If there is one lesson I hope McVay learned vs. the 49ers...

[Merlin]

At the same time, the defenses we faced in those playoff games absolutely HAD to respect the run, or Marshall Faulk would kill them.

And there are counterexamples as well - like the NFC Championship against the Eagles two years later. The passing game was a bit disjointed in the first half, so Martz came out in the second half and started out giving Faulk something like 7 or 8 straight carries, which really set the tone for the half. After that, the Eagles D was the unit that became disjointed, as they could never figure out whether to emphasize stopping the run or the pass and ended up stopping neither.

We also lost the last two Super Bowls we have been in. So the low rushing totals are not a surprise.

In that last Super Bowl vs the Patriots btw guess who had 94 yards rushing on 18 carries. Sony Michel. Feed him plz McVay.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

he said in his interview yesterday that basically he wont make that mistake again.

The way he played it is the way that most coaches play it - but yeah i dont think you will see that again after what happened.

Belichick hasn't played it that way in years. There are a lot of high scores this year. Arians is another. I think its best for the offense to be trying in those situations all year long so they are more prepared when its needed.

I hope McVay sticks to what he said. Its frustrating to watch.

 

[Merlin]

Yeah I understand your logic,

But didn't you post in the GDT thread that we should stop handing off to michel because it was a waste of a down?

Swore I saw you post that!

I recall saying we're gonna need our passing game to win. That was not to mean completely disregard balance. This line is not good enough to do that in their pass pro.

Our OL was up against it in that game. If you start calling pass pass pass they just get teed off on.

I do have complaints about the run game. They were getting trucked in zone, and I wanted them to adjust with some power in the middle and move that fucking NT out with Allen in duo with one of the OGs. But that's a whole other conversation.

Only adjustment McVay needs to make is not forgetting about the run. You won't get plus yards but the action of running it has other benefits. Also re: this next game he needs to make a conscious effort to ensure Michel gets carries. It's bad enough forgetting about the run but when you also have a new toy to play with that erodes those snaps with the power back even further.

 

[majrleaged]

This has been done to death in the Vent thread. Why do we need several moaning threads each week.

There is a lot to vent this week. Don't like, don't read.

 

[Loyal]

He doesn't have to become a smashmouth guy in total, but he can move a little in that direction until he is balanced. @Merlin and I were talking about Joe Gibbs and the Hogs yesterday, which is a great example of an offense that married a smashmouth running game that could steamroll over other teams with a dynamic passing game. In the Redskins best years during the Gibbs era, they would run over teams and wear them down and then hit them with a long pass to someone like Art Monk.

My other point is that coaches can change if they can put aside their stubborness and do some serious introspection. Remember John Robinson in the 80's? Started out with Dickerson, and the offense was pretty much student body left, student body right, run up the middle and occasionally throw a pass to keep the QB's arm warm. But realizing the limitations of the Rams offense at the time, he lobbied for and got his QB in Everett and then he hired a great offensive mind in Ernie Zampese and set him loose, and for a few years the Rams had one of the most exciting offenses in the league. And he did that without abandoning the running game because he had maulers up front that even a guy like Greg Bell could do well running behind.

I wouldn't want McVay to become a smashmouth guy at the expense of the passing game he envisions. But there's no reason those two things can't be put together.

Ok, Gibbs had an offensive line called the Hoggs, with John Riggins as an honorary member. McVay wants an Oline on the cheap, so he can get more skill players, which is very much unlike Joe Gibbs. For that matter, very much unlike John Robinson in the 80's...Allen has proven better than I thought he could be at Center, but is a liability against the best DT's, and McVay chose to not do a serious upgrade with Humphreys. I keep coming back to this because it emphasizes how little McVay values premium Olinemen, especially for a tiny WR. I think this is proving to be one of the worst decisions in the draft that McSnead has made.

Our Olinemen are doing the best they can, I know, but they can't stop the best Dlines that we'll meet in the playoffs. McVay keeps thinking that having an empty backfield on 3rd and one, is better than hammering with our version of John Riggins up the gut for the first down. He wants a flashy 4o yard pass play instead, which we all want to see. but is more rare against a team like the 49ers. Playoff football is more conservative and McVay continues to try to make his style of high flying offense work in January, which hasn't worked so well without relying on CJ Anderson in our Super Bowl run a couple of years ago.

