Should Fisher start Cunningham?

[OldSchool]

That was last year, m'man. This year the Rams rank 30th in rushing yards per game, 30th in rushing yards per attempt, 30th in 10+ yard rushes (big plays), and 30th in rushing TDs, despite the fact that 45% of their offensive plays are rushing plays (7th highest average in the league).

We're also 30th in passying YPG, we have 4 passing TD's last in the league is 3 teams tied with 3, 32nd in completion percentage and last in 1st downs but we shouldn't make a change at QB. Interesting that the running game isn't producing yet we should bench the guy who's arguably our most talented player on offense to give our QB a jump start. But we shouldn't bench our QB who would be a backup on most teams to give our best player a boost.

 

[-X-]

We're also 30th in passying YPG, we have 4 passing TD's last in the league is 3 teams tied with 3, 32nd in completion percentage and last in 1st downs but we shouldn't make a change at QB. Interesting that the running game isn't producing yet we should bench the guy who's arguably our most talented player on offense to give our QB a jump start. But we shouldn't bench our QB who would be a backup on most teams to give our best player a boost.

Are you suggesting that I'm of the opinion we shouldn't make a change at QB? Because I never said that. If Goff is ready, then by all means, put him in. Have you seen Goff play, and this somehow gives you the ability to make that determination? Because I've seen Cunningham play, and I think he can benefit from a larger role. I mean, don't get me wrong, it would be great if EVERY THREAD could eventually result in a Keenum V Goff thread, but this isn't the time or the place. If you don't agree that letting Cunningham start a game (at least the first drive) would yield any kind of benefit whatsoever, then cool. You don't believe it would help. Care to weigh in on what *would* improve the run game?

 

[OldSchool]

Are you suggesting that I'm of the opinion we shouldn't make a change at QB? Because I never said that. If Goff is ready, then by all means, put him in. Have you seen Goff play, and this somehow gives you the ability to make that determination? Because I've seen Cunningham play, and I think he can benefit from a larger role. I mean, don't get me wrong, it would be great if EVERY THREAD could eventually result in a Keenum V Goff thread, but this isn't the time or the place. If you don't agree that letting Cunningham start a game (at least the first drive) would yield any kind of benefit whatsoever, then cool. You don't believe it would help. Care to weigh in on what *would* improve the run game?

So Benny Cunningham who teams don't fear would provide a boost to the running game that Gurley can't provide? I'm confused here you want to bench our best offensive player a running back because that would provide a spark in the running game. Most people around here and the so called sports media experts that includes former players and coaches think that we need to have a passing game that makes the opposing team respect it to the point they stop putting 7 or 8 in the box. If downgrading our talent at RB accomplishes that then sure I'm all for it. I personally think that's counterproductive but that's just my opinion.

As for the QB position I shouldn't have said anything we've discussed this ad nauseam and gotten nowhere on it so it's pointless to continue it in yet another thread sorry.

 

[-X-]

So Benny Cunningham who teams don't fear would provide a boost to the running game that Gurley can't provide? I'm confused here you want to bench our best offensive player a running back because that would provide a spark in the running game. Most people around here and the so called sports media experts that includes former players and coaches think that we need to have a passing game that makes the opposing team respect it to the point they stop putting 7 or 8 in the box. If downgrading our talent at RB accomplishes that then sure I'm all for it. I personally think that's counterproductive but that's just my opinion.

As for the QB position I shouldn't have said anything we've discussed this ad nauseam and gotten nowhere on it so it's pointless to continue it in yet another thread sorry.

I'm not suggesting we bench Gurley though. When I pose the question, "Should Fisher start Cunningham", that really only means, should he start him next week (if Gurley still can't get it going against the Bills). You can still rotate Gurley in the game. Hell, you can split the carries evenly for all I care. See, let me clarify. Wondering if the run game can benefit by giving Cunningham a larger role doesn't automatically mean I think Gurley sucks. I already explained that the run game design would have to change for Cunningham, because they're not the same kind of runner. So if you *have to* design a different run game, maybe things will change and it would become a learning experience for Boras and Groh. I also posted that Fisher once started Richardson over Jackson one game just to see if a speedier back would open things up for the offense. He did that twice, actually. So I really didn't come at this like a troll jerkoff who only wants to elicit everyone's wrath by insulting the GOD of all RBs. It was a genuine question meant to generate a little discussion. No more, no less.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Pitch the effing ball, pull, stunt just don't hand him the ball and send him into the pile

 

[OldSchool]

I'm not suggesting we bench Gurley though. When I pose the question, "Should Fisher start Cunningham", that really only means, should he start him next week (if Gurley still can't get it going against the Bills). You can still rotate Gurley in the game. Hell, you can split the carries evenly for all I care. See, let me clarify. Wondering if the run game can benefit by giving Cunningham a larger role doesn't automatically mean I think Gurley sucks. I already explained that the run game design would have to change for Cunningham, because they're not the same kind of runner. So if you *have to* design a different run game, maybe things will change and it would become a learning experience for Boras and Groh. I also posted that Fisher once started Richardson over Jackson one game just to see if a speedier back would open things up for the offense. He did that twice, actually. So I really didn't come at this like a troll jerkoff who only wants to elicit everyone's wrath by insulting the GOD of all RBs. It was a genuine question meant to generate a little discussion. No more, no less.

