No announcement yet.

Max Protect? What is that exactly?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Max Protect? What is that exactly?

    How can the Rams use something called Max Protect and STILL give up the most sack yards in the NFL? What is Max Protect? Keep the FB in? Boy that helped. Keep the TE close? Worked ever so welll last year didn't it?

    I don't get this max protect crap. Someone help me please.

  • #2
    Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

    It would seem to me that the idea of max protect is supposed to better protect the quarterback or take protection pressure off of the offensive line. However, if you think about it, by devoting more personnel to pass protection, you're effectively taking away targets for the quarterback to throw to during the play. For example, in a formation with two wide receivers, two tight ends, and one halfback, the quarterback has the potential for five targets. If one tight end and the halfback are devoted to pass protection, the quarterback only has three targets: the two WRs and the one remaining TE. If those three targets are covered -- and less face it, it's easier to cover two WRs and a TE than it is, say, four WRs and a delayed HB route -- then the quarterback has few if any options at this point. So I'm inclined to believe that max protect has the potential to hurt an offense as much as it does help because it takes away offensive targets.

    If you look at Marc Bulger's situational stats, there are a number of interesting pieces of information. Of the four formations that ESPN has situational stats for (shotgun, backs split, I-formation, lone setback), the backs split formation has the highest sack percentage. Bulger attempted 98 passes in this formation, and was sacked 10 times. That's a sack percentage of over 10%. No other formation has a percentage higher than six percent. Now in terms of number of wide receivers, the highest sack percentage falls when there are two or fewer receivers on the field. That seems to raise my eyebrow, because when I think of max protect, I think of formations that have a tight end or a fullback in to help pick up rushers, meaning fewer wide receivers. You don't normally associate max protect with three or four wide receiver sets, but these passing stats seem to imply that the Rams give up fewer sacks when more receivers are in the game, and that by using formations that lower the number of targets -- which I believe would be consistent with a max protection formation -- the Rams are in fact more likely to give up a sack. So perhaps if the Rams want to decrease the number of sacks, one possible way might be to keep a number of targets on the field so that the quarterback has a place to dump the ball off if pressure comes his way. And who knows, perhaps the Rams did that and Bulger wasn't making the reads. We know he's had problems checking down to Faulk, so this would be something he needs to definitely improve on as well.

    Just my two cents.


    • #3
      Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

      I think the west coast offense is designed to be the happy medium between max protect, and the greatest show on turf (aka, everyone go out for a pass).

      Max protect has the problem that there aren't enough weopons out there to throw to, and the other way means not enough time to throw the ball.

      IF you have a great offensive line and don't use your tight end much in the passing game, then you can be a bit more aggressive like we did for awhile there...

      But when that isn't working, I'm not sure the answer is to try to MAX protect, especially since that works against the strengths of this team.

      Unfortunately, we will not go far if we have to change to more of a max protect offense. The O' Line just has to step up and give reasonable protection so that we can get "Isaac Holt" going, and get Curtis/Looker/MacDonald in the mix, with Faulk as an outlet and occasionally the primary receiver. It's our bread and butter.


      • #4
        Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

        A vary valuable and insightful two cents, Nick. Thanks!


        • #5
          Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

          That's why I think all this max protect talk is just I really don't think the Rams max protected Bulger. If anything, Bulger just had less weapons at his disposal. He had no speed at 3 WR, played quite a bit without Faulk, and still led the NFC in passing yards.

          Take that max protect stuff and put it somewhere else because the Rams didn't really max protect Bulger. Maybe Bulger had a quicker release than some of you thought.


          • #6
            Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

            max protect is when you have everyone blocking except for two receivers and the qb.


            • #7
              Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

              Marc likes max protect, he is not as good as Warner was, in finding the 4th and 5th read.


              • #8
                Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

                Rambos, he's not? Take a look at Looker's might be surprised. They are similar to Hakim's.


                • #9
                  Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

                  we have no short passing game.... faulk was missing and no confidence with our TE's... should have gone for a big short yardage receiver in FA.


                  • #10
                    Re: Max Protect? What is that exactly?

                    "Max Protect" is what you say when you finally admit that the QB's play wasn't all the QB's fault but you don't want to admit that QB's play was partly your fault too.


                    Related Topics


                    • MauiRam
                      Memo To the St. Louis Rams: How Enemy DCs Will Destroy Your WCO In 2010
                      by MauiRam
                      By David Leon

                      The West Coast Offense is not my favorite offensive scheme, not by a long shot. I greatly prefer the Gilman-Coryell-Martz approach. I would also prefer the Spread, and the K-Gun, two very similar offenses. The WCO would rank just above the Erhardt-Perkins and Lombardi-Shula schemes. That's pretty low on my list of favorites.

