Offensive Schemes, Running Game & Blocking FYIs

[Bear Hands]

Hi there,

I'm seeing retweets and narratives being driven, and it's kind of a funny thing.  So just wanna throw this out there:

Every single team in the league, EVERY TEAM, runs zone concepts on at least a third of their running plays.  Even ones considered power, and yes, even us last year post-Rhule under Wilks.  

It's all a matter of coach and their scheme/philosophy/style/background.  If you really broke it down, there are 32 schemes in this league, and this black and white, power v. zone dichotomy does not exist.    

Examples in CAR:

• Rivera's running game was zone-read, inside & outside zone blend.  Jet sweep and gap were deployed as well, but not as prominent.  
• Rhule's offense was a 50/50 zone/gap split under Brady.  Held mostly throughout Rhule's tenure  
• Wilks' was a gap heavy, pin & pull, power concepts focus with less zone (~35%).  Notably had some pretty diverse concepts that works for us in that monster Lions game last year.
• Reich historically is about 55% zone (primarily inside--he loves his split runs), with gap used in that 35% range.   

Elsewhere...

• Kyle's West Coast offshoot is zone-based, primarily outside.  Passing game is built off PA and motion -- the trick is to have consistent formations that deploy very different outcomes/create options all over the place to help spread the field.  Offensive disguises.   
• McVay is an interesting blend of zone but has more gap and trap involved these days.  And as many know, plenty of misdirect.

And bigger picture..

• Offensively, Sean Payton was one of the guys to really blend a WCO and EP effectively.  He uses a mixed-concept run game approach.  Zone, gap, the full bag.  The passing game, as we all endured when he was in NO, is a high volume of quick short passes to kill teams slowly and then inserts mismatches to get the bigger plays.   

So what am I getting at?

Yes, we have a new coach and a new scheme and it appears to work terribly.  But this idea that we completely changed our offensive language from an offensive lineman's perspective is incorrect.  It's a new scheme, a different playbook, but from a blocking assignment standpoint, we've changed the ratio of deployment. 

This is not a black and white league.  There is not simply zone v. gap.  There is not simply Spread v. WCO v. EP v. AC.  Everything is its own unique composition pulling from all parts of football life.   

Let's slow the roll with this whole pining for what Wilks ran.  It is not like you can go from A to B.  And then back from B to A.  What they can start doing is starting to tick up the gap calls.  It doesn't require a wholesale scheme change, especially when everything we have is already implemented.  You're not just flipping the script, it's all about the usage rates.  

Bigger picture offensive notes:

We are currently deploying the second highest rate of 11 personnel in the league (Behind the Rams) to help create mismatches because our personnel sucks, and we still can't do anything.  Reich's aging scheme is trying to leverage itself between the OLs we have and our QB...and none of it fits well together.  It's a bag of misfit toys playing with an outdated playbook.    

So the "why do we suck" falls into many categories in this regard.  Sure, the scheme isn't working that they've developed, situational playcalling sucks, positional-coaching itself seems bad, the players are underperforming, and we don't have certain personnel that virtually every team in the league tends to have these days (pass-catching RB, a shifty-speedster at WR). But again, this is not a magic fix that we can just rewind to Wilks' Scheme.  

Okay, thanks.           

[Jay Roosevelt]

4 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

Hi there,

I'm seeing retweets and narratives being driven, and it's kind of a funny thing.  So just wanna throw this out there:

Every single team in the league, EVERY TEAM, runs zone concepts on at least a third of their running plays.  Even ones considered power, and yes, even us last year post-Rhule under Wilks.  

It's all a matter of coach and their scheme/philosophy/style/background.  If you really broke it down, there are 32 schemes in this league, and this black and white, power v. zone dichotomy does not exist.    

Examples in CAR:

• Rivera's running game was zone-read, inside & outside zone blend.  Jet sweep and gap were deployed as well, but not as prominent.  
• Rhule's offense was a 50/50 zone/gap split under Brady.  Held mostly throughout Rhule's tenure  
• Wilks' was a gap heavy, pin & pull, power concepts focus with less zone (~35%).  Notably had some pretty diverse concepts that works for us in that monster Lions game last year.
• Reich historically is about 55% zone (primarily inside--he loves his split runs), with gap used in that 35% range.   

Elsewhere...

