Should we be concerned?

[crazyhorns]

I know it's early in the preseason and many of the starters were not active for the game. However, last years team started out slow out of the gate and some of the concerns early on last year has shown it's head again. The Rams once again could not stop the run and had way too many flags.

Not ready to hit the panic button yet and hope that when the starters come in that those issues disappear.

On a good note loved the balance and can't wait to see the Defense utilize blitz packages.

go Rams

 

[rams24/7]

You're concerned about a run D that was missing its most vital pieces in JL and Brockers as well as Langford and our 2 starting CBs. Not to mention Dunbar played out of position and Quinn only played a handful of snaps.

And flags? How many of those were from starters? The majority of the guys making those mistakes won't even be making the team or get significant PT if they do

 

[bwdenverram]

I'm not sure why everyone seems to be so worried about the first preseason game. Was the run D bad? Of course it was. But you weren't watching all of our starters. Not even close.You were watching 2nd and 3rd stringers and guys just trying to earn a job. We didn't even have half our starting backfield out there.

If it we're 100% starting defense then yeah, I'd be a little worried. But first preseason game with a totally mixed bag of people on D, not at all.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Last year the Rams were rushed against 440 times(16th in the league) for 1646 yrds (9th) an average of 3.7 ypa (3rd) they gave up an average of 102.9 per game. I believe we will do a lot better this year!! Keep in mind there were "5 Def. Starters" that didn't play at all, that almost half our D!!!!

 

[SaneRamsFan]

I think penalties and poor tackling which resultss in noot being able to stop the run is absolutely a concern. But there is a reasonable explanation and no need to panic yet. On the tackling remember this was the first time they have engaged in any live tackling. It is nonexistant in todays nfl practices. So I expected them to be a little rusty. We also didnt start the whole middle of our first team defense- gotta think that had somethi ng to do with stopping the run. NO used there #1 back extensively.
As far as the penalties, remember the refs all suck and are against us.
I am sure Fisher and the coaches watched the game and tackling techniques will be discussed at length as well as the penalties.

 

[Thordaddy]

I've always couched my enthusiasm over our pass rush against the need to stop the run to set the PR up,I think we'll be far better against the run when all those mentioned before who didn't play are with us.
JMO though the Saints quacked and flopped around about GW so much it's difficult for me to believe that they didn't plan to run and run and worked towards a semi game plan because the best way to avoid punishment is to dish it with a running game.
Bottom line though injuries are the only things the first two preseason games that warrant any real concern.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I thought we looked good.

Our back ups played better then our starters have in preseasons' in the past. The field experience is a plus. These are young kids with upside.

If we were playing a starting lineup, With veterans in their prime, then I would panic. Not the case.

I saw a lot of things to be happy about.

 

[Alan]

I'm not going to weigh in on whether we should be worried or not about our run D but those that claim we didn't have our starters on the field are at least partly incorrect. We are going to have a 7 man D-line rotation so in the case of our D-line we were playing our starters. The LB corps was missing ONE starter and one of them was playing out of position but that's far from saying we weren't playing our starters. If nothing else, what is the take away if we're saying that we can't stop the run with the planned D-line rotation and JL off the field?

 

[mr.stlouis]

Well, preseason under Walton DID transfer to the regular season. It never changed. I do beleive Greg W. has a lot more depth to his playbook than that.

I'm only concerned about the run defense and short passes. But hey, big difference when Brockers is in there. He's a core clog.

 

[Alan]

mr.stlouis forgetting a key part of our strategy:
I do beleive Greg W. has a lot more depth to his playbook than that.
But hey, big difference when Brockers is in there. He's a core clog.

Except that they said only Quinn will be on the field a larger percentage of the time compared to the others. So without attempting to do any math this early in the morning, Brockers should only be on the field about 60% of the time. What about the other 40%?

In addition, while Greg does have a much bigger playbook than the one we used, most of what we didn't use had to do with the passing game and getting to the QB. There isn't all that much you can do play wise to stop the run except putting more defenders in the box.

 

[Rams and Gators]

Should we be concerned about a run D which gave up 3 yards per attempt after the bye last season on the basis of a preseason game where half our starters didn't play and the other half played about 5 snaps? Sure why the hell not.

 

[snackdaddy]

Its too hard to put any stock in the first preseason game. Most the penalties were committed by players who won't be on the roster in September.

If I have any concerns it would be the missed tackles. Some of them were guys who expect to make the roster.

 

[DCH]

Not really. As mentioned, we didn't have Brockers or JL in, and that's a huge part of our run D. And frankly I didn't think we had an inordinate amount of penalties.

Cody Davis needs to be on notice, though... you can't get trucked by ball-carriers that much.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Except that they said only Quinn will be on the field a larger percentage of the time compared to the others. So without attempting to do any math this early in the morning, Brockers should only be on the field about 60% of the time. What about the other 40%?

In addition, while Greg does have a much bigger playbook than the one we used, most of what we didn't use had to do with the passing game and getting to the QB. There isn't all that much you can do play wise to stop the run except putting more defenders in the box.

