The reason the QB should ID the MIke (if possible)

[MHS831]

The more I try to understand the complexity of heavy Zone blocking Schemes in the NFL, and how they adjust to ever-changing defenses, the dumber I get about it.  So having said that--please understand that this thread is about the stuff we don't see clearly watching TV.  I do know that in football, the player who looks to have blown an assignment or missed an audible is often NOT the person responsible.  In this case, primarily. understanding the C and QB position in relation to calling blocking schemes is discussed.

Cam never called the schemes (I am not sure what tense to use; since this is looking back, I will use the past tense).  That was left to Kalil, a very smart, seasoned center.  Understanding this, the Panthers overpaid for Paradis; one of the reasons they liked him?  He had been calling the schemes in Denver. Why is this important?  The Mike call tells the OL where to aim--it guides their angles in the blocking scheme.  It is not always the middle LB, but more of the "map center" for zone blocking angles.  It gets very complicated, and defenses do all they can do to confuse the scheme. 

Why do some QBs call the Mike?  Why did we rarely see Cam do it?  Different theories, but the Center understands blocking schemes and the QB has the best view.  In addition, a QB can manipulate the blocking schemes by identifying the Mike and changing the play--or knowing when to get out of a play.  That is not something the Center can do.  So ideally, you would prefer your QB to identify the Mike, stay with the play or change it based on that call, and the C can call the schemes.  However, the QB must also read the secondary and watch the clock. For example, a C may need help from the G reaching a shaded nose, notifying the T is on his own.  He may call for an X block, etc.  Still based on the Mike.  That is how I understand it.  This video features a funny verbal exchange where a LB yells at Romo, "I am not the Mike!"  It is funny because the Mike is who the C or QB says it is---and the defense has no say in it.  Usually the MLB, but not always.

 

Why is it better for the QB to identify the Mike?  During the pre-snap read, he may see a sign that there is a blitz coming.  He can then switch the Mike, directing the OL to take different (opposite) angles.  He could leave the Mike call as is, and change the play.  He could trade the TE, motion a back to reveal which LB is in coverage, etc.  To manage the blocking schemes and to pre read the secondary requires a lot of film study and an OL that operates as one unit.  Communication is key.

So in 2018 or 2019, I did not see Cam or Allen calling the Mike.  That does not mean it was not done--I just did not see it.  If you are relying on a new center with a rookie committee at LT and a backup RT at LG, you can see why defenses often sent pressure up the offensive left side.  Were Little/Daley bad?  I can say they were left on an island a lot.   In Super Bowl 50, the Broncos schemed to leave Remmers on an island vs. Miller.  Great defensive scheming.  Rivera/Cam/Kalil did not adjust, but Miller was often off the line, so Kalil would have trouble making that call. 

I am not making a statement about Cam here--many teams use centers and not all teams hope to evolve into a situation in which the QB calls the defenses--Manning, Brady, Brees, and Rivers, for example, are not great athletes---they know how to put their athletes in place to increase their chances for success. Romo, as is shown in the video and evidenced by his color commentary, was not a great athlete--but man, he was smart.  In Carolina, they did not seem to attempt to develop this skill in Cam, relying on his athleticism to overcome obstacles a simple line shift might have prevented.  Furthermore, Cam was asked to do so much more, such as the option and rushing.  They never developed Cam to prepare him for old age--he was prepared to win that day, even if it meant his career would be shortened. (My opinion, based on the way he was used and no observable development in fundamentals).

Again, there is more I need to learn about this, but the more I read about this, the more I think some of our OL woes could have been avoided with better QB coaching and better pre-snap reading.  I am interested to hear what others think/know about this.

 

[4Corners]

Tl;dr

[MHS831]

11 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

Tl;dr

 

[Mr. Scot]

Nice work, MHS. You've given me something to think about here (which is always good).

[Khyber53]

Good piece and I agree with you. And I think Paradis' ability at making the calls might have been, umm, padded a bit. Or he was making calls based on what it took to cover his injuries.

