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

[thirteen28]

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.

That's a great point too, and one that has bugged me. I get the analytics thing, and it is a valuable tool. But it's not the only tool, and sometimes, as you imply, you have to toss the analytics thing and just go with the feel and flow of the game.

There is a place for numbers and a place for gut instinct. McVay would do well to learn to recognize the difference and the limitations of the analytics tools that he relies upon.

 

[dieterbrock]

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.

But I thought the topic was based off of the 49ers game? Because they gutted the Rams in the big game?
In any event, going by yards, (6th) or YPC (t5th) the Rams rush defense is then good enough rushing wise?

 

[dieterbrock]

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

I get that but comparing results from the last 10 years will make a more accurate position than from a team 20 years ago. The game has changed completely from 2000.

 

[Ellard80]

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.

maybe... i mean you are going to see more running the ball when your team is ahead.

There are tons of super bowl winners in the past 20 years with nearly no running game as well also.

 

[Merlin]

I get that but comparing results from the last 10 years will make a more accurate position than from a team 20 years ago. The game has changed completely from 2000.

Let's get down to it then. Do you agree that this offense is going to need to be balanced to make a run in the playoffs? Or do you think they can survive mainly throwing the ball.

 

[Ballhawk]

Another problem with that last play in regulation was that if they had ran on third and one instead of taking an empty set sack, they would have ran another half minute or more off of the clock. Could have changed the outcome of the game right there.

 

[Merlin]

Another problem with that last play in regulation was that if they had ran on third and one instead of taking an empty set sack, they would have ran another half minute or more off of the clock. Could have changed the outcome of the game right there.

That 3rd and 1 was painful. Especially because we got there by running it twice. So hand it to 25 and shove it up the 9ers asses.

Line was rolling. I don't like to play the second guessing game on play calls but that one was a bad call.

 

[thirteen28]

maybe... i mean you are going to see more running the ball when your team is ahead.

There are tons of super bowl winners in the past 20 years with nearly no running game as well also.

Yes, but in a number of those game I posted stats for, the games were very tight.

Kansas City was behind going into the 4th quarter, and didn't put the game away until very late (on a run play, btw).
The Rams and Patriots were within a FG of each other most of the way.
Philly and New England went back and forth until Philly got the late turnover.
The Patriots and the Falcons went into overtime.
The Giants were trailing the Patriots late in the 4th before they got the go-ahead score.

So it's not like those teams that won were running the ball to burn clock late in the game with a big lead. They had balance though, and none of them would have likely won had they not had it.

 

[Ellard80]

But I thought the topic was based off of the 49ers game? Because they gutted the Rams in the big game?
In any event, going by yards, (6th) or YPC (t5th) the Rams rush defense is then good enough rushing wise?

all im saying is that there are so many ways to win an nfl game.

I don't care if we pass 1000 times run 1000 times - give up 500 yards

whatever wins in the end.

 

[wolfdogg]

Next time let's try putting Ramsey on debo, Williams on ayuik and double kittle. Everyone knows who to cover in that scenario with zero blown assignments.

This will also help the dline get more pressure on the qb

 

[FarNorth]

I watched that 43 yard pass to Samuel over and over in slo-mo a couple of times. Jalen realized his mistake and took off in a dead sprint and laid out in full extension and barely missed tipping that pass away.Not sure what he started out doing in coverage but I figured he was probably trying to jump a short route and get a pick 6 and be the hero.

That's what it looked like to me. Ramsay has made lots of great plays but that was a mistake at the wrong time. Still, can't say for certain what happened without knowing the intended coverage.

 

[Merlin]

There's no question about it, Ramsey had a bad game.

 

[FarNorth]

I don't know if Sean can change in any meaningful way. He will never become a smashmouth football guy. He is wedded to the whiz bang passing offense and defending against similar offenses. The NFL goes through cycles when teams get unbalanced toward quick tempo passing offenses, and then the bully boy teams come in and smack them in the mouth, like what happens every time we play the Shanny 49ers.
Losing to them six times straight is almost more than I can bear...

I don't think we were doomed to defeat because SF, even without Trent Williams, plays great smash mouth football. And not because our D wasn't able to get enough stops on their runs, short passes and long TD drives. We still made some key plays. (I also thought the refs gave SF a lot of breaks on what should have been holding and personal foul calls.)

We still should have won. We lost the game because of our own mistakes.

Our first half until the last drive was exemplary. McVay was playing run first, control the ball football and Stafford converted third downs. Result: We put up points, dominated time of possession, and had the Niners on their heels.

We allowed SF back in the game emotionally as a result of McVay's inexplicable decision to throw from an empty backfield on third and a foot at the end of the half. McVay made a key error here and and a similar, though opposite, play calling error when he ran the ball on third and 7 at the end of regulation.

