In the NFL, the “zone-blocking” scheme is a powerfully simple approach to blocking assignments that allowed the Denver Broncos to ride to back-to-back Super Bowl championships in the late 1990s, helping put the cap on John Elway’s illustrious career.
Then-head coach Mike Shanahan didn’t originate the system (that honour is bestowed on the legendary Vince Lombardi and Alex Gibbs) but is perhaps the most famous example. Given that professional sport inherently breeds a copycat environment, “zone-blocking” is installed in every football team’s playbook. It also legalizes a brutally unfair rule that is emblematic of the continued legislation that marginalizes defenses.
In ‘man’ schemes, offensive linemen are assigned individual defenders to block. But some exotic defensive alignments disguise and alternate how defenders will play — dropping back in coverage or rushing the quarterback — potentially ruining man-to-man assignments.
The ‘zone’ scheme simplifies this. An offensive lineman is now responsible for a ‘gap’—a region of the field where a defensive player may rush the quarterback. This simplifies pass protection and is enormously valuable in the run game: linemen no longer have to account for moving parts.
But perhaps more importantly, this scheme also ludicrously legalizes the ‘cut-block,’ where an offensive lineman can dive at any defensive player’s knees and ‘cut’ him down. This creates lanes for a running back, and cleans a quarterback’s sight for quick passes thrown parallel to the line of scrimmage. It also allows a 300 pound man to hit another athlete in his knees, and roll up on him.
This is idiotic in an age where player safety — greatly driven by fear of lawsuits — is given paramount importance. The NFL swears that former defensive linemen and their coaches are okay with the rule, but that is inconceivable.
Offensive coaches childishly complain that banning cut-blocks would eliminate the run game and create size mismatches in pass blocking. Why is there no hue and cry when defenders are buried under pages of rules that make the game almost impossible to play cleanly and fluidly?
Even more absurd, the rule allows offensive linemen to cut defensive players in the open field away from a play while the defender is, essentially, defenseless. However, if a defensive player delivers such a block, they are lambasted and hit with flags and fines.
Ndamukong Suh, who has a history of extra-legal activities after the whistle, was assessed a mind-boggling $100,000 fine this season for delivering a cut-block on an interception return.
In the pre-season, San Francisco 49ers offensive lineman Joe Looney threw a cut-block on Minnesota Vikings defensive-tackle Kevin Williams. Looney was not flagged, fined, or suspended; but his teammate, nose tackle Ian Williams, was not so lucky.
Two weeks ago Williams was the victim of a cut-block and collapsed with a broken ankle that ended his season. Again, no discipline, neither during nor after the game. The list of these egregiously unfair examples is too exhaustive to detail.
After Williams’ injury, Giants defensive tackle Cullen Jenkins gave an interview to Sports Illustrated where he bemoaned the protection denied defensive linemen: “. . . people are getting hurt and it’s their livelihoods in jeopardy just because someone wants to take an easy block.” He continued, pondering why “those types of things are ignored when we do everything to protect other players.”
The NFL already hosts a fleet of bizarre double standards, allowing offensive players to lean on defensive backs downfield and stiff-arm would-be tacklers (in the face), while enforcing protections (on quarterbacks, in particular) that players are coached to take advantage of. The cut-block is just another in a sea of inequalities, but is one of the few that could potentially ruin and end careers. How about equal protection for all? Not just for those that, as Gred Bedard of Sports Illustrated succinctly states, “put up fantasy statistics.”
