Raheem to ATL

[WestCoastRam]

So I disagreed with those plays - it's just my opinion and this board is for opinions not facts

Wait... so what happens if someone shares a fact?

Take 'em out to the shed?

 

[Kupped]

Dude - do you really think you are understanding what I am trying to say,

I had one critique of Morris and that was how he played his 3rd and 10 to 20.

I have said many times I liked how he did with his defense this year.

So I disagreed with those plays - it's just my opinion and this board is for opinions not facts no matter how much you want to spout statistics.

Holy shit.

Literally the biggest challenge facing the country today is this kind of mindset.

Alternate reality.

 

[OnceARam]

I really hope McVay and Morris had a gentleman's agreement that he could take 1 coach with him, and not pilfer any more than that

With the demand for OC with McVay pedigree, I imagine he would have been pilfered regardless.

 

[Tano]

Yes---and they did well, about 35% rate --- which is good. So yes, took great pains to make sure you got whatever parameters you wanted in every case ... you decided and I provided.



yes, you did. And yet for some reason, the only year you analyzed was this year because you said you found 10 bad games -- "bad" by your definition,


Very well aware of that.

Again it is only my humble opinion that I disliked his 3rd and 10 to 20 this year.

I am not talking about other years. Completely not in the scope of my discussion.

I am only talking about this year. Stop trying to put other years into the discussion.

And having seen a success rate of over 50% in over half the games even if it was 1 out of 2 tries is all the parameter I need to know that I had a right to dislike it.

It may be better overall than a lot of teams but seeing it occur in over half the games makes me not like it. Again just a preference of mine. To be specific - we are not talking about other teams. We are talking about the Rams and the Rams alone.

In the Lions game for example, they had one 3rd and 15 play in the first half. Sure enough they got a first down. But when it was 3rd and 7, I was highly confident that the Rams were going to stop them. And they did. I told my wife before each play what I thought would happen and it did. In the second half there were a couple of 3rd downs with fewer than 10 yards to go and the Rams stopped them. Morris did a good job on those downs. But in my opinion and my opinion only, he did a less than average job on 3rd and 10 to 20 even if the stats say otherwise.

If I was a fan of other teams and if they are worse per your stats, I would probably be ticked at the defensive coordinator giving up so many first downs on 3rd and 10 to 20 to go.

 

[Tano]

Wait... so what happens if someone shares a fact?

Take 'em out to the shed?

It was late and I said it wrong.

I meant to say

This board is also for opinions and not just facts.

My bad.

 

[Tano]

And if you still want to talk about 2022, I did not like Morris decision to put in a soft zone coverage with the players we had.

As the stats say last year, opponents QBs were able to get the ball out in 2.3 seconds in the first 7 games or so due to the soft zone he played.

.5 seconds faster than the next fastest time.

No way was Donald or Floyd going to get to the QB in that time unless they were untouched.

But I have come to the realization that since Morris went away from a soft zone coverage this year without experienced players that he had last year that Morris must not have been able to implement a more aggressive defense due to not having the proper coaches to implement it properly.

And you can't say that due to the offense being poor last year that they had to implement it.

The offense still had the majority of starters still playing in the first 6 games when it went all downhill after that with injuries.

 

[shovelpass]

I'm just saying 50% is a bad percentage imho. Not saying other teams are better or worse.

Right, but you have to be able to compare it. If it turns out that the Rams are still above average under your specific parameters and you consider it "bad", there's either flaws in your methodology and/or your expectations are too high.

 

[Tano]

Right, but you have to be able to compare it. If it turns out that the Rams are still above average under your specific parameters and you consider it "bad", there's either flaws in your methodology and/or your expectations are too high.

Maybe my expectations are too high. That I will not argue against.

But again the only thing is that I would have been a bit more aggressive on 3rd and 10 to 20. But that's just me. My opinion only. And you know what they say about opinions...

If you disagree - well you can have your opinion and I respect that. Just respect mine as well even as flawed as you think it might be.

Edit - and then we can drink our beers together and toast the Rams.

 

[JimY53]

Again it is only my humble opinion that I disliked his 3rd and 10 to 20 this year.

I am not talking about other years. Completely not in the scope of my discussion.

I am only talking about this year. Stop trying to put other years into the discussion.

I get that. You've limited the discussion in that way, but my point is that is not a fair way to judge, one not shared so as to use it as a fair standard. In other words, you've set up unreasonable parameters. One can make $200,000 this year and they could call it a failure because they've defined success as $300,000. But the the national average for their vocation based on the same number of hours and all else similar is $185, 000. His opinion could be that $200,000 is not up to snuff but is it?

And having seen a success rate of over 50% in over half the games even if it was 1 out of 2 tries is all the parameter I need to know that I had a right to dislike it.

