What is the difference betwee IZ and OZ?

[Vince148]

The blocking is still the same, isn't it. Or is it like the veer, where you leave a 3/4 tech. alone?

[Dusty Ol Fart]

Generically speaking.   IZ seeks to move the defense vertically with double teams between the tackles.  OZ seeks to move the D more laterally thereby creating holes either outside or via the cutback.  OZ does not always guarantee a double team will happen whereas with IZ it usually happens.  Clear as Mud?

 

[seeindouble]

The blocking is still the same, isn't it. Or is it like the veer, where you leave a 3/4 tech. alone?

I think the main difference is the RB's read(s).
On IZ, the RBs read(s) are INSIDE-OUT.
On OZ, the RB's read(s) are OUTSIDE-IN.
But generally, the blocking in both schemes is the same, INSIDE-OUT...

[Vince148]

And another question I have is how would you zone block a GAM type defense out of a wing-t type offense to both the wing side and the open side? Whenever I do searches to find out different blocking schemes, I hardly ever find anything that shows how to block gap type defenses. I find this rather peculiar because we see a lot of gap defenses in my area.

[seeindouble]

And another question I have is how would you zone block a GAM type defense out of a wing-t type offense to both the wing side and the open side? Whenever I do searches to find out different blocking schemes, I hardly ever find anything that shows how to block gap type defenses. I find this rather peculiar because we see a lot of gap defenses in my area.

Here's a discussion in the archives about blocking the GAM:
http://www.dumcoach.com/classic/viewthread.php?tid=5598

[CoachKell]

The blocking is still the same, isn't it. Or is it like the veer, where you leave a 3/4 tech. alone?

No it's a different philosophy than veer altogether

The only differences between the 2 (IZ?OZ that is ) are

1) we attempt to slip the EMOL to get the TE to the secondary (Usually a LB or in some cases a safety)
2) the RB's Landmark is the crack of the TE
3) the RB will key the EMOL as his primary read th next down lineman INSIDE as his secondary read

[Vince148]

Here's a discussion in the archives about blocking the GAM:
http://www.dumcoach.com/classic/viewthread.php?tid=5598

Hmm. Not the way I envisioned it at all. I was thinking that the RG and RT would DT the defender in the B gap and then the RT would come off the block to cut off the LBer's pursuit.

[Dusty Ol Fart]

And another question I have is how would you zone block a GAM type defense out of a wing-t type offense to both the wing side and the open side? Whenever I do searches to find out different blocking schemes, I hardly ever find anything that shows how to block gap type defenses. I find this rather peculiar because we see a lot of gap defenses in my area.

As far as I am concerned that's the problem with the Zone concept.  Folks looking to double team, in some cases you just don't get them and cant allow that to brain lock your line. Uncovered kids need to realize that if the hat goes away from them they have to go next level.  Covered kids need to realize that they aren't always going to get help.  Is zone beneficial?  You betcha!  Kids need to know how to block individually and then teach them to work with zone concepts.  Pull and Replace is hard to accomplish without a ton, and I mean a ton of reps.

  

[CoachKell]

And another question I have is how would you zone block a GAM type defense out of a wing-t type offense to both the wing side and the open side? Whenever I do searches to find out different blocking schemes, I hardly ever find anything that shows how to block gap type defenses. I find this rather peculiar because we see a lot of gap defenses in my area.

You wouldn't you are outnumbered along the front, you'd go to power, or throw , as Alex Gibbs said "When that 9th hat comes down in the box... it's time to get the F$%&, outta the run,  you CAN'T run that mother F#$%er into 9 of them"

[Michael]

Gibbs at C.O.O.L.:

Coach: What do you do when you have two wide receivers on the same side?
Gibbs: They block the guy over them.
Coach: What if one of them doesn't have a guy over him?
Gibbs: We throw him the f______ football.

Great moment.

[seeindouble]

As far as I am concerned that's the problem with the Zone concept.  Folks looking to double team, in some cases you just don't get them and cant allow that to brain lock your line. Uncovered kids need to realize that if the hat goes away from them they have to go next level.  Covered kids need to realize that they aren't always going to get help.  Is zone beneficial?  You betcha!  Kids need to know how to block individually and then teach them to work with zone concepts.  Pull and Replace is hard to accomplish without a ton, and I mean a ton of reps.

 

 Zone blocking DOESN'T brain block kids any more than some of these GOOD GOD,GOD,TKO, and whatever other "youth friendly" schemes that are out there. In the youth game, all those blocking schemes that I mentioned above are only as good as the fundamentally UNSOUND defenses that are out there. For example, if I teach my O-Linemen how to reach block, and the opposing DCs DON'T teach their kids how to defeat a reach block, I have the advantage. If I teach my O-Linemen the proper way to combo block, and the opposing DCs don't teach their D-Linemen how to defeat a DT, I have the advantage. In the youth game, it's about what YOU teach, just as much as what your opponents DON'T teach...

[Test Account]

My understanding of the Iz and oz...is  that oz is an offtackle play. the perception that oz is a cutback play is bogus.  Defenses flow so hard outside that it really looks like a cutback....but its really just inside the te or the aiming point of the back....Iz is the cutback play and that is because you get vertical pushes. the tighter landmark allows for a true cutback. especially if you are oz oriented. You cant cut inside zone because you will clog up the intended hole(s). Hope I contributed something and helped somebody.

[CoachKell]

My understanding of the Iz and oz...is  that oz is an offtackle play. the perception that oz is a cutback play is bogus.  Defenses flow so hard outside that it really looks like a cutback....but its really just inside the te or the aiming point of the back....Iz is the cutback play and that is because you get vertical pushes. the tighter landmark allows for a true cutback. especially if you are oz oriented. You cant cut inside zone because you will clog up the intended hole(s). Hope I contributed something and helped somebody.

yes and no the fact it's referred to as a "cutback" play is incorrect, however the cutback is certainly part of it.  In some cases the cutback could be all the way from one side of the line to the other, depending on defensive alignment. 

Though you wouldn't be wrong on cutting on IZ some do, though I agree that it causes a mess for the back to have to navigate, I prefer to zone across the front as well

[belebuch]

Gibbs at C.O.O.L.:

Coach: What do you do when you have two wide receivers on the same side?
Gibbs: They block the guy over them.
Coach: What if one of them doesn't have a guy over him?
Gibbs: We throw him the f______ football.

Great moment.

And it's as simple as that. 

[Test Account]

yes and no the fact it's referred to as a "cutback" play is incorrect, however the cutback is certainly part of it.  In some cases the cutback could be all the way from one side of the line to the other, depending on defensive alignment. 

get any cutup of oz plays, you wont see a cut back of any sort. I didnt believe at first either but if you watch carefully, there is no cutback on the oz play