 

[ScotsRam]

There is a lot to vent this week. Don't like, don't read.

Like a division title? Sheesht.

 

[dieterbrock]

I'm a little confused about the assertion that stopping the run in the SB is what champion teams do
Case in point,
2021 KC rushed for 107 in a loss
2020 49ers rushed for 141 in a loss
2018 Patriots rushed for 113 in a loss
2017 Atlanta rushed for 104 in a loss
2016 Carolina rushed for 118 in a loss
2015 Seattle rushed for 162 in a loss

 

[RamWoodie]

I'm one who thinks the problem was the Ram Defense let up once they had a 17-0 lead.

You're playing a team that has had your number for a while...so YOU NEVER LET UP!!!

It's just like the Rams having the Seahawks number lately...IT'S A MENTAL THING!!!

I couldn't believe it...after McVay went for that 3rd and one and Stafford got sacked...it was like the Rams forgot how to play.

It's over now...but NOT FORGOTTEN!!!! FORGET IT AND FOCUS ON MONDAY!!!

 

[thirteen28]

Ok, Gibbs had an offensive line called the Hoggs, with John Riggins as an honorary member. McVay wants an Oline on the cheap, so he can get more skill players, which is very much unlike Joe Gibbs. For that matter, very much unlike John Robinson in the 80's...Allen has proven better than I thought he could be at Center, but is a liability against the best DT's, and McVay chose to not do a serious upgrade with Humphreys. I keep coming back to this because it emphasizes how little McVay values premium Olinemen, especially for a tiny WR. I think this is proving to be one of the worst decisions in the draft that McSnead has made.

Our Olinemen are doing the best they can, I know, but they can't stop the best Dlines that we'll meet in the playoffs. McVay keeps thinking that having an empty backfield on 3rd and one, is better than hammering with our version of John Riggins up the gut for the first down. He wants a flashy 4o yard pass play instead, which we all want to see. but is more rare against a team like the 49ers. Playoff football is more conservative and McVay continues to try to make his style of high flying offense work in January, which hasn't worked so well without relying on CJ Anderson in our Super Bowl run a couple of years ago.

You may be wrong in your failure to recognize the abject superiority of submarines over the surface navy, but you are 100% right about everything in that post.

 

[Ellard80]

We also lost the last two Super Bowls we have been in. So the low rushing totals are not a surprise.

In that last Super Bowl vs the Patriots btw guess who had 94 yards rushing on 18 carries. Sony Michel. Feed him plz McVay.

low rushing totals have little correlation with winning super bowls.

If you look at modern super bowl history the winnings teams ability to run or not run the ball has hardly anything to do with winning.

mostly because super bowl teams typically have top 5 run defenses.

 

[Ellard80]

I'm a little confused about the assertion that stopping the run in the SB is what champion teams do
Case in point,
2021 KC rushed for 107 in a loss
2020 49ers rushed for 141 in a loss
2018 Patriots rushed for 113 in a loss
2017 Atlanta rushed for 104 in a loss
2016 Carolina rushed for 118 in a loss
2015 Seattle rushed for 162 in a loss

look at that past 10-15 superbowl winners.

you'll find that most of them are top 5 run defenses.

your post is still interesting though because it shows that running doesn't equate with victory in many cases.

which is part of my point in general.

 

[oldnotdead]

When your secondary is in disarray like it was during the game, it reflects poor coaching. Ultimately it comes back to Morris. When it's 3rd down and 4 and the secondary lines up 7 yds off that's a problem.

I'd like to see a raise of hands who will call Raheem Morris a coward to his face.

I'd have no problem doing that. It's clear he calls a game like he's scared. You simply can't have a DC who plays not to lose instead of playing to win. Why did he change what he opened the game with? When it mattered, why didn't he return to that style of lock down defense? I don't buy that he doesn't have the players. If he can't do it with this roster it can't be done.

I've been hyper-critical of Morris since TC when he said he didn't care about stats. That was a stupid thing to say and NO ONE held him accountable for it and now it's costing the Rams. Both Fangio and Staley play a heavy zone scheme, but they play it differently. They play it aggressively, while Morris uses an outmoded style of playing for a mistake. With Morris' style if the front 4 doesn't get there the pass is in all probability going to be complete.