Never realized I claimed he was a GOD of running backs I merely said he was better than Benny. Absolutely we should get Benny more carries it'll keep Gurley fresh during the game and over the long 16 game season which he still hasn't played a full season. But getting more carries is again a problem. Where are they going to come from? We're last in the NFL in 1st downs, we're 29th in offensive plays from scrimmage. It's the same problem we had in preseason that Fisher acknowledged. We're not good offensively there wasn't enough snaps to get people more PT. Last week we had 55 offensive plays while Baltimore had the most with 80. I'm not sure Benny getting carries instead of Gurley accomplishes what you're proposing but maybe you're the OC the Rams have needed all these year. The rushing game is as bad as the passing game.

The question in my mind comes down to which facet of the game helps improve the other more. Will Gurley, Benny, Malcom or anybody else running for a better average improve the passing game? Or will a better passing attack make it better for the backs to run? So if we start running better what's the defenses reaction? Putting more guys in the box to stop the run? Well not sure they can get any more up in there but that's already happening and it hasn't helped our passing game. So if we start having a better passing attack what is the defenses reaction? My guess is they put less in the box and devote more Safeties and Linebackers to stopping the passing attack. That seems to me to open up the run game more. I could be and likely am wrong but it seems to me like improving the running game isn't going to help the passing game but the opposite seems true. Maybe some trickeration (Gruden or Madden trademark?) of some kind might help like maybe a half back option? Can Benny throw as well as Hekker? Who knows I certainly don't that's why my job title is Market Development Manager and not Offensive Coordinator.

As for the discussion I thought that's what we were doing. Just because I disagree with what you proposed, or the hypothetical you started a topic about, doesn't mean I won't discuss it if that were true I never would have responded.

 

[-X-]

The question in my mind comes down to which facet of the game helps improve the other more. Will Gurley, Benny, Malcom or anybody else running for a better average improve the passing game? Or will a better passing attack make it better for the backs to run? So if we start running better what's the defenses reaction? Putting more guys in the box to stop the run? Well not sure they can get any more up in there but that's already happening and it hasn't helped our passing game. So if we start having a better passing attack what is the defenses reaction? My guess is they put less in the box and devote more Safeties and Linebackers to stopping the passing attack. That seems to me to open up the run game more. I could be and likely am wrong but it seems to me like improving the running game isn't going to help the passing game but the opposite seems true. Maybe some trickeration (Gruden or Madden trademark?) of some kind might help like maybe a half back option? Can Benny throw as well as Hekker? Who knows I certainly don't that's why my job title is Market Development Manager and not Offensive Coordinator.

Well, I think we all agree that both things can work to help the other. A good running game will open up things in the passing game, and a good passing game will open up things in the run game. That said, I don't agree with the premise proposed by many that the passing game (right now) is negatively impacting the run game. Last year Gurley had some pretty good single-game totals with some fairly average QB play. QB play that didn't back off defenses, in other words. He just found a way to pick up a couple of big runs during the course of a game. Would a much better passing game help him out? I would have to say yes. Are we one QB away from making that happen? I really don't know the answer to that. I've seen some bad QB play over the years - as I'm sure you have as well - and what I've seen the past few weeks doesn't meet that criteria. Looks halfway decent to me.

You are right that we need a little trickeration if we don't change anything else in the way of personnel. Whatever Cignetti was doing with the run game last year is missing now. Even Schottenheimer designed some decent run plays in the past. He used a helluva lot more motion, I know that much. So if Gurley isn't getting past that first wave and into the secondary, and we're not going to try a different RB to see if it results in anything better, then it's gonna have to fall on the shoulders of Boras to design something that even remotely resembles what we were able to do last year in the run game. Because, again, the personnel hasn't otherwise changed all that much from last year to this year.

 

[shaunpinney]

I'd vouch for this tbh - what I don't want them to do is run Gurley into the ground early by doing crash-ball runs into defenders, maybe use Cunningham (AND Brown) to slug it out with the defence for the first half, then rotate Gurley in with the hope that defenders start to tire, he'll be much fresher and will be more of a threat in the game.

Also, does anyone know what their (Cunningham & Gurley) stats are like playing on turf? Might be worth while trying it out in London...

 

[tempests]

Have to ride out the valleys with young players.

I don't expect Gurley to average 2.6 YPC the whole season.

 

[shovelpass]

I mean, don't get me wrong, it would be great if EVERY THREAD could eventually result in a Keenum V Goff thread

No! Please.