 

[Madwolf]

Love stuff like this, and this is the reason I love football.

You can always spot well coached, and good QBs by their ability to adjust in the pre-snap. Like watching Lamar Jackson between College and the NFL is a big reason why I enjoy Lamar so much more as a pro. He's so well coached and has learned so much about the pre-snap compared to how he played in college. It was actually frustrating at times to go from Teddy Bridgewater to Lamar because Bridgewater so cerebral at dismantling the defense pre-snap. If Lamar had the same quality of coaching in college he would have shattered even more records in college.

[Jesse]

For many schemes (duo, wide zone, inside zone) in the NFL identifying the mike (or trigger in some terminology) is big because it helps establish who blocks who. Specifically, in duo the identified mike is the third backside defender that the center is working toward. In wide zone (and I think to some extent inside zone), the mike is the first combo block that the tight end is not involved in. 

 

The reason we didn't see Cam (or many college offenses) identify the Mike is because Malzahn's offense doesn't really need to. They ran mostly gap schemes (buck sweep, power, counter) and inside zone/jet. The linemen blocked to the playside gap in zone. The passing concepts were heavy play action and involved down field shots which--again--didn't need any mike ID.

[Sgt Schultz]

Good stuff, MHS.

I love the video....."I'm not the Mike."  Hmm, do you take his word for it? 

[philit99]

Great work! Kalil always called the “mike” to adjust the blocking scheme. As far as Paradis goes, i think he lost his matchups too often, even if it was the right protection call and he had the right angle. I think his injury or the mental aspect of his injury played a good part in his blown assignments. Maybe, he will have a better year after getting some work in last year. That’s all I can hope for anyways.

[OneBadCat]

6 hours ago, MHS831 said:

The more I try to understand the complexity of heavy Zone blocking Schemes in the NFL, and how they adjust to ever-changing defenses, the dumber I get about it.  So having said that--please understand that this thread is about the stuff we don't see clearly watching TV.  I do know that in football, the player who looks to have blown an assignment or missed an audible is often NOT the person responsible.  In this case, primarily. understanding the C and QB position in relation to calling blocking schemes is discussed.

Cam never called the schemes (I am not sure what tense to use; since this is looking back, I will use the past tense).  That was left to Kalil, a very smart, seasoned center.  Understanding this, the Panthers overpaid for Paradis; one of the reasons they liked him?  He had been calling the schemes in Denver. Why is this important?  The Mike call tells the OL where to aim--it guides their angles in the blocking scheme.  It is not always the middle LB, but more of the "map center" for zone blocking angles.  It gets very complicated, and defenses do all they can do to confuse the scheme. 

Why do some QBs call the Mike?  Why did we rarely see Cam do it?  Different theories, but the Center understands blocking schemes and the QB has the best view.  In addition, a QB can manipulate the blocking schemes by identifying the Mike and changing the play--or knowing when to get out of a play.  That is not something the Center can do.  So ideally, you would prefer your QB to identify the Mike, stay with the play or change it based on that call, and the C can call the schemes.  However, the QB must also read the secondary and watch the clock. For example, a C may need help from the G reaching a shaded nose, notifying the T is on his own.  He may call for an X block, etc.  Still based on the Mike.  That is how I understand it.  This video features a funny verbal exchange where a LB yells at Romo, "I am not the Mike!"  It is funny because the Mike is who the C or QB says it is---and the defense has no say in it.  Usually the MLB, but not always.

 

Why is it better for the QB to identify the Mike?  During the pre-snap read, he may see a sign that there is a blitz coming.  He can then switch the Mike, directing the OL to take different (opposite) angles.  He could leave the Mike call as is, and change the play.  He could trade the TE, motion a back to reveal which LB is in coverage, etc.  To manage the blocking schemes and to pre read the secondary requires a lot of film study and an OL that operates as one unit.  Communication is key.