The only DBs that routinely contest catches are the outside CBs. Everyone else, i.e. LB and safeties are literally standing there like statues waiting for the pass to be thrown before reacting. With Fangio and Staley, the minute a receiver enters the zone, the defender reacts to lock them down. IT'S HOW MORRIS PLAYS HIS SCHEME THAT IS AT THE HEART OF THE PROBLEM. IT'S BOTH ALIGNMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION. ALSO, MORRIS DOESN'T DO MUCH TO DISGUISE HIS BLITZES. OVERALL MORRIS MAKES HIS DEFENSE EASY TO BEAT. THAT IS WHY THIS #1 DEFENSE HAS DROPPED TO THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE RANKINGS.

 

[dieterbrock]

look at that past 10-15 superbowl winners.

you'll find that most of them are top 5 run defenses.

your post is still interesting though because it shows that running doesn't equate with victory in many cases.

which is part of my point in general.

I think we are closer to agreeing here than what seems to be a disagreement.
6 of last 7 rushed of over 100 yards, the exception? Yikes.... Rams 64 yards :-(
Going to a full 10 year lookback?
2014 Denver rushed for 27 yards against Seattle
2013 San Fran rushed for 182 yards against Baltimore
2012 Patriots rushed for 82 yards against NY
So 7 of 10 last 3 SB losers ra for over 100 yards, not exactly a compelling argument for the defense but dayum for sure an indictment of our running game!!

 

[AZRams]

cuz it was a needless and very tough loss
train

What he said...

 

[thirteen28]

I think we are closer to agreeing here than what seems to be a disagreement.
6 of last 7 rushed of over 100 yards, the exception? Yikes.... Rams 64 yards :-(
Going to a full 10 year lookback?
2014 Denver rushed for 27 yards against Seattle
2013 San Fran rushed for 182 yards against Baltimore
2012 Patriots rushed for 82 yards against NY
So 7 of 10 last 3 SB losers ra for over 100 yards, not exactly a compelling argument for the defense but dayum for sure an indictment of our running game!!

But there is the flip side to the argument as well.

Tampa Bay ran for 145 in the last Super Bowl and won.
Kansas City ran for 129 in against the 49ers, and won.
New England ran for 154 against the Rams, and won.
Philly ran for 164 against the Patriots, and won.
New England ran for 104 against the Falcons, and won.
Seattle ran for 137 against the Broncos, and won.
NY Giants ran for 114 vs. the Patriots, and won.

Of the last 10 Super Bowls, the outliers, with respect to breaking 100 yards are:

New England failed to get 100 (just 57) against Seattle but won.
Denver failed to get 100 against Carolina (only 90, but on 28 carries) and won.
Baltimore ran for only 93 (but on 35 carries) and won.

So 7 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners ran for over 100 yards in the Super Bowl.

 

[dieterbrock]

But there is the flip side to the argument as well.

Tampa Bay ran for 145 in the last Super Bowl and won.
Kansas City ran for 129 in against the 49ers, and won.
New England ran for 154 against the Rams, and won.
Philly ran for 164 against the Patriots, and won.
New England ran for 104 against the Falcons, and won.
Seattle ran for 137 against the Broncos, and won.
NY Giants ran for 114 vs. the Patriots, and won.

Of the last 10 Super Bowls, the outliers, with respect to breaking 100 yards are:

New England failed to get 100 (just 57) against Seattle but won.
Denver failed to get 100 against Carolina (only 90, but on 28 carries) and won.
Baltimore ran for only 93 (but on 35 carries) and won.

So 7 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners ran for over 100 yards in the Super Bowl.

How is that a flip side? It only supports the argument opposing the idea that championship teams stop running games.

 

[Ellard80]

How is that a flip side? It only supports the argument opposing the idea that championship teams stop running games.

in some of those superbowls you posted the rushing totals given up were not miniscule.

but if you look at the last 10 years.... most superbowl winning teams have top 5 run defenses all year.

Tampa Bay was #1 last year..... philly was #1 when they beat New England.

New England had 2-3 #1 defenses against the run in their wins.

I'm just saying in general stopping the run appears more important than your ability to run it yourself in the post season.

 

[thirteen28]

How is that a flip side? It only supports the argument opposing the idea that championship teams stop running games.

