Official Underwhelmed Thread

[ramsince62]

I'll gladly take being 0-4 in the preseason and making the POs over being 4-0 and finishing 2-14.

HUH?

 

[-X-]

HUH?

Spags was 4-0 in 2011's preseason and we finished 2-14.

 

[MrMotes]

True story. Whiners were up 23 zip with 5 to go vrs the Cowpies over the week end. Anyone think that's how a regular season game would play out? Idle down, fellas.

Tampa Bay dominating Cincinnati in the first half tonight. What does that tell us about the regular season?

 

[Mojo Ram]

Tampa Bay dominating Cincinnati in the first half tonight. What does that tell us about the regular season?

Hey i've got Tampa winning that shitty division.

 

[…..]

Tampa Bay dominating Cincinnati in the first half tonight. What does that tell us about the regular season?

Unrelated to the Rams looking like doodoo yesterday

 

[ramsince62]

Spags was 4-0 in 2011's preseason and we finished 2-14.

Thanks.

 

[ramsince62]

The first, second, and fourth preseason games are mainly for evaluating new players and getting them to gel with the veterans. If we still stink in the third game, where the starters will most likely play the whole first half, then some nervousness should begin to creep in. A team normally can't flick a switch and go from suckiness to great in time for the regular season. However...

NFL preseason records are known to either give a fanbase false hope or cause them to fall into needless despair. For example: the Rams went 4-0 in 2011 but then went on to lose 7 out of their first 8 games and ended up with a 2-14 record.

Spagnuolo was like a jockey who whipped his horse before it even got in the starting gate and then was exhausted once the race started and had nothing left. Fisher on the other hand seems like a jockey who coddles and kisses his horse, and is the last one to get out of the gate, usually ending the race somewhere in the middle.

Right now the Rams, Colts, Cardinals, Saints, Seahawks, and Cowboys are all 0-2, while the Redskins are 2-0. I doubt that any of these teams will end up at the end of this season where those preseason records would seem to indicate.

I think there's too much emphasis on the scores or record. To me, that's not the issue. Instead it's the play execution and individual performance. Personally, I could care less if they lost every game preseason. What I don't want to see is what we've all witnessed so far. As you pointed out, "A team normally can't flick a switch and go from suckiness to great in time for the regular season."

So unless Fisher is craftier Hannibal, there's probably reason for concern.

 

[ramsince62]

Oh gawd, hard to talk about the officiating. I really can't speculate on why we get all the devastating calls, and the calls for us, mean almost nothing. They even tried to help them with a call late in the game, but, at least, we were smart enough to decline it.

I can't disagree on the coaching issues, and for the first time, maybe unfairly, because it was a preseason game, I questioned Fisher as the right coach for this team. I do know that we destroyed some very good playoff teams, in the regular season, the last couple of years, and except for the striped help, would have whooped Dallas. To me, it is clear that this team, is the most talented, under his regime. I want to see that talent realized.

The problem is consistency or at least it was before this season.

 

[ramsince62]

As some have said... it might take a different coach.

Agreed. Fisher is a good assembler, I question his ability to finish.

 

[Mackeyser]

As Legatron pointed out the team started pretty fast the last few years. The offense put up decent points. The defense was what was so far behind. However they did go through some DC changes over the years. Blake Williams, Walton then Fisher takes over then Gregg Williams. Maybe some of the slow play was that players were still learning the defense each of those years. Now this year we have a new QB and a new OC. Maybe we should expect the offense to start slow.

Now I don't want you to think that I am dismissing the concept that the easier practice regimens could also contribute to slow starts. It may have. But this year I expect to see a difference with the defense. They are not learning a new system. If they do come out of the gate slow again then I would have to agree that Fisher takes it too easy on them.

But I remind myself that Pete Carroll is not all that fanatical about overworking his players either. He is more of a players coach with a laid back style. However Seattle looks good each pre-season. Maybe that is because they have played the same system for so many years?

Seattle plays a pretty simple system, especially on D and focuses on execution, so you shouldn't expect to see much difference between preseason and regular season at least on D. The offense has more twists, obviously, but it's still pretty simple; run first, play action and keep the pass rush guessing using plays designed to move the pocket. Again, its focus is execution.

Our D should look much better once the regular season starts because Gregg Williams doesn't like to show his D during the pre-season. His D is a pretty complicated D with disguised looks and lots of exotic blitzes and dawgs. Without that, it's a super vanilla D that's really easy to exploit. And that's what we're seeing. In that respect, I'm not worried.

What worries me is the D's current propensity to deliver a huge hit (and they have. The huge hit by TJ McDonald rattled my teeth), but not wrap up. It didn't take long for the opposing O to get it that there was a chance to extend the play by spinning off of the big hit. Several times it worked for big yards and there's no excuse for our D to not be fundamentally sound.

I'm NOT worried about our D not opening the playbook in pre-season. I AM worried about our D not executing basic defensive fundamentals...like tackling.

Will our O start slow? Probably. I expect that. If we play Fisherball and the D steps up, then we can still win early games while our O is getting in sync.