                      So why do I dislike the WCO? It's pretty easy to beat these days, that's why. Nobody plays it in the pure form that Walsh did back in 1981. The reason is simple: They can't. The pure system doesn't really work anymore. Let me give you a little history lesson about it.

                      Back in the year 1981, everyone was deathly afraid of the bomb. Not the atomic bomb, the long pass. The 1978 rule changes had been in effect for three full years prior to the 49er eruption.

                      Teams like the Steelers and Raiders had used the bomb with devastating effect on route to Super Bowl championships. The Cowboys were playing bombs-away also. Even the Rams, with Vince Ferragamo, were throwing the football deep.

                      In those days, most defenses would concede a four yard pass and think nothing of it. They would not contest those short routes much at all.

                      If you added some sophistication to your short passing game, running combination routes to produce rub-offs and so forth, you could really move the chains. You could sustain a drive for 9-12 plays, keep your defense off the field, build your QB's passer rating, and score touchdowns.

                      Bill Walsh knew and understood this. He organized his entire offense around the precept that defensive coordinators would give him his short yardage, practically for free. This was especially true in the final two minutes of the game when everybody (and I mean everybody) played the prevent defense.

                      The 49er offense was revolutionary for the time. Frankly, I always knew it could be stopped. I used to chastise our Ram defensive coordinators, like Fritz Shurmur, for ordering our corners to cover the 49er WRs as they ran endlessly down the field on eight and nine routes to no avail. Joe would seldom throw the football deep. Truth be told, he had a 40 yard arm. He couldn't fling it that deep with any consistency of accuracy.

                      Well, it took awhile, but a defensive coordinator arose who had the nuts to play a realistic defense against the WCO. I regret to say this, but the man's name is Bill Belichick. At the time, he was the defensive coordinator for the New York Giants under Bill Parcells.

                      If you will check the historical record, you will find the New York Giants were the team that most consistently vexed the 49er dynasty. They laid a devastating 49-3 route on ***** on route to their first Super Bowl victory in 1986-87.

                      Jim Burk sent Joe Montana out on a stretcher in that game. They terminated the ***** shot at a three-pete in 1990-91....
                      -05-14-2010, 09:20 AM
                    • r8rh8rmike
                      Time To Get The Tight Ends More Involved?
                      by r8rh8rmike
                      Could we see things open up for the tight ends against Seattle? The offense has been progressing nicely the last few weeks and making the tight ends more a factor could be an added dimension that the Seahawks may not be planning for. Both Klopf and Walker have shown the ablity to make big catches and incorporating something else for the opposition's defense to worry about could really open things up and help in the red zone.
                      -10-14-2006, 04:10 PM
                    • MauiRam
                      The Evolution of the Zone Blitz ..
                      by MauiRam
                      By Greg Cosell

                      Don Coryell and Bill Walsh were two pioneering and aggressive innovators who greatly expanded how people approached the NFL offense. As I wrote in a recent piece about the evolution of the offense, both men challenged standard beliefs and conventional wisdom, helping to gradually transform the run-dominated league that Vince Lombardi ruled in the 1960s into the pass-heavy NFL we know today. More than 30 years after Coryell and Walsh first advanced their strategic views, their influence remains as strong and pervasive as ever.

                      But how did defenses react to these historic changes in offense? Remember that, for years, defensive coaches had been trying to stop offensive formations that almost exclusively featured two backs, two wide receivers and a tight end aligned on the line of scrimmage right next to the tackle. Passing was predominantly a long-yardage tactic, focused on deep, seven-step drops and long-developing routes. The defensive template was fairly well-established, consisting of 4-3 fronts that rarely blitzed, minimal coverage schemes that highlighted man-to-man with deep safety help and basic zone concepts that did not incorporate route progressions or pattern reading. When teams did blitz and a blitz back then was always defined as sending five or more rushers they played man coverage, working without a deep safety in the middle of the field most of the time. The rewards could be great, but so were the risks.

                      Unless they had great talent, defenses of that era (and in the early 1980s) were not strategically equipped to effectively respond to the expansion of the passing game, with its innovative emphasis on quick timing throws, three-receiver sets and tight ends that could align outside the formation. Thanks to Air Coryell, Bill Walsh and the proliferation of the West Coast offense, offenses were usually a step ahead. Teams needed to make a parallel change in defensive philosophy. As quarterbacks became increasingly important to their offenses, stopping them became increasingly important to defenses. The challenge was to exert pressure on the quarterback without placing too many demands on the coverage. Conventional thinking about blitzing held that pure man coverage be used. Cornerbacks had no help; they were exposed, liable to give up big plays and touchdowns if they were beaten on the outside.