Right? Sure you have the right to dislike anything you want. In this case, you've set up parameters that are esoteric and in your one world you can do that. It's called delusion.

It may be better overall than a lot of teams but seeing it occur in over half the games makes me not like it. Again just a preference of mine. To be specific - we are not talking about other teams. We are talking about the Rams and the Rams alone.

Yes, you can set up whatever parameters you want in your head, but you choose to post your preference on a Rams chat board and do so with a history of complaining about Morris. And is such your assumptions, and parameters are open to scrutiny. And if fair scrutiny that is based up by facts and the fair application of facts it should prove to you that your opinion would not be shared by people just as familiar on the subject as you are. So their opinion is as valid as yours and they differ but one has objective standards and yours does not. You put it outthere so others are free to discredit it.

In the Lions game for example, they had one 3rd and 15 play in the first half. Sure enough they got a first down. But when it was 3rd and 7, I was highly confident that the Rams were going to stop them. And they did. I told my wife before each play what I thought would happen and it did. In the second half there were a couple of 3rd downs with fewer than 10 yards to go and the Rams stopped them. Morris did a good job on those downs.

What is your watched the film and the way those 3rd and longs were played the exact same way? Same blitz package --- front, number of blitzers and coverage so similar so as we really couldn't tell the difference?

But in my opinion and my opinion only, he did a less than average job on 3rd and 10 to 20 even if the stats say otherwise.

As I said you are welcome to your opinion but your opinion is not backed by anything - unless you refine the meaning of 'average' as being something other than the middle of something. Not high, not low. In this case, Rams are better than average, high even in the situation you've defined.

If I was a fan of other teams and if they are worse per your stats, I would probably be ticked at the defensive coordinator giving up so many first downs on 3rd and 10 to 20 to go.

I am sure that is right. But I have to ask you, why are you so hard on Raheem that caused you to be so frustrated? The nut of this whole thing is you are upset because of how deep Morris plays his CBs. You, and many, theorized that deep CBs = excessive failure on 3rd and long, no?

So, I think the soft zone is what you are upset about. If Rams had a DC that blitzed more (as you sau you want) but had a worse failure rate than Raheem what would your reaction be? Would it be like this: Ah darn, he keeps failing on 3rd and long, he's blitzing and playing tight CBs --- why doesn't he play soft? Look at the other teams and they are successful on 3rd on long and they play soft. Our DC should not blitz so much and put so much pressure on our CBs.

My take is that the frustration is not performances based, it a perception of failure when it does not exist (using this year rd and 10 to 20) and the belief that the way Morris plays those situations is the culprit.

Isn't that what is really going on? It's about Morris and what the defense looks like and not about objective results?

 

[Tano]

I get that. You've limited the discussion in that way, but my point is that is not a fair way to judge, one not shared so as to use it as a fair standard. In other words, you've set up unreasonable parameters. One can make $200,000 this year and they could call it a failure because they've defined success as $300,000. But the the national average for their vocation based on the same number of hours and all else similar is $185, 000. His opinion could be that $200,000 is not up to snuff but is it?


Right? Sure you have the right to dislike anything you want. In this case, you've set up parameters that are esoteric and in your one world you can do that. It's called delusion.


Yes, you can set up whatever parameters you want in your head, but you choose to post your preference on a Rams chat board and do so with a history of complaining about Morris. And is such your assumptions, and parameters are open to scrutiny. And if fair scrutiny that is based up by facts and the fair application of facts it should prove to you that your opinion would not be shared by people just as familiar on the subject as you are. So their opinion is as valid as yours and they differ but one has objective standards and yours does not. You put it outthere so others are free to discredit it.



What is your watched the film and the way those 3rd and longs were played the exact same way? Same blitz package --- front, number of blitzers and coverage so similar so as we really couldn't tell the difference?



As I said you are welcome to your opinion but your opinion is not backed by anything - unless you refine the meaning of 'average' as being something other than the middle of something. Not high, not low. In this case, Rams are better than average, high even in the situation you've defined.



I am sure that is right. But I have to ask you, why are you so hard on Raheem that caused you to be so frustrated? The nut of this whole thing is you are upset because of how deep Morris plays his CBs. You, and many, theorized that deep CBs = excessive failure on 3rd and long, no?

So, I think the soft zone is what you are upset about. If Rams had a DC that blitzed more (as you sau you want) but had a worse failure rate than Raheem what would your reaction be? Would it be like this: Ah darn, he keeps failing on 3rd and long, he's blitzing and playing tight CBs --- why doesn't he play soft? Look at the other teams and they are successful on 3rd on long and they play soft. Our DC should not blitz so much and put so much pressure on our CBs.