It's the flip side of the argument that running the ball doesn't equate to winning the Super Bowl (not that you were making the argument, but @Ellard80 has opined that running is overrated on this board). In 7 of the last 10 , it absolutely did, and even in 2 of the 3 outliers, while the rushing totals didn't break 100, the teams didn't give up on the run (28 attempts by the Broncos against Carolina; 35 by the Ravens against the 49ers, thereby keeping those defenses honest). So if you add those two in, you could say 9 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners made enough of a commitment to the run to provide a reasonable amount of balance to the offense.

Or more succinctly, running the ball is not overrated.

 

[Jacobarch]

...it is this defense can not be trusted with a one score lead against a good offense. It is one thing for the defense to look good against mediocre teams or with two score leads. It is another to be on the field being ahead by one score late in the game against a good offense.

In hindsight on their last possession of regulation with the seven point lead the should have tried to get a first down.

I don't think mcVay will learn from this. As he's a highly analytical guy and coach he's always gonna go with the numbers rather than feeling the flow of the game. It's why he loved Staley so much. But one thing he needs to improve on is a feel for the game and where his team is in the moment.

I called it out on the "Raheem Morris" thread. I said, if the Rams keep on switching to that soft zone shell Everytime they get a lead it will ultimately bite them in the ass when it comes to playoff football. And we saw it unfold during the 9ers game. Point is you can get away with that crap against bad to mediocre teams, but not against a playoff caliber team that's a division rival to boot.

I honestly think it's more of a mcVay problem than a Morris problem. mcVay is the HC and the buck stops with him and this has been his tell since he's become the head coach for the Rams. We've seen it with every single DC since his inception.

 

[Merlin]

Ok, Gibbs had an offensive line called the Hoggs, with John Riggins as an honorary member. McVay wants an Oline on the cheap, so he can get more skill players, which is very much unlike Joe Gibbs. For that matter, very much unlike John Robinson in the 80's...Allen has proven better than I thought he could be at Center, but is a liability against the best DT's, and McVay chose to not do a serious upgrade with Humphreys. I keep coming back to this because it emphasizes how little McVay values premium Olinemen, especially for a tiny WR. I think this is proving to be one of the worst decisions in the draft that McSnead has made.

Our Olinemen are doing the best they can, I know, but they can't stop the best Dlines that we'll meet in the playoffs. McVay keeps thinking that having an empty backfield on 3rd and one, is better than hammering with our version of John Riggins up the gut for the first down. He wants a flashy 4o yard pass play instead, which we all want to see. but is more rare against a team like the 49ers. Playoff football is more conservative and McVay continues to try to make his style of high flying offense work in January, which hasn't worked so well without relying on CJ Anderson in our Super Bowl run a couple of years ago.

You make good points. I will just observe that we have an OL that probably favors power more than zone. Rams have run both this year, but one thing for sure is when we face a front like that of SF moving our OL sideways to string them out results in penetration across the front. So this is why I kept saying we needed a power run approach and go right at them. That is how you run vs that front.

Going forward it is important to marry the talent and scheme. That 6-1 BS started vs our outside zone dependency. OL have been changed out. The front is different now, and probably better served with power than zone, at least for the playoffs.

I think we are closer to agreeing here than what seems to be a disagreement.
6 of last 7 rushed of over 100 yards, the exception? Yikes.... Rams 64 yards :-(
Going to a full 10 year lookback?
2014 Denver rushed for 27 yards against Seattle
2013 San Fran rushed for 182 yards against Baltimore
2012 Patriots rushed for 82 yards against NY
So 7 of 10 last 3 SB losers ra for over 100 yards, not exactly a compelling argument for the defense but dayum for sure an indictment of our running game!!

Every team is built differently. The great coaches adjust their schemes to what they do well as the season gives them reality checks.

With the GSoT that line was so good at pass pro and the receivers were so good at winning matchups 4 deep that they could live and die with the passing game far more efficiently than this offense can. This offense has a QB who is a gunslinger, an OL that springs leaks if you get pass happy, and a receiver corps that only has two plus matchups in the passing game. And one of those matchups runs the wrong route some of the time as he is learning the offense.

To my eye at least the run game is required to get the most from this OL. And strangely enough, when that run game is going and especially when it's Michel hammering into the secondary like a pinball, this offense is at its most dangerous. So for our chances this year we definitely need to not only ground the offense by making sure balance is there, but we also need to ensure Michel is getting focused carries. He deserves them. The guy is the reason this team reanimated after that tough stretch of games.