But we have to start tackling.

 

[Prime Time]

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/25/nfl-andy-dalton-brandon-browner-devin-funchess

What It Takes To Build a Super Bowl Contender
Brandon Browner explains what made his Seahawks and Patriots teams so special.
by Robert Klemko

I think Saints cornerback Brandon Browner was spot-on when he told me the three most important factors to forming a Super Bowl team. (He had been a member of two different Super Bowl-winning franchises—the Seahawks and Patriots—in two consecutive years.)

A. “Togetherness. You have to throw away the egos. The Seattle team had characters, with your Richard Shermans and whatnot. But those egos and characters have to come together as one on Sunday.”

B. “Smarts. You have to completely do away with dumb penalties and similar things that hurt the team. That starts in camp. You create the atmosphere early and rehearse everything in practice so when game time comes it comes naturally.”

C. “The quarterback. I’ve been blessed to play with some of the best in the game, and we have that here with Drew Brees.”

 

[MrMotes]

Seattle led the league in penalties the year they won it. New England was 3rd last season...

 

[Fatbot]

Seattle led the league in penalties the year they won it. New England was 3rd last season...

The key is always "dumb" penalties v. the "right kind" of penalties.

 

[MrMotes]

NE was penalized for over 1200 yards last season, Seattle over 1400 the year before. I'd love to see that broken down between smart and dumb penalties...

 

[Fatbot]

NE was penalized for over 1200 yards last season, Seattle over 1400 the year before. I'd love to see that broken down between smart and dumb penalties...

Here's a good discussion about how penalties matter statistically: http://regressing.deadspin.com/is-discipline-overrated-in-the-nfl-1496283805

 

[Rmfnlt]

Seattle led the league in penalties the year they won it. New England was 3rd last season...

Please give this a rest.

The nuance that is of utmost importance has been explained multiple times yet you seem to want to just repeat the same thing, as if quality of roster meas nothing.

It's becoming borderline trolling now.

 

[MrMotes]

Here's a good discussion about how penalties matter statistically: http://regressing.deadspin.com/is-discipline-overrated-in-the-nfl-1496283805

Thanks, good read:

If discipline is instrumental to success, we'd expect to see offensive penalty rate linked to points scored, defensive penalty rate linked to points allowed, and total penalty rate linked to point differential. Here's how the numbers looked for the 160 seasons in our dataset:

This data show no statistically significant correlation between penalty rates and offensive, defensive, or team performance.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Thanks, good read:

If discipline is instrumental to success, we'd expect to see offensive penalty rate linked to points scored, defensive penalty rate linked to points allowed, and total penalty rate linked to point differential. Here's how the numbers looked for the 160 seasons in our dataset:

This data show no statistically significant correlation between penalty rates and offensive, defensive, or team performance.

Oh, sweet Jesus...
"This doesn't imply that penalties aren't bad for teams"

 

[Fatbot]

Oh, sweet Jesus...
"This doesn't imply that penalties aren't bad for teams"

Correct. We know penalties are bad but there must be reasons why some winning teams can still win despite being penalized so much, sometimes the most in the NFL. Which gets back to my original reply -- there are dumb penalties and the right kind of penalties.

If a guy is flying around the field making plays and pushing the envelope of pass interference or defensive holding or illegal hits or whatever, that can result in more wins as long as his increased aggression results in making more good plays than costly penalties. It's like K in baseball -- if a guy K's more because he's swinging harder, there's a certain tipping point where it makes sense to K more if it means you hit more HR.

There's also the art to penalties -- knowing what refs are looking for in a certain situation (times when you know a ref will throw a flag for a certain thing, and when they would never), and not stupidly walking into a easy flag. Or how to make it look like your opponent should get a flag. Knowing when justice will be served and won't, such as the idiocy of flagging the guy who retaliates instead of the instigator (see Rams v. Panthers)! And most important knowing when you should risk borderline conduct if it's a game-deciding situation for your team.

Or maybe it's just some teams are so good they can overcome penalties. But I'd also suggest that some of those top penalty teams probably also lead the league in penalties not called because of the sheer volume of their illegal conduct -- the "cheat every play because they can't call so many penalties or else fans and the media get mad at refs controlling the game" theory. In short, I think teams like Seattle and NE still get away with murder despite being flagged a lot, while a team like the Rams doesn't cheat anywhere close to as much and yet gets flagged for every little hangnail, or sometimes even for fictional crap. But try to statistically prove that!

The moral is there's way more to penalties, it's not just if you commit too many you lose. It's not just "stop making penalties". It's about playing the game intelligent, and unfortunately the refs are a huge part of the game that you need to have a plan to deal with in an intelligent manner.

 

[Stranger]

This is essentially what I got out of TheHammer's posts. I know a lot of people thought he was being too negative, but sure seems to me that his TC observations were the most accurate given what we're seeing on the field.

Yup! This is what I posted back in August, and nothing much has changed, with the exception of a little blip against Seattle on opening day.