Stat(s) of the Week: Week 12 (Why the “bend don’t break” approach is stupid)

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
4,838
When the Rams get the ball, they are productive.

Don't believe me?

Here are the Rams' yards/drive and points/drive #s (and rankings):

Yards/Drive: 38.05 (3rd/tied)
Points/Drive: 2.69 (3rd)

So why are the Rams not scoring more? Well...

Average Time of Possession: 27.5 minutes (29th)
Total Offensive Drives: 111 (27th/tied)

While some of these stats can be explained by a positive factor - quick scoring drives - I think that overall, and particularly in recent weeks, it has been due to the "bend don't break" defensive approach that is allowing teams to eat up yards and clock. Its keeping the offense off the field.

Look at last Sunday. The Packers' first drive lasted 15 plays and ate up more than half a quarter (8:08). Even though it didn't result in points, it kept the Rams' offense from getting back on the field and getting into a rhythm. Even worse was the opening drive of the second half, which ate up over half the quarter (7:42), and resulted in a Packer TD.

The Rams need to alter their approach and pressure defenses with tighter man coverage (particularly on 3rd down). While this could result in the occasional big play over the top, that would be better than the "death by a 1,000 cuts" we've been seeing.

At least the offense would get more chances which, statistically speaking, would lead to good things.
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,036
I think our problems extend to all three phases. What the defense is doing, as we have discussed since early this year and before this losing streak, is not complementary to our offense. But the offense isn't helping either and also they weren't up to making the game a shootout.

Then we got special teams. And that unit, well, they are some serious window lickers right now.
 

OntarioRam

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
3,168
We have a defence that seemingly can never get off the field in under 6 minutes, and an offence that appears unable to methodically move towards the opposing team's end zone but rather is reliant explosive plays. It's a recipe for a time of possession nightmare which, of course, has major rippled effects in terms of fatigued defenders, the types of calls you can make on offence with the clock against you, etc. Both sides of the ball need major improvements.

Chunk plays are amazing. But you need a running game and short-to-intermediate passing game, as well. All are required to win a Super Bowl. This isn't a video game. As much Sean McVay might think it is.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,211
Name
Tim
I agree 100% @AvengerRam. You can’t play you DBs ten yards off knowing the ball has to come out in less than 2.3 seconds.

Press gives them more opportunities for deflections and maybe interceptions and forces the QB to hold the ball longer giving our formidable defensive front a chance to get home.

Those concepts work together.
 

HE WITH HORNS

Hall of Fame
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
3,828
You can't let a QB like Aaron Rodgers have 10 yard cushions, or he will eat you alive. Those 15 play drives demoralize the defense, and when they finally get into the redzone, and we are supposed to tighten up, the defense is so tired that the other team can just run it in, or have another short completion because our defense is used to giving them up.

Also, what good is giving them the underneath stuff if our guys can't or won't tackle?
 

RamDino

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
2,565
Nice post Avenger Ram! And McVay is not helping by asking Stafford to carry this team on his back. McVay was not like this in the Todd Gurley era. In fact, I believe he ran the ball more than he passed the first couple of years! Maybe he just doesn't have any confidence in his running backs. I know I don't. However, I would try giving Sony Michel the ball, even for just one game, to see if he can make a difference. Henderson is not a bad back... he just isn't a #1. And if the Rams want to control the clock a little better... they need to run the ball more. JMHO.
 

LARAMSinFeb.

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
4,435
Nice post Avenger Ram! And McVay is not helping by asking Stafford to carry this team on his back. McVay was not like this in the Todd Gurley era. In fact, I believe he ran the ball more than he passed the first couple of years! Maybe he just doesn't have any confidence in his running backs. I know I don't. However, I would try giving Sony Michel the ball, even for just one game, to see if he can make a difference. Henderson is not a bad back... he just isn't a #1. And if the Rams want to control the clock a little better... they need to run the ball more. JMHO.
You have to invest in linemen to do that effectively though. Can't just be a perennial "oops" afterthought.
 