I think I understand what you're saying, my man. You're taking about personelle packages depending on the situation. Excellent point! I like that and, yes, I did overlook that. But if teams are pounding the rock down our throats then Brockers will play more. Langford/Brockers on first down, Donald/Carrington on passing downs.

Quick question; Is Carrington really a better pass rusher than Brockers? Brock had 5.5 sacks last year, I don't know.

 

[CoachO]

I'm not going to weigh in on whether we should be worried or not about our run D but those that claim we didn't have our starters on the field are at least partly incorrect. We are going to have a 7 man D-line rotation so in the case of our D-line we were playing our starters. The LB corps was missing ONE starter and one of them was playing out of position but that's far from saying we weren't playing our starters. If nothing else, what is the take away if we're saying that we can't stop the run with the planned D-line rotation and JL off the field?

Not as simple as saying we were playing the guys who will be "starters" in that they will be part of the rotation. The ONLY 'starters" on the D-line who were on the field for anything more than a token series or two, were Eugene Sims and Alex Carrington. Chris Long played a series. Wm. Hayes didn't play a down. Quinn played only a handful of snaps, all on 3rd down pass rushing situations. Brockers and Langford didn't play a down either. So by my count, that's FIVE of the SEVEN "rotational" guys who didn't play up front.

And as far as having only one starter at LB out, its more a case of who took his place that lead to most of the issues. By having Dunbar slide to the MLB position, and now putting Armstrong on the field to stop the running game..... well you saw how that turned out.

For all those people who still want to beat the drum for Ray Ray taking over for Dunbar at the WLB, I hope you took notice. He couldn't get off blocks, and over ran plays consistently. I know its ONE preseason game. But this is the same thing that shows up in every practice.

 

[Debacled]

Not concerned about the lack of a run D or the tackling.

The new CBA makes it really hard to knock the offseason rust off as far as contact goes. Two a days are gone, and the days that live contact is allowed are numbered. Strictly. Defenses will suffer and are suffering from the lack there of when it comes to live contact drills.

Also as it has been mentioned a good chunk of the starters sat out. Compound that with the preseason being used by the coaches to see what individuals can do rather than teams, it makes sense that there are going to be breakdowns. Most of the guys we watched play friday won't be on the roster by the time the season rolls around, and even more of those who make the roster will rarely see the turf.

 

[BonifayRam]

Bottom line here MIA starters were CB's Jenkins, Johnson & top reserve CB McGee. WSLB Dunbar, MLB JL, DT's Langford & Brockers & top reserve Hayes. Did I just name 8 defensive regulars from last yrs team. Very Limited action from star DE's Quinn & Long too.

We started the game with a rookie 6th rd pick Gaines & a UDFA PS player Woodard starting @ CB!

 

[LACHAMP46]

Concerned...Should be...It seemed like NO was trying to play a little more physical than us. Seems as if they succeeded somewhat. Seems as if some of the backups don't wanna hit..Concerned, yeah, but week 2 should be interesting.

And as far as having only one starter at LB out, its more a case of who took his place that lead to most of the issues. By having Dunbar slide to the MLB position, and now putting Armstrong on the field to stop the running game..... well you saw how that turned out.

For all those people who still want to beat the drum for Ray Ray taking over for Dunbar at the WLB, I hope you took notice. He couldn't get off blocks, and over ran plays consistently. I know its ONE preseason game. But this is the same thing that shows up in every practice.

Welp, your preaching to the choir Coach0....And personally, I wanna see a bunch more of Mr. Armstrong in preseason games 2 & 4. Only a lil in 3, cause that's when the "starters" usually play a lot. And if he doesn't look a whole lot better....Man, We gotta find some backups that can play...But it seemed like the whole defensive front had trouble getting off blocks. And a bunch of missed tackles....Ray Ray looked like.....The worst part about it? Dunbar did too.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

I think the reason why they got a lot of those runs on us was because we were missing a lot of cats on D I believe, so no, I wouldn't hit the panic button yet too. I think well get the perfect opportunity to see how our run defense will be in week 1 going up vs AP.

 

[CoachO]

Concerned...Should be...It seemed like NO was trying to play a little more physical than us. Seems as if they succeeded somewhat. Seems as if some of the backups don't wanna hit..Concerned, yeah, but week 2 should be interesting.

Welp, your preaching to the choir Coach0....And personally, I wanna see a bunch more of Mr. Armstrong in preseason games 2 & 4. Only a lil in 3, cause that's when the "starters" usually play a lot. And if he doesn't look a whole lot better....Man, We gotta find some backups that can play...But it seemed like the whole defensive front had trouble getting off blocks. And a bunch of missed tackles....Ray Ray looked like.....The worst part about it? Dunbar did too.

Normally, I would agree with you regarding game 3 being the one where the starters play. But it seems Fisher's MO is to use both games 3 and 4 to ramp up the starters snap counts, so I think you will see more of the "Starters" in game 4 than you might think.