There goes our run game.

[Smellyman]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

??? I thought chop blocks were already illegal....

Yes mostly they were already illegal. Now they are totally illegal. I'm sure that the posters who are more knowledgeable about Xs and Os could explain the nuances but it doesn't seem to be a big change. You can still cut block as long as the defender is not engaged by another blocker above the waist.

So Miracle Max was on the Competition Committee?

Eh, in any case, don't see as this is the end of the world. Mostly, anyway.

 

[hawknation2016]

I just hope this doesn't turn into a way for the referees to penalize us for legal cut blocks.

 

[Tical21]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

It doesn't matter. Whiffing on a cut block actually isn't a bad thing. It means the d-lineman is looking for the cut block. The more times he jumps over a cut block, the easier it is to make him pay for looking for it when you run directly at him. When you worry, is if you keep cutting a guy and he keeps falling down. This means the cut blocks aren't slowing him down at all, and he's still coming at you hard regardless. Those DT's very rarely chase down a play from the backside anyways, so even if they jump the cut block, it very rarely ends up costing you any yards. If Sweezy were to give-up, and stop trying to cut after the player had jumped him a few times, Cable would have his rear-end. If the DT is jumping your cut, you're in his head.

 

[HawkGA]

??? I thought chop blocks were already illegal....

Yes mostly they were already illegal. Now they are totally illegal. I'm sure that the posters who are more knowledgeable about Xs and Os could explain the nuances but it doesn't seem to be a big change. You can still cut block as long as the defender is not engaged by another blocker above the waist.

So Miracle Max was on the Competition Committee?

Eh, in any case, don't see as this is the end of the world. Mostly, anyway.

Humperdinck!

 

[hawknation2016]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

At least the dude who punked Sweezy here is now a Seahawk.

 

[Smellyman]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

At least the dude who punked Sweezy here is now a Seahawk.

I won't miss that flopping around like a fish on land.

Sweezy always seemed like a try 'hard guy' to me. Like the guy at pickup basketball game who is out working and out hustling everybody but not accomplishing much.

 

[olyfan63]

the "Lure" chop block wasn't illegal, and I don't think Thomas was flagged for that play. I think they're saying all of it was illegal now.

I understood that flavor of chop block, on a passing play, was already illegal. You read it differently?

In any case, on the (illegal) chop block by Julius Thomas, on AZ's Calais Campbell, in the video I shared, the Broncos WERE flagged for the chop block. However, apparently, the flag was attributed to Denver LT Ryan Clady, so says the article. The flag wiped out a 77-yard TD pass by Denver on the play. Clady was called apparently for "luring" Calais Campbell into the chop block. Very legit call, but I'm not sure if the refs really meant to call it on Clady, or just chose his number because he was there and it was visible. It seemed to me like Thomas was the one who made the illegal block, so the call should have been "credited" to him, IMO.

Julius Thomas was the one who was issuing apologies afterwards. Campbell was injured on the block and was out 3-4 weeks with an MCL sprain.

 

[Sgt Largent]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

At least the dude who punked Sweezy here is now a Seahawk.

I know this was posted to laugh at Sweezy's "eyes wide shut technique", but I can't stop focusing on Marshawn's absolute refusal to run the wide zone properly.

Although we all love the guy for his toughness and ability to make yards from nothing...man, he just can't help but do his own thing time after time.

In a two back set, the fullback has the same read as the tailback. Fullback reads the play properly and Lynch should have been right behind him, against a fill Safety. Who doesn't think Lynch wins that battle.

Without knowing what the MIKE call was, Sweezy should have blocked #91 anyway.

Britt has to get to the second level and cut #54.

The cut block attempt on #96 was worthless as well. He looks like he was playing such a tight shade 1 tech anyway that C and G should have comboed that with Sweezy realeasing to #91 as he tries to fill.

Lots of messed up stuff here besides Sweezys nosedive.

 

[Laloosh]

Chop blocks are now illegal. Is Tom Cable obsolete?

No, but J.R. Sweezy is.

nobody whiffs on cut blocks more than Sweezy....nobody

At least the dude who punked Sweezy here is now a Seahawk.

Sweezy sort of punked himself on that one, didn't he? :stirthepot:

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

This is good news for Michael Bennett though, yeah?

 

[Hawks46]

We'll have to see where this ends up. On nfl.com, they are calling it "chop style" plays, which could mean no more cut blocks.

It's weird. Chop blocks were already illegal. Cut blocks weren't. "Chop style" is something that is ambiguous. If they're banning cut blocks, why don't they just call them cut blocks ?

Then again, why call it "chop style" ? Sheesh, I wish the NFL were more clear on their rules. It's like trying to decipher what the government is telling us.

 

[olyfan63]

Is that Sweezy trying to cut block NE #96, one of the two defenders who is in on the tackle?
Hard to make out some numbers and positions from this clip.
There's another cut block on NE #54, which is reasonably effective.
In any case, these are (attempted) cut blocks, not chop blocks, as there is no other blocker engaged with those defenders.

And it does look like Marshawn coulda, shoulda followed his fullback and had more success on this play.

 

[Hawks46]

I actually just read a SBNATION article on Hawkblogger, and it's as some of us surmised at first: all chop blocks are illegal in all situations now, and cut blocks are still legal.