RamDino

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
2,565
You have to invest in linemen to do that effectively though. Can't just be a perennial "oops" afterthought.
Agree with this ^. They should draft linemen on both sides of the ball every year. On the O-line though, the Rams signed All-Pro Whitworth, Edwards was a 5th round pick, Allen a 4th, Corbett a 2nd (although it was a trade), and Havenstein was a 2nd-rounder. Evans was a 3rd, Anchrum was a 7th, and they also signed a couple of developing guys in Alaric Jackson and the Italian guy. And I firmly believe you can develop excellent linemen in any round. So I'm not sure it's fair to say that the Rams haven't invested in the O-line, although Creed sure would have looked nice this year -lol.
 

RamBall

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
5,528
Name
Dave
What the O needs desperately is a back that can wear down a D. Hendo has bulked up, but he is still relatively small for a RB, or at least appears that way to me. A back that gets stronger as he weakens the D would be great and then Hendo would be more effective as the change of pace back. Not sure Akers has the size I'm speaking of, but he does seem to be able to make something out of nothing more often than Hendo has as well as turning the 4 yrd runs into 14 yrd runs in the 2nd half.
 

Ellard80

Legend
Joined
Aug 11, 2016
Messages
6,312
im not sure what the exact answer is.. but i would like to see more blitzing and man defense to mix it up.

Looks to me like we are 90% zone.
 

payote75

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
3,816
Name
Payote75
When the Rams get the ball, they are productive.

Don't believe me?

Here are the Rams' yards/drive and points/drive #s (and rankings):

Yards/Drive: 38.05 (3rd/tied)
Points/Drive: 2.69 (3rd)

So why are the Rams not scoring more? Well...

Average Time of Possession: 27.5 minutes (29th)
Total Offensive Drives: 111 (27th/tied)

While some of these stats can be explained by a positive factor - quick scoring drives - I think that overall, and particularly in recent weeks, it has been due to the "bend don't break" defensive approach that is allowing teams to eat up yards and clock. Its keeping the offense off the field.

Look at last Sunday. The Packers' first drive lasted 15 plays and ate up more than half a quarter (8:08). Even though it didn't result in points, it kept the Rams' offense from getting back on the field and getting into a rhythm. Even worse was the opening drive of the second half, which ate up over half the quarter (7:42), and resulted in a Packer TD.

The Rams need to alter their approach and pressure defenses with tighter man coverage (particularly on 3rd down). While this could result in the occasional big play over the top, that would be better than the "death by a 1,000 cuts" we've been seeing.

At least the offense would get more chances which, statistically speaking, would lead to good things.

All day I've been saying this. Thank you very well said man! Glad you made a thread it's has merit. Yes some play calls could be better yes blocking needs to improve but the defensive scheme is not a good puzzle fit for mcvays offense. He does need to step up and address this or the ship will go down!
 

Mackeyser

Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
14,158
Name
Mack
We need a small school, big strong back to fall to the 4th... Maybe he smoked weed or the competition was dreadful and it looks on film like he's playing against middle schoolers... I dunno.

I know that Gurley absolutely SPOILED McVay.

I also know that Stafford absolutely has to step up his play action game. I've been and continue to still be on the Stafford train, but damn does Goff do about the best play action fakes in the game. That alone set up so many opportunities just by moving the linebackers and safeties.
 

Kupped

Legend
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
8,102
Name
Kupped
When the Rams get the ball, they are productive.

Don't believe me?

Here are the Rams' yards/drive and points/drive #s (and rankings):

Yards/Drive: 38.05 (3rd/tied)
Points/Drive: 2.69 (3rd)

So why are the Rams not scoring more? Well...

Average Time of Possession: 27.5 minutes (29th)
Total Offensive Drives: 111 (27th/tied)

While some of these stats can be explained by a positive factor - quick scoring drives - I think that overall, and particularly in recent weeks, it has been due to the "bend don't break" defensive approach that is allowing teams to eat up yards and clock. Its keeping the offense off the field.

Look at last Sunday. The Packers' first drive lasted 15 plays and ate up more than half a quarter (8:08). Even though it didn't result in points, it kept the Rams' offense from getting back on the field and getting into a rhythm. Even worse was the opening drive of the second half, which ate up over half the quarter (7:42), and resulted in a Packer TD.

The Rams need to alter their approach and pressure defenses with tighter man coverage (particularly on 3rd down). While this could result in the occasional big play over the top, that would be better than the "death by a 1,000 cuts" we've been seeing.

At least the offense would get more chances which, statistically speaking, would lead to good things.
Or lead to more turnovers.

Which is death by a couple of cuts for the team turning the ball over.