 

[RamWoodie]

I don't think you start BC. This thing is a matter of Gurley being patient and letting the OLine get consistent.

In my thinking you don't mess with things right now...you tweak a little though. I like the idea of Fisher saying they will use Gurley in the pass game. It should help him get going better.

I just don't see the need to start BC yet. He's there if you need him...and he's gonna get touches when Gurley gets a breather.

HOLD THE COURSE FOR NOW!

 

[Athos]

Through 4 games, Todd looks like a JAG. Those are the facts. Whether it's a mix of him, the o-line, or one or the other, he's looked pretty bad. I mean, a stacked box isn't going to clog every hole every time. I haven't watched the Rams closet enough to see how bad the scheme and run blocking has been, but this is virtually the same unit as last year.

Todd is the least effective back in the league right now. With the 6th most touches. I'm sorry, but it can't just be all on the line and stacked boxes.

The Hags o-line is a porous PS but Michael is averaging 4.6/touch. I guess you could account for Wilsons legs and superior passing threat, but it's still a shitty unit.

You should make several changes and yea, some involve increasing reps to other backs. If they start producing with better success, you have a problem. If not, your scheme sucks balls and once again you're looking at incompetent offensive minds which is par for the course.

 

[Alaskan Ram]

That was last year, m'man. This year the Rams rank 30th in rushing yards per game, 30th in rushing yards per attempt, 30th in 10+ yard rushes (big plays), and 30th in rushing TDs, despite the fact that 45% of their offensive plays are rushing plays (7th highest average in the league).

I know it was last year bruddah.
That was MY POINT.
Last year, Week 5, with an inept passing game and QB, we were enjoying "THERE GOES GURLEY!!!! 150 yards rushing, yet, the team got spanked on the score board.

And I can see with my eyes since 2nd half of last year that teams have decided to STOP Gurley at all cost and make the Ram's inept passing game beat them.

Do you know what's happened the last 4 games of last year, and the first 4 games of this year? Team's have been successful in the "all-in" approach to stopping Gurley. However, Keenum and the Rams are 6-8 in those games.

Fast foward to the quarter Pole of 2016, the rams are on pace for a 12-4 record.

I love Benny. There's 31 other teams that probably wouldn't mind having our 1,2 punch running back combo.

I agree blending them in more can lead to better rushing production.
But only if/when Defenses back the fuck off the line and go back to playing us honest.

Until then, The last 8 games with our Rushing attack being near dead last has correlated to a .750 winning %.
That's a whole lot fucking better than the .250% shit we've endured on game days.

We are beating teams over the top BECAUSE of Gurley being back there.

If I were to make any changes, it might be checking out of every run with Gurley in the back field if the opposing D is playing up and stacking the box. He's been a Decoy. And I'm fine with that.

EDIT:
One of our losses since Case has gone on the 6 of 8 tear is the game Gurley sat out to end the season against the 9ers.

 

[TexasRam]

I am 100% percent positive the issue has 0% to do with the RB and 0% to with the Oline and 100% to do with Case Keenums inability to throw the ball down the field and 100% to do with Fishers stubborn commitment to a safe no turnover offense at all costs. And then every opposing defense's 100% sell out to stop the run. Which has worked very effectively. Fortunately for us, our defense has won the battle on the last possession of the last 3 games.

 

[SAK11]

I think it would be silly to start Benny over Gurley. I wouldn't mind seeing him get a few more touches- he's shown himself to be a capable 3rd down back the last few years. I also wouldn't mind seeing a few more runs with Austin as he was very productive last year running the ball. But starting Cunningham in a way points to Gurley as the problem offensively. Perhaps some people believe that to be the case, but I'm seeing a player who's getting hit behind the line carry after carry, and who has little to no running room the majority of his carries as his o-line loses the battle up front with defense's anticipating the run time and time again.

 

[A55VA6]

No.

 

[OldSchool]

That said, I don't agree with the premise proposed by many that the passing game (right now) is negatively impacting the run game.

The passing game is already negatively affecting the rushing game we have at least 8 men in the box almost every time we run. If we had a passing game we wouldn't face that.

 

[Corbin]

Gurley struggling is 110% why the passing game is working. We're getting one on one coverage with Gurley back there. Notice when Benny comes in there's no extra players in the box. That means there's someone on the team being completely blanketed, which means Keenum needs to be able to fit the ball into tight windows, and he cant do consistently. Leave Gurley in if you want to win.

Great post

 

[-X-]

The passing game is already negatively affecting the rushing game we have at least 8 men in the box almost every time we run. If we had a passing game we wouldn't face that.

Explain last year then.
Same personnel, same level of QB play, better results.

 

[OldSchool]

Explain last year then.
Same personnel, same level of QB play, better results.

We didn't see this many men in the box each and every run play last year. And you are wrong on better production last year. Keenums starts last year we averaged 173 yards a game passing. We're doing better this year which still isn't good.