I find it tremendously ironic that the two examples they showed are Britt cutting a guy, and Sweezy and Gilliam cutting a guy. The first is almost universally regarded on this site as the worst OL we have, while the 2nd is generally viewed as a cut block "whiffer" (which there's tons of tape to verify). Pretty funny.

 

[kearly]

Seattle ran legal chop blocks all the time, so this will be a significant adjustment for Tom Cable. In the NFL's own demonstration video explaining the rule change, they showed two examples of previously legal chop blocks, and both of those examples were executed by the Seahawks offensive line over two different games.

I remember my high school coaches debating the ethics of chop blocks almost 20 years ago. It's long been considered a dirty but in some cases necessary technique. That's why it's lasted so long despite being unethical.

On an interesting side note, John Harbaugh, who was unhappy with the ruling, seemed to blame the rule change on Tom Cable.

“Based on a few of the clips that they put in there by one team [Seattle], that posting and cutting people’s knee, that could be cleaned up real simply by getting that team [Seattle] to stop doing that technique,”

If you want to draw parallels here to the "LOB rule" a few offseasons ago, at least one NFL HC would agree with you.

 

[MeanBlueGreen]

Chop blocks have always been illegal, but as far as I understand it, a player had to be engaged for it to be a chop block.

the "Lure" chop block wasn't illegal, and I don't think Thomas was flagged for that play. I think they're saying all of it was illegal now.

A cut block is a block from the front or side where the player isn't engaged. You can even get a guy around the ankles as long as you do it with your body and not arms, hands or legs (tripping).

A clip is when you cut block a guy from behind.

I was a bit worried about this, in that defensive coaches have been lobbying against cut blocks for years, and I was hoping that the media didn't mix up "chop" block with "cut" block. I'm honestly not sure what the big deal is for this to be "official" outside of the "lure" chop block.

Much like the changes to the rules for the secondary were driven by, imho, the Seahawks success with jamming receivers, this new ruling comes hot on the heels of the Broncos winning the SuperBowl. They are definitely affected by this in Wade Phillips' system. Indirectly, this affects ZBS

 

[DavidSeven]

Seattle ran legal chop blocks all the time, so this will be a significant adjustment for Tom Cable. In the NFL's own demonstration video explaining the rule change, they showed two examples of previously legal chop blocks, and both of those examples were executed by the Seahawks offensive line over two different games.

I remember my high school coaches debating the ethics of chop blocks almost 20 years ago. It's long been considered a dirty but in some cases necessary technique. That's why it's lasted so long despite being unethical.

On an interesting side note, John Harbaugh, who was unhappy with the ruling, seemed to blame the rule change on Tom Cable.

Nice info.

Sweezy broke Tyrunn Walker's leg last year and Ian Williams ankle a few seasons ago on low blocks that could arguably have been called "chops" under these rules. In both plays, you can argue that the defender was engaged (at least momentarily) when Sweezy hit them low.

 

[drdiags]

Following-up on Kearly's quote of Harbaugh (is there a link to the article with this comment?), I went to Hawkblogger's twitter feed and found this:


[tweet]https://twitter.com/HawksChronicle/status/712711208369913856[/tweet]

So at least in this instance (with TJ Lang and his whining from the Fail Mary game, not sure if he is being a hater or not), sure seems like Seattle has a reputation for teaching cut block techniques that are on the edge. I gather it is the cut then roll aspect that is the issue but I am no OLine expert so just WAGs on my part.

 

[mrt144]

Seattle ran legal chop blocks all the time, so this will be a significant adjustment for Tom Cable. In the NFL's own demonstration video explaining the rule change, they showed two examples of previously legal chop blocks, and both of those examples were executed by the Seahawks offensive line over two different games.

I remember my high school coaches debating the ethics of chop blocks almost 20 years ago. It's long been considered a dirty but in some cases necessary technique. That's why it's lasted so long despite being unethical.

On an interesting side note, John Harbaugh, who was unhappy with the ruling, seemed to blame the rule change on Tom Cable.

Nice info.

Sweezy broke Tyrunn Walker's leg last year and Ian Williams ankle a few seasons ago on low blocks that could arguably have been called "chops" under these rules. In both plays, you can argue that the defender was engaged (at least momentarily) when Sweezy hit them low.

This just makes me want to pick up where I left off looking at Sweezy whiff on blocks.

 

[kearly]

It doesn't matter. Whiffing on a cut block actually isn't a bad thing. It means the d-lineman is looking for the cut block. The more times he jumps over a cut block, the easier it is to make him pay for looking for it when you run directly at him. When you worry, is if you keep cutting a guy and he keeps falling down. This means the cut blocks aren't slowing him down at all, and he's still coming at you hard regardless. Those DT's very rarely chase down a play from the backside anyways, so even if they jump the cut block, it very rarely ends up costing you any yards. If Sweezy were to give-up, and stop trying to cut after the player had jumped him a few times, Cable would have his rear-end. If the DT is jumping your cut, you're in his head.

It's basically the same concept as a pitcher using a fastball and changeup. You can look for a fastball, and you can look for a changeup, but you can't look for both at the same time. A good pitcher keeps the hitters guessing.

It's a similar idea here. If a DT starts expecting the cut block, he's not going to be as fast out of the chute as he could have been.