• Kyle's West Coast offshoot is zone-based, primarily outside.  Passing game is built off PA and motion -- the trick is to have consistent formations that deploy very different outcomes/create options all over the place to help spread the field.  Offensive disguises.   
• McVay is an interesting blend of zone but has more gap and trap involved these days.  And as many know, plenty of misdirect.

And bigger picture..

• Offensively, Sean Payton was one of the guys to really blend a WCO and EP effectively.  He uses a mixed-concept run game approach.  Zone, gap, the full bag.  The passing game, as we all endured when he was in NO, is a high volume of quick short passes to kill teams slowly and then inserts mismatches to get the bigger plays.   

So what am I getting at?

Yes, we have a new coach and a new scheme and it appears to work terribly.  But this idea that we completely changed our offensive language from an offensive lineman's perspective is incorrect.  It's a new scheme, a different playbook, but from a blocking assignment standpoint, we've changed the ratio of deployment. 

This is not a black and white league.  There is not simply zone v. gap.  There is not simply Spread v. WCO v. EP v. AC.  Everything is its own unique composition pulling from all parts of football life.   

Let's slow the roll with this whole pining for what Wilks ran.  It is not like you can go from A to B.  And then back from B to A.  What they can start doing is starting to tick up the gap calls.  It doesn't require a wholesale scheme change, especially when everything we have is already implemented.  You're not just flipping the script, it's all about the usage rates.  

Bigger picture offensive notes:

We are currently deploying the second highest rate of 11 personnel in the league (Behind the Rams) to help create mismatches because our personnel sucks, and we still can't do anything.  Reich's aging scheme is trying to leverage itself between the OLs we have and our QB...and none of it fits well together.  It's a bag of misfit toys playing with an outdated playbook.    

So the "why do we suck" falls into many categories in this regard.  Sure, the scheme isn't working that they've developed, situational playcalling sucks, positional-coaching itself seems bad, the players are underperforming, and we don't have certain personnel that virtually every team in the league tends to have these days (pass-catching RB, a shifty-speedster at WR). But again, this is not a magic fix that we can just rewind to Wilks' Scheme.  

Okay, thanks.           

Bear Hands for Panthers O.C. 2024!

[AU-panther]

16 hours ago, Bear Hands said:

Hi there,

I'm seeing retweets and narratives being driven, and it's kind of a funny thing.  So just wanna throw this out there:

Every single team in the league, EVERY TEAM, runs zone concepts on at least a third of their running plays.  Even ones considered power, and yes, even us last year post-Rhule under Wilks.  

It's all a matter of coach and their scheme/philosophy/style/background.  If you really broke it down, there are 32 schemes in this league, and this black and white, power v. zone dichotomy does not exist.    

Examples in CAR:

• Rivera's running game was zone-read, inside & outside zone blend.  Jet sweep and gap were deployed as well, but not as prominent.  
• Rhule's offense was a 50/50 zone/gap split under Brady.  Held mostly throughout Rhule's tenure  
• Wilks' was a gap heavy, pin & pull, power concepts focus with less zone (~35%).  Notably had some pretty diverse concepts that works for us in that monster Lions game last year.
• Reich historically is about 55% zone (primarily inside--he loves his split runs), with gap used in that 35% range.   

Elsewhere...

• Kyle's West Coast offshoot is zone-based, primarily outside.  Passing game is built off PA and motion -- the trick is to have consistent formations that deploy very different outcomes/create options all over the place to help spread the field.  Offensive disguises.   
• McVay is an interesting blend of zone but has more gap and trap involved these days.  And as many know, plenty of misdirect.

And bigger picture..

• Offensively, Sean Payton was one of the guys to really blend a WCO and EP effectively.  He uses a mixed-concept run game approach.  Zone, gap, the full bag.  The passing game, as we all endured when he was in NO, is a high volume of quick short passes to kill teams slowly and then inserts mismatches to get the bigger plays.   

So what am I getting at?

Yes, we have a new coach and a new scheme and it appears to work terribly.  But this idea that we completely changed our offensive language from an offensive lineman's perspective is incorrect.  It's a new scheme, a different playbook, but from a blocking assignment standpoint, we've changed the ratio of deployment. 

This is not a black and white league.  There is not simply zone v. gap.  There is not simply Spread v. WCO v. EP v. AC.  Everything is its own unique composition pulling from all parts of football life.   

