Max Protect - a solution or a problem?
This morning on ESPN radio's Mike and Mike show they were talking to Jeff Saturday, former center from the Colts. The topic was the obviously injured Peyton Manning and what Saturday would do to keep him healthy since he is the only reason the Broncos are a super bowl contender. As Saturday spoke, I immediately thought of our situation with Devin Gardner - his health, his unproven back-up, and the fourteen recent sacks.
Saturday's first comment was that he would absolutely not max-protect. In his opinion that causes more "trash" around the QB because every TE and RB that stays in to block brings a defender who will read their tendencies and add another blitzing body to the mess around your QB. He said he would spread the field, spread the D, and thus give the QB plenty of options to get rid of the ball faster.
Obviously Denver's OL is far more competent than whatever we're throwing out there, but this is a strategy I'd like to see us use more. I'm guessing you won't see any covered WR in Denver's next game.
The other comment he said was that if he were the OL coach he would tell the guys that if they got beat by their man to hold, grab, or tackle the guy so he didn't hit Manning. He said they'd rather see a penalty or bad play than get their QB hurt. That made me realize that for all the lousy protection lately, we haven't had hardly any penalties for holding. Why not tell the guys to push the limits a little more until the refs call it?
November 13th, 2013 at 11:49 AM ^
Even in the case of Michigan. But you also have to remember that DG has struggled making quick reads, which is something that is required with spreading the field out. Typically, in max protect situations, you have to run more complex route combinations because there are fewer routes being run. But they do make the reads easier because the QB sees how everything develops.
So it's not just the OL, but also the QB. Manning, for instance, immediately knows on the snap exactly where to go. He can look of defenders and get the ball out immediately because he's had that time repping the plays and he understands the game at such a high level. DG isn't there yet.
November 13th, 2013 at 12:58 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 1:19 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 2:00 PM ^
There seems to be this theme among a few posters like you who post what would otherwise be harmless or decent input, but are obnoxious raging dickheads about it (while sometimes starting useless threads that should merely be comments in another thread). Then when you make a bunch of douchey responses to people who ask you to turn it down and get your threads deleted, you bitch and bitch and bitch about being censored. Just shut up already. Sometimes the problem is in the mirror.
November 13th, 2013 at 2:31 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 2:42 PM ^
There may in fact be much more wrong with this team/program than we perceive. I'm almost afraid to know how far down the rabbit hole this goes.
November 13th, 2013 at 4:14 PM ^
i'm not a QB or coach, but currently, isn't DG being asked to make reads based on routes that take a lot of time to develop? wouldn't it be easier if we had 3-4 receivers and he makes his read pre-snap and goes there? that way, there is no decision making while under duress. that may involve bubble screens though (yikes). just asking.
November 13th, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
Your point is valid, but it is not like keeping Fitz in is buying us any more time for things to develop. So why not at least send him out into the flat in hopes that someone goes with him, or, if the don't then Gardner occassional recognizes this and dumps it out?
November 13th, 2013 at 3:17 PM ^
the full extent of his skills and ability to make those quick reads since we don't run a ton of those plays. The problem becomes the few "quick" reads being more obvious due to play design and lack of a constraint. He might be good in a different system and with more ability to make checks.
November 13th, 2013 at 11:57 AM ^
I agree completely on the max protect thing. It's the same concept as running out of 2 or 3 TE sets - all you're really doing is bringing in more defenders, which equals more opportunities for a block to be messed up. Mathematically it's really best to spread the field.
That having been said, as a changeup I think max protect can work very well. If you spread the field consistently throughout the game to the point that the defense only sends 4 or 5 every play, changing things up by using 7 or 8 pass blockers can have its desired effect: keeping the QB clean long enough to hit a deep route. But when you are consistently loading the box with 2 or 3 TEs and running a lot of max protect, you're just inviting more defenders to blitz.
November 13th, 2013 at 12:00 PM ^
Agreed, they should push the limits until the refs flag them. Besides, I'd rather have a pass play wiped out by a holding penalty than a pass play wiped out by Devin taking another helmet to the ribs.
November 13th, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^
I said this last week - and no one took me seriously - but do we know that a kangaroo cannot play NCAA football?
November 13th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^
Have you learned nothing!? Fear the 'roo! Fear it!!
November 13th, 2013 at 3:13 PM ^
to fear the 'roo at the Akron game.
November 13th, 2013 at 12:25 PM ^
The Salt Lake City Tribune actually had a piece on Del Rio's reluctance to use max protect schemes where Manning is concerned. He states, in contrast to the wishes of the Bronco faithful:
"But quarterbacks are actually hit more often when you pack them in. And they’re hit far more often in maximum protection. In fact, one of the times he was hit Sunday was on a max protection and the tight end got beat."
November 13th, 2013 at 3:19 PM ^
We need to accentuate our weaknesses.