So in 2018 or 2019, I did not see Cam or Allen calling the Mike.  That does not mean it was not done--I just did not see it.  If you are relying on a new center with a rookie committee at LT and a backup RT at LG, you can see why defenses often sent pressure up the offensive left side.  Were Little/Daley bad?  I can say they were left on an island a lot.   In Super Bowl 50, the Broncos schemed to leave Remmers on an island vs. Miller.  Great defensive scheming.  Rivera/Cam/Kalil did not adjust, but Miller was often off the line, so Kalil would have trouble making that call. 

I am not making a statement about Cam here--many teams use centers and not all teams hope to evolve into a situation in which the QB calls the defenses--Manning, Brady, Brees, and Rivers, for example, are not great athletes---they know how to put their athletes in place to increase their chances for success. Romo, as is shown in the video and evidenced by his color commentary, was not a great athlete--but man, he was smart.  In Carolina, they did not seem to attempt to develop this skill in Cam, relying on his athleticism to overcome obstacles a simple line shift might have prevented.  Furthermore, Cam was asked to do so much more, such as the option and rushing.  They never developed Cam to prepare him for old age--he was prepared to win that day, even if it meant his career would be shortened. (My opinion, based on the way he was used and no observable development in fundamentals).

Again, there is more I need to learn about this, but the more I read about this, the more I think some of our OL woes could have been avoided with better QB coaching and better pre-snap reading.  I am interested to hear what others think/know about this.

 

One thing I blame Rivera for is  taking the quickest route to success with Cam. We were on the way to a dynamic offense with Chud, and we should have kept Cam on that path. After that it seemed we were pretty much RPO, play action, and screen passes. Probably because Ron was trying to keep his job.

[MHS831]

48 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

Love stuff like this, and this is the reason I love football.

You can always spot well coached, and good QBs by their ability to adjust in the pre-snap. Like watching Lamar Jackson between College and the NFL is a big reason why I enjoy Lamar so much more as a pro. He's so well coached and has learned so much about the pre-snap compared to how he played in college. It was actually frustrating at times to go from Teddy Bridgewater to Lamar because Bridgewater so cerebral at dismantling the defense pre-snap. If Lamar had the same quality of coaching in college he would have shattered even more records in college.

Jackson is a great example--if we had the staff to do this with Cam--imagine how many rings we'd have.  Athleticism can be a curse--it got you so far and then you have to condition your brain to carry the load your legs--the tools that bailed you out your whole life--used to.

[MHS831]

2 minutes ago, OneBadCat said:

One thing I blame Rivera for is for taking the quickest route to success with Cam. We were on the way to a dynamic offense with Chud, and we should have kept Cam on that path. After that it seemed we were pretty much RPO, play action, and screen passes. Probably because Ron was trying to keep his job.

That has been my biggest complaint about Rivera.  He had a Lamborghini and he took it 4-wheeling for 9 years.  You hit the nail on the head about RR. 

[Mr. Scot]

I hadn't seen that video before.

Now I'm just imagining a linebacker standing in the A gap, yelling at the offense "I'm not blitzing!" 

[MHS831]

50 minutes ago, Jesse said:

For many schemes (duo, wide zone, inside zone) in the NFL identifying the mike (or trigger in some terminology) is big because it helps establish who blocks who. Specifically, in duo the identified mike is the third backside defender that the center is working toward. In wide zone (and I think to some extent inside zone), the mike is the first combo block that the tight end is not involved in. 

 

The reason we didn't see Cam (or many college offenses) identify the Mike is because Malzahn's offense doesn't really need to. They ran mostly gap schemes (buck sweep, power, counter) and inside zone/jet. The linemen blocked to the playside gap in zone. The passing concepts were heavy play action and involved down field shots which--again--didn't need any mike ID.

Thanks Jesse--this extends my elementary knowledge of it--I just never really thought about it that much.  It is interesting--however, I can say the simplification of the pre-snap read for college offenses should limit the effectiveness of that blocking scheme in the pros---I have to think about it more.