Let's slow the roll with this whole pining for what Wilks ran.  It is not like you can go from A to B.  And then back from B to A.  What they can start doing is starting to tick up the gap calls.  It doesn't require a wholesale scheme change, especially when everything we have is already implemented.  You're not just flipping the script, it's all about the usage rates.  

Bigger picture offensive notes:

We are currently deploying the second highest rate of 11 personnel in the league (Behind the Rams) to help create mismatches because our personnel sucks, and we still can't do anything.  Reich's aging scheme is trying to leverage itself between the OLs we have and our QB...and none of it fits well together.  It's a bag of misfit toys playing with an outdated playbook.    

So the "why do we suck" falls into many categories in this regard.  Sure, the scheme isn't working that they've developed, situational playcalling sucks, positional-coaching itself seems bad, the players are underperforming, and we don't have certain personnel that virtually every team in the league tends to have these days (pass-catching RB, a shifty-speedster at WR). But again, this is not a magic fix that we can just rewind to Wilks' Scheme.  

Okay, thanks.           

Best post of the year. 
 

you have to be careful using facts around here, most of the posters don’t understand what they are looking at.

 

[Mr. Scot]

17 hours ago, Bear Hands said:

Hi there,

I'm seeing retweets and narratives being driven, and it's kind of a funny thing.  So just wanna throw this out there:

Every single team in the league, EVERY TEAM, runs zone concepts on at least a third of their running plays.  Even ones considered power, and yes, even us last year post-Rhule under Wilks.  

It's all a matter of coach and their scheme/philosophy/style/background.  If you really broke it down, there are 32 schemes in this league, and this black and white, power v. zone dichotomy does not exist.    

Examples in CAR:

• Rivera's running game was zone-read, inside & outside zone blend.  Jet sweep and gap were deployed as well, but not as prominent.  
• Rhule's offense was a 50/50 zone/gap split under Brady.  Held mostly throughout Rhule's tenure  
• Wilks' was a gap heavy, pin & pull, power concepts focus with less zone (~35%).  Notably had some pretty diverse concepts that works for us in that monster Lions game last year.
• Reich historically is about 55% zone (primarily inside--he loves his split runs), with gap used in that 35% range.   

Elsewhere...

• Kyle's West Coast offshoot is zone-based, primarily outside.  Passing game is built off PA and motion -- the trick is to have consistent formations that deploy very different outcomes/create options all over the place to help spread the field.  Offensive disguises.   
• McVay is an interesting blend of zone but has more gap and trap involved these days.  And as many know, plenty of misdirect.

And bigger picture..

• Offensively, Sean Payton was one of the guys to really blend a WCO and EP effectively.  He uses a mixed-concept run game approach.  Zone, gap, the full bag.  The passing game, as we all endured when he was in NO, is a high volume of quick short passes to kill teams slowly and then inserts mismatches to get the bigger plays.   

So what am I getting at?

Yes, we have a new coach and a new scheme and it appears to work terribly.  But this idea that we completely changed our offensive language from an offensive lineman's perspective is incorrect.  It's a new scheme, a different playbook, but from a blocking assignment standpoint, we've changed the ratio of deployment. 

This is not a black and white league.  There is not simply zone v. gap.  There is not simply Spread v. WCO v. EP v. AC.  Everything is its own unique composition pulling from all parts of football life.   

Let's slow the roll with this whole pining for what Wilks ran.  It is not like you can go from A to B.  And then back from B to A.  What they can start doing is starting to tick up the gap calls.  It doesn't require a wholesale scheme change, especially when everything we have is already implemented.  You're not just flipping the script, it's all about the usage rates.  

Bigger picture offensive notes:

We are currently deploying the second highest rate of 11 personnel in the league (Behind the Rams) to help create mismatches because our personnel sucks, and we still can't do anything.  Reich's aging scheme is trying to leverage itself between the OLs we have and our QB...and none of it fits well together.  It's a bag of misfit toys playing with an outdated playbook.    

So the "why do we suck" falls into many categories in this regard.  Sure, the scheme isn't working that they've developed, situational playcalling sucks, positional-coaching itself seems bad, the players are underperforming, and we don't have certain personnel that virtually every team in the league tends to have these days (pass-catching RB, a shifty-speedster at WR). But again, this is not a magic fix that we can just rewind to Wilks' Scheme.  

Okay, thanks.           

Correct that all teams use a mix. Also correct that all teams basically have their own playbook, though they tend to fall into categories (WCO, Coryell, etc).

