The Protection Dilemma

[GRWatcher]

One solution is to go "max protect", which means keeping backs and tight ends in for extra blocking. The positive? More blockers to keep the QB upright and give him time to make a good decision. The downside? It means fewer receiving options.

But knowing that we didn't see either of those things happen in week one, looking at the pros and cons of "more blockers" vs "more receivers" and bearing in mind that the opponent this week is different, which approach is the wise one for week two?

Almost every time we went to max protect, it worked

Sorry, Mr. Scot, but we did max protect often in the 2nd half. Goodson to the left, TE to the right. And it was working well. Which is probably why Goodson was out there more than Williams or Stewart. Then Goodson gets dinged and comes out. Bam! we have protection problems again.

So, if we really want to pass instead of run, I say go with a max protect scheme until it's shown that we don't need it. Let Matt get comfortable and having fun and he hopefully will start to make quicker & better decisions.

[Mr. Scot]

Sorry, Mr. Scot, but we did max protect often in the 2nd half. Goodson to the left, TE to the right. And it was working well. Which is probably why Goodson was out there more than Williams or Stewart. Then Goodson gets dinged and comes out. Bam! we have protection problems again.

So, if we really want to pass instead of run, I say go with a max protect scheme until it's shown that we don't need it. Let Matt get comfortable and having fun and he hopefully will start to make quicker & better decisions.

Wrong topic. Go back to the original post...

Bottom Line: Winning the war in the trenches is vital, as is having a QB who can get the ball out without too much hesitation (something Scherer emphasizes).

But knowing that we didn't see either of those things happen in week one...

These are the things I was referring to.

[Cat Fanboy]

Moore can't hold on to that ball so long either.

[homeblown]

They're going to have ground and pound the hell out of tampa. It was said on NFL network that the panthers adveraged 6 yards per carry in the last three games against the bucs. Panthers are going to have to ground and pound, then only in emergencies throw when ever we have too. Moore has been getting jakeitis and not scrambling to make something happen, but if its not there throw it away.

Still have to keep the defense honest through the air. Without a successful passing game we cant have a successful running game either. Moore didn't perform well last week but alot of receivers dropped passes also, keeping us from moving the chains. King dropped a pass that would have been 15 yard pick up i believe, first down, move the chains. Even smitty dropped one, positive yards dropped. Not saying this would have changed the outcome, it would have helped open up the playbook more. If we cant throw against tampa and have to run, tampa will eventually shut it down too. We have to be successful in all areas of the offense.

[GRWatcher]

Sorry Mr. Scot! Reading too fast?!

Still think we have to max protect because after last week everybody and their brother is going to blitz us until we burn them a couple of times. Gotta' get Moore comfortable and then maybe he reds & reacts better.

[twylyght]

While I'm thinking of it, another issue arising from week one.

The offense definitely had protection issues last week, especially in the second half. And with the starting right tackle down, that's likely to continue. So one of the big questions that needs to be answered this week will be how to prevent that particular disaster from happening again.

One solution is to go "max protect", which means keeping backs and tight ends in for extra blocking. The positive? More blockers to keep the QB upright and give him time to make a good decision. The downside? It means fewer receiving options.

Now, if the defense blitzes, you have extra people to pick it up and not as many defenders back in protection, so that's good. But if they only rush four, you wind up with two - maybe three - receivers trying to find an opening between seven defenders. Combine that with a receiving corps that isn't exactly keeping DCs awake at night, and it's a recipe for a coverage sack or a bad QB decision.

For this to work properly, you need the "extra blockers" to be smart and know when to release and run a short route rather than stay in when they aren't needed. You might only wind up with a modest gain in that scenario (unless someone breaks something) but still, that's better than a sack, an incomplete or a pick.

The flipside? Send a good number of receiving options out there so that even if the prime guys are covered, the QB has an option. And of course, designate a "hot read' for when there's a jailbreak.

Also good in theory, but you still need at least half-decent protection from the line for this to work, and at the moment it's a big question as to whether we have that. You also need for the QB to be able to make quick decisions, something Moore did well in prior starts, but not so well last week. Throw in that your execution needs to be crisp for this to be effective, and "crisp' wasn't exactly a word I would have used for the offensive execution last week. And again, the quality of the receivers is a factor.

Bottom Line: Winning the war in the trenches is vital, as is having a QB who can get the ball out without too much hesitation (something Scherer emphasizes).

But knowing that we didn't see either of those things happen in week one, looking at the pros and cons of "more blockers" vs "more receivers" and bearing in mind that the opponent this week is different, which approach is the wise one for week two?

I think Zod had a good idea with the TE packages to negate this type of issue. Moreover, we can slide the FB for problem areas for a max protect scheme to reduce the amount of penetration. What I saw from the Giants last week was the left side getting overloaded in how they stacked the box and the right side missing assignments completely.

The line has to shore up their communication. That is first and foremost. Someone posted a pics of Schwartz clearly letting Justin Tuck blow by him while he proceeded downfield to block a non-existant LB. Tuck then merely ran down our RB in the backfield for a tackle for loss when all we needed was for him to pick up his assignment and give our guys time to let the play develop.

Also, Moore MUST make those adjustments at the line when he see the blitz coming. If the necessary package to counter it was not called down, then burn the timeout. That is where Davidson comes into play. He NEEDS to see how the opposition is gameplanning us and counter appropriately. If the Giants are overloading the box on the left side, have Matt roll right or have DWill or JStew run a counter off-tackle to the weak side.

An effective TE package could roll one to the left side for protection while allowing either a FB or an additional TE to push the blocking to the middle zone on the right side. I saw Lafelle and Jarret actually run some good blocking on their end last week, so that could further counter such a scheme. Once the opposition gets burned enough, the overload to the left has to drop and the strength of the line can then do what it does best. If the coverage drops back rather than presses the line, then the TEs can be good enough to recognize that and press the flat.

The bad part for us is that the WRs' only chance to get downfield is to bump and run when over-the-top coverage isn't rolled to their side. That would mean Lafelle/Jarret actually finding some speed to get behind their guy as coverage is almost ALWAYS likely to roll to Smith's side. Jarrett hasn't shown the speed to beat his guy like that. Lafelle hasn't shown the hands to be reliable enough to catch the ball over his shoulder and in stride to be that threat. You'd almost be better off to put Rosario out wide with King on the inside to at leat make it a middle tier threat to the opposition.

Either way, our WRs have not shown the consistency and talent level to work that angle. Our TEs on the other hand could absolutely play that Joker role with any iteration of exotic check-downs, OLine max protect, downfield blocking, etc to give opposing D coordinators nightmares if used effectively. Pick your poison: stack the box and take a chance on the TEs get behind you, overload the box to the left and have the RBs go untouched to the second level of your D, or drop back and have the left side of the oline grind that side of the dline into the dirt with RBs again pushing the next level of the D.

[Miaoww]

Max protect if Moore starts the game. Send out extra receivers if Clausen starts the game.

I don't trust Moore to go through his progressions quick enough to not end up planted in the turf if we run out extra receiving options.

[2jakefansinva]

We do. And I know for sure we called a screen atleast once in that game. Maybe even twice. Crazy huh?

I'll bet ya MM drew those plays up in the dirt.

[mmmbeans]

but it feels so much better without protection.

[Mr. Scot]

Only three receivers active could mean the backs and TEs are more active in the passing game, so you might not see as much max protect.

Safe bet they'll be run-heavy in the game plan, but that's hardly a shock.

We'll see what happens.