My take is that the frustration is not performances based, it a perception of failure when it does not exist (using this year rd and 10 to 20) and the belief that the way Morris plays those situations is the culprit.

Isn't that what is really going on? It's about Morris and what the defense looks like and not about objective results?

No - you still don't understand what I am trying to say

This is a lost cause.

 

[JimY53]

due to the soft zone he played.

I wish I had seen this before I replied to your next response. I predicted this was the issue all along and didn't see this until a few minutes later -- right now. It's always been about how the defense looked, not actual results -- results based on fair parameters.

That is how I have seen this Morris debate all along and now I have confirmation in your case.

But I have come to the realization that since Morris went away from a soft zone coverage this year without experienced players that he had last year that Morris must not have been able to implement a more aggressive defense due to not having the proper coaches to implement it properly.

And you can't say that due to the offense being poor last year that they had to implement it.

Jourdan wrote this last year. Cody Alexander covered it as well. Posters here made that same case. And it is great that you now realize it.

Others (not you) said the reason was because Morris was stupid, retarded, and a coward.

The offense still had the majority of starters still playing in the first 6 games when it went all downhill after that with injuries.

I think that is a fair assessment of the situation.

 

[JimY53]

This is a lost cause.

We agree.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

And if you still want to talk about 2022, I did not like Morris decision to put in a soft zone coverage with the players we had.

As the stats say last year, opponents QBs were able to get the ball out in 2.3 seconds in the first 7 games or so due to the soft zone he played.

.5 seconds faster than the next fastest time.

No way was Donald or Floyd going to get to the QB in that time unless they were untouched.

But I have come to the realization that since Morris went away from a soft zone coverage this year without experienced players that he had last year that Morris must not have been able to implement a more aggressive defense due to not having the proper coaches to implement it properly.

And you can't say that due to the offense being poor last year that they had to implement it.

The offense still had the majority of starters still playing in the first 6 games when it went all downhill after that with injuries.

There was an article in the Athletic saying that Raheem expressed his desire to play a more aggressive defense, before the season.

I think it will be telling as to what he prefers after a few seasons in Atlanta.

 

[Tano]

I wish I had seen this before I replied to your next response. I predicted this was the issue all along and didn't see this until a few minutes later -- right now. It's always been about how the defense looked, not actual results -- results based on fair parameters.

That is how I have seen this Morris debate all along and now I have confirmation in your case.


Jourdan wrote this last year. Cody Alexander covered it as well. Posters here made that same case. And it is great that you now realize it.

Others (not you) said the reason was because Morris was stupid, retarded, and a coward.

I think that is a fair assessment of the situation.

This is what I said to Shovelpass

Maybe my expectations are too high. That I will not argue against.

But again the only thing is that I would have been a bit more aggressive on 3rd and 10 to 20. But that's just me. My opinion only. And you know what they say about opinions...

If you disagree - well you can have your opinion and I respect that. Just respect mine as well even as flawed as you think it might be.

Edit - and then we can drink our beers together and toast the Rams.

 

[JimY53]

This is what I said to Shovelpass

Maybe my expectations are too high. That I will not argue against.

But again the only thing is that I would have been a bit more aggressive on 3rd and 10 to 20. But that's just me. My opinion only. And you know what they say about opinions...

If you disagree - well you can have your opinion and I respect that. Just respect mine as well even as flawed as you think it might be.

Edit - and then we can drink our beers together and toast the Rams.

Agree with all. I wish all debates about the defense could go that way. Tough, spirited, both sides passionate on the subject, both sides presented, people can judge the way they want to but in the end each comes to respect the poster more than he did in the beginning so it's not just an "agree to disagree".

It's an "agree to disagree" when all rabbit holes have been explored and they see the have finally come to an end.

 

[Tano]

Agree with all. I wish all debates about the defense could go that way. Tough, spirited, both sides passionate on the subject, both sides presented, people can judge the way they want to but in the end each comes to respect the poster more than he did in the beginning so it's not just an "agree to disagree".

It's an "agree to disagree" when all rabbit holes have been explored and they see the have finally come to an end.

That is all I am asking.

 

[Selassie I]

The best part of Raheem getting the ATL job is knowing that Belicheat knows he couldn't beat out Raheem Morris to get this job that he so obviously wanted.

Blank... Nah, Raheem is a much better choice than Belicheat.

Haaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa

 

[Kupped]

One thing making me laugh…

I forget who here… but someone was saying the Rams lost in the first half to the lions because they gave up 21.

Lol

 

[Psycho_X]

View: https://x.com/putemupcdukes/status/1752084399015760121?s=20

 

[Ram Ts]

Ok losing Lake hurts actually. That’s a bummer. The one material loss so far.