But in the same way that you can't run a Coryell without deep threats, you also can't run a zone blocking scheme when your personnel going from center left all don't fit that scheme.

That's why I looked back at all the pre-draft and free agent analyses of our current lineman and some of our backups. In just about every case from the center left (except for Brady Christensen) all were noted to be weak in and / or not suited to zone blovking.

Either not understanding or not adapting to that is a coaching failure.

[CRA]

this front office hired Frank Reich to come in here.  Frank Reich is what he is. 

the biggest failure is on the front office.  Who then spent all offseason knowing Frank would be implementing a Reich offense and was being given Bryce Young to be the QB out of the gate.   

Frank not adapting to not having the parts once he saw his product is a Frank issue.  It in no way shape or form should be giving Fitterer and this front office any cover.   They couldn't revamp the entire roster in an offseason but that doesn't then excuse the disaster management of the roster they did do. 

There is crazy marriage of parts that don't mesh going on here on a multitude of levels.  No actions suggest this HC and this front office have been on the same page and sharing the same vision.  And it gets more clear that Fitterer should of been tossed in the trash when Rhule was.  Tepper keeping him into this next era was another Tepper blunder.  

[Mr. Scot]

14 minutes ago, CRA said:

this front office hired Frank Reich to come in here.  Frank Reich is what he is. 

the biggest failure is on the front office.  Who then spent all offseason knowing Frank would be implementing a Reich offense and was being given Bryce Young to be the QB out of the gate.   

Frank not adapting to not having the parts once he saw his product is a Frank issue.  It in no way shape or form should be giving Fitterer and this front office any cover.   They couldn't revamp the entire roster in an offseason but that doesn't then excuse the disaster management of the roster they did do. 

There is crazy marriage of parts that don't mesh going on here on a multitude of levels.  No actions suggest this HC and this front office have been on the same page and sharing the same vision.  And it gets more clear that Fitterer should of been tossed in the trash when Rhule was.  Tepper keeping him into this next era was another Tepper blunder.  

 

[CRA]

13 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

 

again, no one is suggesting Fitterer could of overhauled the entire roster.....which is an argument used in that post of why he should get a pass.   Fact is, what he did this offseason, in no way was building toward what Frank/Bryce would be doing/wanting.   That's on Fitterer.  Which was discussed by many in great length before the season started.  The disconnect in what he was adding vs what Frank would be doing with Bryce.  Which has 100% played out as those of us that argued it said it would.  There remains zero evidence Matt Rhule's old GM who is on his own timetable (that too discussed this offseason)......is in sync with what this staff would be doing this year with Bryce Young.

it's just more odd mental gymnastics to defend Fitterer.   Who has done nothing but be very bad as a GM (with a new excuses every year for what it is all someone else's fault). 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, CRA said:

again, no one is suggesting Fitterer could of overhauled the entire roster.....which is an argument used in that post of why he should get a pass.   Fact is, what he did this offseason, in no way was building toward what Frank/Bryce would be doing/wanting.   That's on Fitterer.  Which was discussed by many in great length before the season started.  The disconnect it what he was adding vs what Frank would be doing with Bryce.  There remains zero evidence Matt Rhule's old GM who is on his own timetable (that too discussed this offseason)......is in sync with what this staff would be doing this year with Bryce Young.

it's just more odd mental gymnastics to defend Fitterer.   Who has done nothing but be very bad as a GM (with a new excuses every year for what it is all someone else's fault). 

"Mental gymnastics"

Fitterer has things that are his fault. Coaches running a scheme that didn't fit personnel who were already here (and who they wanted to keep) is not one of them.

You want the GM fired. We get it. We all get it. There are plenty of people that agree with you.

But if you're going to make that argument, at least use supporting points that make sense. Otherwise you come off looking goofy.

[CRA]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

"Mental gymnastics"

Fitterer has things that are his fault. Coaches running a scheme that didn't fit personnel who were already here (and who they wanted to keep) is not one of them.

You want the GM fired. We get it. We all get it. There are plenty of people that agree with you.

But if you're going to make that argument, at least use supporting points that make sense. Otherwise you come off looking goofy.