November 13th, 2013 at 12:52 PM ^
Generally, the rule for LB/S is if RB/TE stay in to protect the QB, it's an automatic blitz if it's man coverage. We attack them to hold them off just in case they leak then go after them once we realize there's no leak route. Staying in for max protect allows fewer receivers to run routes against 7-8 men on the field covering. This will give DL more time to get to the QB especially if they're really good at stack and shed.
November 13th, 2013 at 1:12 PM ^
I know I've felt that max protect is hurting this team. The fact is, we don't have people who can block consistently. In my opinion, the answer then is not to put MORE bad blocking on the field, but to put LESS bad blocking on the field. Spreading out the defenses and trading LBs/DL for nickle/dime packages would be ideal IMO.
Space coyote brings up a good point about Gardner's ability to read, so I don't know. Maybe they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. But I think I'd take my chances with Gardner reading defenses instead of having the pockets crumble and him eating the ball because complicated 2 man routes are not open.
November 13th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 1:56 PM ^
I would think Funchess would make a great screen for Dileo underneath on a quick route. He seems like a shore handed slot ninja that is never used. Or maybe try Northfleet at it. We seem to have personel that could make you pay for what defenses are doing. Heck, I would just throw it up immediatly when you have Funchess one on one on the outside. I like those chances better than the standard 2 yard loss.
November 13th, 2013 at 2:10 PM ^
As with most things in a sport where you only get 11 guys no matter what, it helps you in some ways and hurts you in others. I tend to agree it's probably a net negative at this point, especially combined with the slide protection scheme since some of the best linemen are often blocking air leaving the RB is 1v1 with the DE. I'll defer to coaching types, but I would guess spreading has other problems and is more susceptable to blitzs if the QB can't make quick reads and find the dump off. Is it better than taking a coverage sack because your two WRs are double/triple covered? I don't know.
November 13th, 2013 at 3:04 PM ^
Max protect does nothing to cover our main issues of terrible blocking by the interior line. Yeah, you've got more guys in, but we do (or can do) nothing to prevent the defense from bringing in just as many guys. Max protect only helps if you've done other things to keep the defense from blitzing every play, and only if your extra blockers are smart and skilled enough to pick up the extra rushers.
Ultimately, more guys is just more chances for a defender to get through, and less chances for a quick out if one of them does.
The other issue is that frequent max-protect is going to hurt your run game - those defenders in the box to pressure your QB can just as easily stifle your runs.
I think our best bet at this point is to spread the field, with more outlet opportunities for Gardner. Worst case, fewer guys in the box is a better chance for a run play to succeed, and a much higher likelihood of there being a scramble lane open if Gardner decides to tuck it.
Yeah, maybe Gardner can't adjust and might make some bad throws that get caught by the other team. But at some point 0 turnovers are meaningless because not moving the ball at all is essentially a turnover anyway.
November 13th, 2013 at 3:15 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 3:28 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 4:03 PM ^
November 13th, 2013 at 4:24 PM ^
Personally I'd like to see Michigan go almost exclusively from a spread formation the rest of the year. The fewer defenders/blitzers in the box that have to be blocked, the better. I cringe every time Michigan lines up in a heavy formation as it doesn't tend to end well.
November 13th, 2013 at 8:01 PM ^
I played football for 10 years(DII @ Saginaw Valley in the 1970's). I Coached youth football
for a couple of years for my sons team. I am not expert, but I remember a year with a terrible O-line and it was brutal in youth football. We had limited options with very little passing, but its VERY hard for anything to work when the D is in your backfield every play.
We did slant passes, draws, screens, short counters(no long, reverses) and all quick hitter type plays. Yes, a straight handoff/dive play like we see with Fitz was in the mix because its quick and you pray for even a small crease or small hole for the RB.
We are going to see the same D we saw the last two weeks until we force the other team out of it by hurting them. I hope Brady and Al come up with something.
November 13th, 2013 at 8:22 PM ^
and let it fly. hit the slant or fake a Y dump, and go the other way on a fade, but never hold the ball more than about 2.5 seconds. if you loosen up the defense, then you can run, but with 8-9 guys in the box, you aren't going anywhere fast on the ground.
November 13th, 2013 at 8:43 PM ^
Before Michigan State, max protect was the answer.
Now, nobody likes it.
No matter what you do, football is blocking and tackling.
November 14th, 2013 at 2:03 AM ^
This is garbage people, Hoke is out guy now and we need to support them. Have you not learned anything from bashing RR and his staff. Shit up until a few weeks ago everything was perfect. Just sick of everyone flip flopping on what they want on O and just let them work. Now no excuse for Borgis and his crappy play calling though, I'm sick of his vanilla cream of a game plan but so be it and stop flip flopping all the time.
November 14th, 2013 at 8:33 AM ^