Have the Rams ever won a game with
- Thread starter drsnook
- Start date
-
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.
I would guess during the Warner years. TOs were negated by quick strikes of retaliation.
The last time the Rams won a game with a quarterback throwing three or more interceptions was in Week 8, 2005, versus Jacksonville. The Rams won that day 24-21, with QB Jamie Martin throwing 3 INTs, 2 TDs, and 200 yards.
https://www.nfl.com/news/rams-qb-ma...t-team-win-with-less-than-spectacular-passing
https://www.nfl.com/news/rams-qb-ma...t-team-win-with-less-than-spectacular-passing
Warner had 5 games as a Ram where he threw 3 INT and we won.
You might remember one - NFC championship against the Bucs.
You might remember one - NFC championship against the Bucs.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #5
Definitely remember that game, but not the three picks.
That game is a great example of how an offense can run into a wall in the playoffs.
That is why the Rams developing a power run game is such a big deal. That tends to play much better in the playoffs than a pass happy attack.
Not sure.
I do recall us winning a game turning the ball over three times and the opponent not turning the ball over. We won 30 to 0 at Detroit.
maybe - I see at as a point that sometimes shit will go south and you need to play complimentary football and have the other sides of the ball pick you up.
running the ball valuable but stopping the run is even more important
If you look at the past 10 years or so of super bowl winners - their rushing rankings are different - i think like 4 of the last 10 super bowl winners had a top 10 rushing attack. 8 out 10 had top 10 rush defenses.. alot of top ranked rush defenses.
Last edited:
Which is the same thing. If you look at the history of the NFL playoffs it backs all that up too, being one dimensional is not a good thing.
I don't think there's been a one dimensional passing attack that has won it all for example.
There have been teams who won with defense but no offense, but those defenses were rare elite units at stuffing both run and pass and keeping points ridiculously low. So can't really call those Bears or Ravens teams one dimensional. Complimentary football, balance, whatever you want to call it, it's a big key for being able to survive in the playoffs.
look at what i edited in my posted above - top rush defense is a key in winning super bowls
top rush offenses... not as neccessary.
But of course the more complete team you have the better. If a team has to respect the run it opens up more for big plays.
NFL News, Scores, Standings & Stats | FOX Sports
Get NFL news, scores, stats, standings & more for your favorite teams and players -- plus watch highlights and live games! All on FoxSports.com.
www.foxsports.com
Well interestingly enough our rush defense in '99 was the best in the league iirc. So you'll never get an argument out of me irt the importance of rush defense.
Re: the offensive side run game I think potency matters too. Teams that can power you on the ground or who have a breakaway talent in the backfield have more going for them in threat than a team who just runs the ball that bare minimum amount.
For example take Michel. No team wants that dude mashing their secondary and wearing them down. The DC is going to fear that. We're seeing a similar effect from Michel to what CJ gave us in 2018. But nobody is gonna fear Hendy, sadly. Basically if Michel were to miss time we're up shit creek IMO and no amount of carries for Hendy is gonna change that.
Re: the offensive side run game I think potency matters too. Teams that can power you on the ground or who have a breakaway talent in the backfield have more going for them in threat than a team who just runs the ball that bare minimum amount.
For example take Michel. No team wants that dude mashing their secondary and wearing them down. The DC is going to fear that. We're seeing a similar effect from Michel to what CJ gave us in 2018. But nobody is gonna fear Hendy, sadly. Basically if Michel were to miss time we're up shit creek IMO and no amount of carries for Hendy is gonna change that.
By the way re: the stats they say matters in that link...NFL News, Scores, Standings & Stats | FOX Sports
Get NFL news, scores, stats, standings & more for your favorite teams and players -- plus watch highlights and live games! All on FoxSports.com.
Our offense looks good other than redzone scoring percentage. Scoring defense of late has been very good (18.7 over the last 3 games). QB performance as irritating as it has been from time to time has overall been among the best in the league this year. We don't look too shabby tbh, seems like redzone scoring looms as our biggest problem irt the listed elements required, given that our defense seems to be on a big upswing.
I don’t mind Stafford throwing picks when he is airing it out, I’d prefer it didn’t happen but risk/reward … the short passes where he is under pressure close to our own end zone need to stop. Stafford appears to have a weakness here … maybe we just give the ball to Michel instead. 
Agree, but I kind of feel like the deep throws just for the sake of throwing them seem to be an obligatory thing with McVay now...I wish he wouldn't be as obvious as he is now and pick his spots with a little more thought...The bad throw last week was thrown into double coverage and it was only catchable by the Vikings DBs...Zero chance of a completion...The 15-18 yard throws by Stafford are still freaking lasers but he seems to be having a bit of trouble with underthrowing the deep shots...Not trying to really be critical of either of them, I obviously don't know enough to even presume I should be...just seems a bit troubling to me..I don’t mind Stafford throwing picks when he is airing it out, I’d prefer it didn’t happen but risk/reward … the short passes where he is under pressure close to our own end zone need to stop. Stafford appears to have a weakness here … maybe we just give the ball to Michel instead.
i agree - an INT that happens on a deep, aggressive play i dont mind.I don’t mind Stafford throwing picks when he is airing it out, I’d prefer it didn’t happen but risk/reward … the short passes where he is under pressure close to our own end zone need to stop. Stafford appears to have a weakness here … maybe we just give the ball to Michel instead.
but an int inside your own 10 on a check down - cant have that.