They hired Frank.  Who does what he does.  They then gave him Bryce.  

and then they went out and spent money on free agents that made no sense for what Frank/Bryce would be doing.   You keep skipping past this part.  Which was talked about leading up to the season.  Folks here could see how things weren't in sync with what this front office was doing......It was pointed out then.  Folks like you didn't want to here it then.  Definitely not now that it has played out as we warned. 

Meanwhile in la la land your boy Fitterer was talking about never drafting in the top 10 again, competing now, all star staff, etc.   Fitterer doesn't just have faults.  He has no positives in Carolina. 

[mrcompletely11]

10 minutes ago, CRA said:

They hired Frank.  Who does what he does.  They then gave him Bryce.  

and then they went out and spent money on free agents that made no sense for what Frank/Bryce would be doing.   You keep skipping past this part.  Which was talked about leading up to the season.  Folks here could see how things weren't in sync with what this front office was doing......It was pointed out then.  Folks like you didn't want to here it then.  Definitely not now that it has played out as we warned. 

Meanwhile in la la land your boy Fitterer was talking about never drafting in the top 10 again, competing now, all star staff, etc.   Fitterer doesn't just have faults.  He has no positives in Carolina. 

scot is still defending this, pure insanity

 

 

[Mr. Scot]

11 minutes ago, CRA said:

They hired Frank.  Who does what he does.  They then gave him Bryce.  

and then they went out and spent money on free agents that made no sense for what Frank/Bryce would be doing.   You keep skipping past this part.  Which was talked about leading up to the season.  Folks here could see how things weren't in sync with what this front office was doing......It was pointed out then.  Folks like you didn't want to here it then.  Definitely not now that it has played out as we warned. 

Meanwhile in la la land your boy Fitterer was talking about never drafting in the top 10 again, competing now, all star staff, etc.   Fitterer doesn't just have faults.  He has no positives in Carolina. 

Still not comprehending. And for the record, you never gave a good response to Fiz's rebuttal Day House "thesis" either.

You really don't get it, but hey, kudos for trying

What's especially funny though is that in the space of just 24 hours, you managed to both 1) claim my analysis was wrong, but also 2) claim you said it first.

You've admitted to defending goofy points in the past just for the hell of it, but this time it seems like there's a reason. Apparently you're so desperate to win a debate with me that you'll go to some real extremes, even contradicting yourself.

Oy

[Tbe]

34 minutes ago, CRA said:

again, no one is suggesting Fitterer could of overhauled the entire roster.....which is an argument used in that post of why he should get a pass.   Fact is, what he did this offseason, in no way was building toward what Frank/Bryce would be doing/wanting.   That's on Fitterer.  Which was discussed by many in great length before the season started.  The disconnect in what he was adding vs what Frank would be doing with Bryce.  Which has 100% played out as those of us that argued it said it would.  There remains zero evidence Matt Rhule's old GM who is on his own timetable (that too discussed this offseason)......is in sync with what this staff would be doing this year with Bryce Young.

it's just more odd mental gymnastics to defend Fitterer.   Who has done nothing but be very bad as a GM (with a new excuses every year for what it is all someone else's fault). 

So you think Fitt made all these acquisitions without approval from the coaches?

Im not defending Fitt, but we all know the coaches signed off on each of these players they brought in. That’s just how the NFL works.

[Mr. Scot]

More from John Ellis ...

Expanding a little further...

He's right. You also have to factor in pass heavy playcalling and the total lack of a strong run game (also scheme-related). That was my starting point when I made an analysis thread a few weeks back.

[CRA]

43 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Still not comprehending. And for the record, you never gave a good response to Fiz's rebuttal Day House "thesis" either.

You really don't get it, but hey, kudos for trying

What's especially funny though is that in the space of just 24 hours, you managed to both 1) claim my analysis was wrong, but also 2) claim you said it first.

You've admitted to defending goofy points in the past just for the hell of it, but this time it seems like there's a reason. Apparently you're so desperate to win a debate with me that you'll go to some real extremes, even contradicting yourself.

Oy

Fitterer continued to build a roster for an offense that wasn't suited or catered to what Frank/Young would be doing this year and would want to do in the future going forward.   You intentionally attempt to not comprehend that.  Because it highlights how inept Scott Fitterer is.  How dysfunctional our front office and Fitterer CONTINUES to be post Rhule.    What you are doing is simple and easy to understand. 

Real extreme lol.  I mean, frankly I go back and forth with you because I find it fun. It's not about winning a debate.  No one can convince you of anything.  I'm under no illusion of that.