                      Dick LeBeau, the defensive backfield coach for the Cincinnati Bengals from 1980 to 1983, recognized this significant shift. He intuitively understood that the objective was to impact the quarterback without sacrificing bodies in coverage. It was a numbers game: Teams had to rush with fewer defenders while forcing offenses to keep more blockers in pass protection, including eligible receivers like running backs and tight ends. The goal was to have more defenders available to cover fewer receivers. LeBeau addressed the need to bring pressure by attacking specific...
                      -07-26-2012, 11:58 AM
                    • Bar-bq
                      The Box Seat
                      by Bar-bq
                      Here's a worrying stat- since week five of last year's regular season, our Rams are a total of 4-10.

                      In that same stretch, the lowly Browns, led by Charlie Frye and Derek Anderson are also 4-10.

                      The Detriot Lions, who held the number two overall pick in last year's draft are 5-9.

                      The Buccaneers, sorry to rub the loss in, are 6-10.

                      The ***** have knocked up 7 wins in that span.

                      By comparison, the world champion Colts are 10-4 in that same period, and the New England Patriots have gone one better with a mark of 11-3.

                      In fact, the only team worse since week five of last year are the Oakland Raiders, who've managed a grand total of two wins.

                      Presently, we can't score a point and have two starters on the offensive line out for the season with injury. Incognito still hasn't played, and to top it all off, even the backup tackle is injured and out for his season (and potentially his career.)

                      **SO IT'S TIME TO PUT YOU IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT**

                      Starting now, you assume the persona of Head Coach Scott Linehan, and you have one post to fix this team. It's all well and good for people to say "better playcalling" but how do you fare when you're actually at the helm?

                      2 Rules-
                      Explain why you make the changes you do
                      You Cannot Fire Yourself. Do whatever else you think is necessary to fix this team.
                      -09-24-2007, 03:53 AM
                    • LaRamsFanLongTime
                      Play Calling -Offense
                      by LaRamsFanLongTime
                      We as Rams fans have been spoiled at times by one of the best offensive minds in the game. In my opinion Martz has some of the best plays ever yet he lacks continuity. The 3-5 step drop that made his team famous was replaced by 5-7 with his qb usually getting killed. The front office fealt like it was time to change and they did. He left behind a offensive legacy that was stained by madness. There is alot to learn from the Rams offensive regime and hopefully Linehan does just that.

                      The Rams have Holt one of the best in the league at WR. Then there is best route runner in NFL history Issac Bruce. When you add in the super Fast Curtis you have weapons that teams just dont see very often. Not to Mention we have a Moose of TE that is just a huge target(I know he is a Rookie). Then you have an extremely accurate Bulger throwing to these guys. Factor that in with the threat the SJ can break one at any time and we should have a top tier offense.

                      The offensive line though at the moment is shakey and already has been hit with an injury. Bulger will face pressure and The Rams are gonna have to limit the play calls at times with max protection schemes. Or they could start using quick drop pass plays that limit the time defense has to react. I think one of the greatest things that can be learned from Martz is how effective quick drops can be when you have the weapons. Its a shame that he abandoned it in the first place. I really want to see quick slants and little 5 yard outs. A couple more screens would have been nice as well. Get the ball out of Bulgers hand and into the receivers hands.They make plays that is their job.

                      Im not asking for Martz ball, I want to see more balance and less flinging the ball around then we have in the previous years. The thing is I think Linehan yesterday showed us balance on the drives but not in the red zone. This was a problem Martz had in the Red zone as well. Kind of a "Lets try to outsmart the d instead of pound their d." When you start from the 3 yard line you pound once twice 3 times a lady hell even 4 times if you have too. I say use Davis like the Steelers used Bettis if you dont want SJ doing the carrying inside the 5 (something I do not understand by the way.) Coach those little pass plays intended for the TE or RB off the goalline work alot better when you are not facing extremely fast linebackers. Sorry for the smart alec routine but that play really pissed me off.

                      I like the balanced attack. I like the commitment to the run.We just need that commitment in the zone too. We will have to get this passing game going If we want to put up some points though. I would give the play calling a d minus yesterday. They really did not work the middle of the field very much. I like the direction I like the focus but you have to be a little bit wild at times on both sides of the ball not just defense. Open up the playbook in the open field please.
                      -09-11-2006, 12:18 PM