by about 2 feet in this situation? Would it be sensible to still call the outside zone play and have the running back run inside the TE's block, and then stretch the play outside?

Oneback, I can see what you are saying here. I was thinkning for a moment that by widening the split of the TE, you would automatically get the same outside technique from the DE, which would be highly unlikely vs. any quality opponent. Yes, a good DE crashing down in this situation would cause BIG problems. It was one of those thoughts that hit you when you are up too late on a Monday night.