Rams’ final play is debated

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
Jim Thomas
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/foot...cle_72da406e-73fd-5508-92e1-eb29bb5196a1.html

1v7xJ7u.jpg



A day later, the last play of Monday night’s 14-9 loss to Seattle remained the one play most Rams fans wanted to talk about.

As for coach Jeff Fisher — not so much.

“It was the play selection,” Fisher said, of quarterback Kellen Clemens’ incomplete pass to Brian Quick on a fade pattern as time expired. “It’s what we felt gave us the best chance to score a touchdown.”

But on a night where the Rams rushed for 200 yards, why not at least have Zac Stacy in the backfield? Stacy went in motion and split out wide on the play. So instead of having to guess whether the Rams would run or pass, the Seahawks knew a pass was coming and sent an all-out blitz at Clemens on fourth-and-goal from the 1.

Clemens’ pass was hurried because of the pressure and was thrown behind Quick, who was well covered by Seattle corner Brandon Browner.

“What if we had had a back back there and didn’t get in?” Fisher said. “We’d be asked about why you’d run it, why didn’t we go empty and give Kellen a chance to throw the football? So, that was what we prepared to do. We thought it gave us the best chance.”

Clemens said the play-call from offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer gave him “a lot of options” on what to run based on the look he got from the Seattle defense.


“We wanted to give ‘Kel’ options to get the ball out quick,” Fisher said after the game. “He made the right read, and we didn’t make the catch.”

“They sold out from a defensive standpoint — brought everybody,” Clemens said, speaking of the Seattle defense. “So the best option we had was ‘Quickie.’ Browner made a good play that seemed like a pretty physical play. (Would have) loved to have put the ball in a little bit different spot. But didn’t have a lot of time to assess it since they brought one more than we could block.”

As is custom for Seattle corners, Browner was physical on the line of scrimmage with Quick, who had trouble beating the jam.

“When you’re in certain situations like that, it’s not going to always go as planned — like you practice — every time,” Quick said. “So you’ve just got to basically do what you can to get open. That’s what I tried to do.”

So that was that. One of the Rams’ best defensive efforts and best rushing efforts in years wasn’t enough to overcome Seattle.

The 200 yards rushing (on 37 carries) marked the Rams’ first 200-yard rushing game in five years. The last time it happened was Dec. 28, 2008, when the Rams had 202 yards rushing against Atlanta in Jim Haslett’s last game as interim head coach.

And Monday’s strong ground effort came against the league’s second-ranked defense and sixth-ranked run defense.

“That’s amazing,” Clemens said. “Against that defense? That is such a credit to what the other 10 guys on the football field did. Credit Zac (Stacy). He did a great job. He made yards after contact. He’s a great asset for us. We’re lucky to have him.’’

Despite a late-game ankle injury, Stacy gained 134 yards on 26 carries. It’s the second-highest rushing total for a Rams rookie since the move to St. Louis in 1995, exceeded only by Steven Jackson’s 148 yards vs. Philadelphia in 2004.

Defensively, the Rams were even more dominant. As dominant as they’ve been since coming to St. Louis. Seattle’s 135 yards of total offense was the lowest ever against a “St. Louis” Rams defense.

In fact, throw out the fluky 80-yard TD catch by Golden Taint, on a play in which Janoris Jenkins was in position for an interception before losing his balance, and it would’ve been a defensive performance of historic proportions.

(The 1937 Rams allowed 68 yards vs. Washington, the third-best defensive day in franchise history in terms of yards allowed. The ’73 Rams allowed 63 yards vs. Green Bay for second-best. The team — and league — record is minus-7 yards allowed against Seattle in 1979.)

“ ‘Jenks’ actually was in really good position considering the coverage,” Fisher said of Jenkins. “We had some confusion and we were checked in and out of coverages. ‘Jenks’ actually was just sinking; he was in underneath coverage but he still was in position nonetheless. He sorted things out and was in position to make the play, just got his legs tangled.”

Earlier, there appeared to be some confusion in the secondary on Taint’s first TD catch, a 2-yard reception in the second quarter.

“They quick-snapped, and there was some communication stuff going on, but no (confusion),” Fisher said. “I think we’re nitpicking here. I thought the secondary played pretty good. I thought the safeties played well in the run game. I thought they pressured well.

“We gave them multiple looks, and like I said (Monday) night, we asked the corners to do a lot of stuff by themselves the whole game. That’s how you have to defend this run game and the read-option and everything associated with Marshawn Lynch. So, I thought overall the guys played pretty well.”

In part, that entailed having the Rams play more man-to-man coverage than usual. The result was only 139 yards passing by Wilson, and just 91 net passing yards after subtracting the 48 yards lost on seven sacks.

All things considered, Fisher said it has been a while since one of his defenses played that well.

“We had a good plan,” Fisher said. “We spent a lot of time during the week on the things that they were doing ... and somehow it just all came together.”

Just not together enough for an upset victory.
 

Selassie I

H. I. M.
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
17,678
Name
Haole
I would have ran the ball straight up the middle. We were able to RUN-OVER that defense for 200 yards leading up to that play. If Zac was too injured to run it,,, I would have had DR carry the rock.