Rams needed to call high percentage plays in each case to maintain ball control and hopefully score but failed to do so. (Don't tell me we don't have a better play to run for half a yard or to throw for a seven yard third down. The Niners in fact have those plays). The result was giving up possession, points, and ultimately the game. McVay needs more discipline and maybe more mental preparation for play calls in critical situations like these.

Stafford played really well much of the game. Made some great, tough throws. But his interceptions gave away first possession and then a chance to win the game. It's not too much to ask of a 13 year veteran to make better decisions and not put the ball up for grabs.

Last were the coverage breakdowns in the game tying TD drive by SF. First Ramsay, then apparently Rapp, blew coverages. (Or so it appeared to me--can't be certain without knowing the intended coverage.) In any event the scheme broke down at a critical point.

Rams played well enough to win. We had our chances to put the game away but gave it away instead.

 

[FarNorth]

Once again. Bear with me here.

Shanny: has a run counter he tries to get to. Knows if he can get to 30 runs he is in the game.

McVay: drops the run like a used toy when it's not performing.

The entirety of the point was that McVay does not value the impact of what a run game does for an offense. He wants return. He wants yards.

Shanahan wants number of carries.

There is a fundamental difference.

McVay ran the ball a lot, for not many yards but to really good effect in the first half. I thought that version of the offense looked really good. So McVay actually can stick with the run.

There he didn't run it when he absolutely needed to (or at least to run play action), instead going empty to pass on third and a foot.

 

[FarNorth]

Like a division title? Sheesht.

The SeaHawks won the division for us. Meanwhile, unfortunately, imo this was a key strategic loss for the Rams.

We could have had Philly as a first round opponent. Now we have the Cards again. If we beat Arizona we now likely Green Bay on the road, or Dallas or Tampa Bay on the road. Then a second road game against a divisional winner. Unless we get the Niners again at some point instead.

This is a much tougher path to the Super Bowl.

 

[FarNorth]

That's a great point too, and one that has bugged me. I get the analytics thing, and it is a valuable tool. But it's not the only tool, and sometimes, as you imply, you have to toss the analytics thing and just go with the feel and flow of the game.

There is a place for numbers and a place for gut instinct. McVay would do well to learn to recognize the difference and the limitations of the analytics tools that he relies upon.

Not so sure that McVay is relying on analytics. I think he's making exotic, poor decisions, at least in play calling at critical points, which would seem to go against any sound analytical approach.

 

[BriansRams]

Note: What attracted me to this thread is that the title contained the words "I hope McVay learned..."

What I worry about is that McVay is not going to change, at all. His pass happy self is what we get. We have to deal with it. We have to deal with an empty backfield set on 3rd and 1 against a team with a ferocious pass rush.

For example, do you realize How Many Times I've seen posts here over the years like "I hope McVay learned from today" or "He's a young coach he'll learn how to make the best play calls and clock management calls...."

Well he's 5 years in now, and making the same specific mistakes each time they present themselves. I don't think he wants to "learn" another way to do it, a better way to do it, a "these odds are better" way to do it.

Great coach though. I like him. I prefer him over all past coaches since Vermeil.


PS- Oh, and my favorite posts (for a good chuckle and eye roll) are stuff like: "I trust McVay to get us ready for next week. He no doubt learned his lesson."

 

[thirteen28]

Not so sure that McVay is relying on analytics. I think he's making exotic, poor decisions, at least in play calling at critical points, which would seem to go against any sound analytical approach.

I'm not sure. I have heard a lot (e.g., on the 11 Personnel Podcast) that they really love the analytics in the Rams building. And while I definitely think it has merit, you also have to have a feel for the game and sometimes just go with gut instinct.

 

[majrleaged]

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!!!

When we dominated we even blized. We were agressive at the line of scrimage and the secondary. We didn't rush more than 4 on the game tying drive. Of course we backed off in the secondary the second half. So did McVay. I am sorry but I hate just trying to burn the other teams time outs instead of going for 1st down. To me you have got to go for the throat. A first down wins the game. For christ sake, how many time do you have to see teams drive with no time at half time to get a field goal to know Morris doesn't know how to close out a game. And if there was miscommunication that's on him as well. Not coaching his team well enough. One of the reasons we had the #1 d last year is everybody new their assignments. No mistakes. It was a problem the first half of the year but then it stopped and the secondary was tight. Morris should not be here next year unless he has finaly learned a lesson he hasn't learned in his entire career.

 

[majrleaged]

That 3rd and 1 was painful. Especially because we got there by running it twice. So hand it to 25 and shove it up the 9ers asses.

Line was rolling. I don't like to play the second guessing game on play calls but that one was a bad call.

I don't mind passing in that situation. The 9ers D is tough to run on. I just think you should line up showing run and fake a run since you just had a good run. At least it makes the D think for a second. To telegraph the fact you are not running so they can just pin their ears back on the line and faking a block by our receivers then running a route is not an option, is not showing much in the way of situational awareness. It's fucking stupid and has bit us in the ass all year. Do we really self scout?