Given the player we had at QB, and the real strength of Seadderall's defense being against the pass / jamming WRs at the line.... a run play seems like the play that would have the best chance of succeeding to me.

If nothing else, we should have called timeout. I believe we still had one left that we never used.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
I would have ran the ball straight up the middle. We were able to RUN-OVER that defense for 200 yards leading up to that play. If Zac was too injured to run it,,, I would have had DR carry the rock.

Given the player we had at QB, and the real strength of Seadderall's defense being against the pass / jamming WRs at the line.... a run play seems like the play that would have the best chance of succeeding to me.

If nothing else, we should have called timeout. I believe we still had one left that we never used.

richardson was stuffed the play before actually.

I wouldn't have ran it, unless it was stacy in the back field - but i definitely would have a kept a back in the backfield.
 

Selassie I

H. I. M.
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
17,678
Name
Haole
I can hear my old football coach screaming "RUN IT AGAIN".

DR gained some good yards in that same drive. He or Zac instill far more confidence in me than Clemens throwing to Quick from the 1 yard line with Browner jamming Quick.


Having no RB in the backfield just seems silly for sure! Jesus H .
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,229
Name
Tim
Has there really been debate? It looked like a landslide no one bought in to that last play including the players. Stacy was in there and he was the star of the game. Call the whole team to the sideline in that time out pump them up and stuff it in the end zone at least give Zac a chance at winning the game he dominated
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,664
To me, it looks like the best playcall would've been play action to the RB with the TE sneaking out like we've done in the redzone all season long. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like Clemens is as comfortable turning his back to the defense as Bradford was, he really struggled with play action passing on Monday.
 

Pancake

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 1, 2010
Messages
2,204
Name
Ernie
“What if we had had a back back there and didn’t get in?” Fisher said. “We’d be asked about why you’d run it, why didn’t we go empty and give Kellen a chance to throw the football? So, that was what we prepared to do. We thought it gave us the best chance.”


We've seen Clemons play Jeff.....Not many would be asking why not have Clemons throw.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,180
Name
Burger man
I would have put Clemens in motion for a run/pass option... or I would have ran it with Stacy.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,112
I think that any play there that was unsuccesful would be met with 2nd guessing.
But in all fairness, had the final play worked, I think there also would have been a lot of "glad it worked, but what the heck was that"
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
It wasn't the last play that sucked, it was the play before that. A run straight up the gut with Rich was terrible. The guy has success on the edges, not up the middle. Shoulda been a pitch to the outside.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,180
Name
Burger man
It wasn't the last play that sucked, it was the play before that. A run straight up the gut with Rich was terrible. The guy has success on the edges, not up the middle. Shoulda been a pitch to the outside.

I lump the two plays together.

Both weren't good calls for the situation. Yeah, yeah, yeah... it's easy to second guess. But DR up the middle? A pass with empty backfield? Just not smart play selection. Might have well done two kneel downs.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
It's not the play I'd have called , but as dieter sez any play that didn't work would have been questions ,"they love you win or win"
 

Agamemnon

Rookie
Joined
Apr 6, 2013
Messages
307
I wasn't too worried about what play they ran, but I thought they should have had more than one option. It appeared to me that Quick was it. Even with Seattle's 'zero blitz', the dbs holding, "Clemons knew the play", etc. I like to have more than one bullet in my gun. So, I am think the play design was at fault.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
I think the play was fine, and the ball placement was beautiful despite the pressure. You really couldn't have put that ball anywhere else than where it went on that read. But, had Clemens had more time, then who knows what else would have been available. Big fat meh from me. You have a run that has a 50/50 chance of being successful, or a throw that has a 50/50 chance of being successful. Sucks, but can't unwind that clock now.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,664
I think the play was fine, and the ball placement was beautiful despite the pressure. You really couldn't have put that ball anywhere else than where it went on that read. But, had Clemens had more time, then who knows what else would have been available. Big fat meh from me. You have a run that has a 50/50 chance of being successful, or a throw that has a 50/50 chance of being successful. Sucks, but can't unwind that clock now.
Looking back at the play, Quick looks like he ran straight into Browner and just gave up fighting for the ball. That being said, a fade route is such an iffy play, completely dependent on the receiver, and the Rams managed to find the one CB in the league who's actually bigger than the 6-3 Quick to run it against. There's no way you can't question that call.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,229
Name
Tim
I didn't think Quick ran a fade route it looked a lot more like a shallow out a fade he should have been facing the QB and running to the back corner so he could see the ball early use his body and jump to catch the ball at its highest point.

Maybe he learned something from it
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,664
I didn't think Quick ran a fade route it looked a lot more like a shallow out a fade he should have been facing the QB and running to the back corner so he could see the ball early use his body and jump to catch the ball at its highest point.

Maybe he learned something from it
Either way, Clemens threw a fade route.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
I lump the two plays together.

Both weren't good calls for the situation. Yeah, yeah, yeah... it's easy to second guess. But DR up the middle? A pass with empty backfield? Just not smart play selection. Might have well done two kneel downs.

Yeah I gotta agree. I was thinking PA fake and dump down to the TE, a very popular and successful Redzone play for us this year. But no, we had to lob it to Quick against BROWNER. The worste part about it is we had a TE open on the last play. He ran a little stop route and he was open for a second.

Talking about this really sux...