I disagree that the defense was better in 2022. He played so much soft zone that teams took advantage of it and would do 5 to 10 minute drives in a lot of the games. But once he got to the red zone, his defense stiffened and only gave up a FG at the end.
It's fine to disagree. But Objectively, based on where teams rank in traditional categories and analytics mike DVOA it's a fact. We can only go by that because anecdotes by you or me are not quantifiable. And what I said is overall ... not in everything, I said 2023 is marginally worse.
I have always stated he is great inside the red zone.
In addition, last year he had much more experienced players on defense so they should have done a lot better stat wise.
This year he has done a hell of a job working with inexperienced players. Well done.
Even if the stats don't quite show it, I am still going to give him a thumbs up on the defense.
Again, totally fine. But people liking it better still does not make it better. It's simply too subjective. Your opinion carries the same weight as mine. Neither is correct ... they just are. So give him a thumbs up for 2023 and a thumbs down for 2021-22. I would use a hand signal for each and for when context matters ... that means the defense's first 11 games in 2022 were a playoff-level defense but after that they were not.
As to 2021, I was never down on him but I wanted him to stop playing his CBs 7 to 10 yards back as frequently as he did. And once he got Miller, he stopped doing that. He had his CBs playing within 5 yards much more often. After seeing that, I felt he was a very good DC.
You say you don't like the depth of the CBs. But it is required in the Fangio scheme for good or for bad. The depth can vary and Rams did play deeper than most but it's not like it was a huge difference.
In the Fangio scheme players on each side (3 receiver side and 2 receiver side) have to work together. The theory is to have a numbers advantage. To the 3 receiver side you want 4 defenders. On the 2 receiver side, you want 3 defenders. You want a square and a triangle. You cannot have a box or triangle if you mess with the depths, you mess up the matchups of who takes who.
This is why I say the people who complained about the depth do not understand the scheme. All of us are ignorant of something. I know nothing about your job, whatever it is. If I came in yoo your company, call it ABC Corp and said "You're doing it wrong because company XYZ did it this way. You'd look at my resume and see I had no expertise --maybe just general knowledge.
In that case, I'd be ignorant. Does not make me stupid. Well --- think of the Fangio scheme ... you the critics know much about it? Do they know the things I just said? Well, the ones who do know -- online -- explain things to us and we can learn and become more informed -- have more wisdom and understanding/
Some Morris's critics are unintentionally misinformed about how it works. And want to do things that XYZ does and not what ABC's mission statement is.
I felt he should have done similarly in 2022 using the end of 2021 as an example but he used the 7 yards back much more often than he even did in 2021 and I couldn't understand why. I believe he stated he couldn't get any pressure with his rush so had to play more conservative but Donald was still getting to the passer within 2.5 to 3 seconds on a lot of his rushes. I felt he could have mixed in a bit more 5 yards or less coverages. He only did that in a few games. Carolina and Tampa Bay in the first 3 quarters. Against Seattle, he had Ramsey play tighter on quite a few plays which was fine imho.
However, one play in particular really pissed me off last year.
We've gone over this. Your anecdotes and what pleases you and displeases you are not objective. It's just complaining about results and you're second-guessing what was done. You "feel" he should have mixed in other things. Agin your feelings are fine but others can have feelings that are different. In both cases feelings don't matter. Mine don't. Yours don't. And the times I've explained the Fangio scheme -- you can look up my posts --people are just simply rejecting it without understanding it. That's not fair.
The one stat that really irritated me last year was that Rams opponents were getting the pass off under 2.3 seconds in the first 7 games or so and that was .3 to .5 seconds faster than the next fastest opponent pass play. No way could Donald get to the QB in that amount of time unless he was unblocked.
This is the stat that really pissed me off and got me on the fire Morris bandwagon after the Tampa Arizona and New Orleans games.
Again emotion -- pissed off again ... not seeking understanding and perspective. And it's always something new with you. We went over all the other stuff you wanted --- 3rd and long "I took that to mean normal breakdown" and that was not god-awful. so you changed it to 3rd and 10+. That was not awful. Then you changed it to 3rd and 10+ outside the red zone. Then to 3rd and 15, cutting if of. Now you change the subject without really admitting you were wrong on everything else. So, once again you are moving the goalposts and probably wanting expecting me to prove what the issue with that was. And then I will do it. And you'll say, yeah, but inside the 20 does not count.
You must at least
consider no matter how many things you throw out there (even if true, which they are not), the real damage it did was to piss you (and a lot of others) off. Why? Because the defense was not bad -- a defense that someone should be fired for. Many Morris critics were mad and wanted to blame someone and Morris was the scapegoat. But my feelings don't matter, yours don't either. What is objective is the performance and your assumption that the off-coverage was making Morris's defense
so bad he deserved to be fired.
I would say it is time to say simply you don't like the way the defense looked and that it was not one of the best in the NFL, you wanted it to be better. But the imperfections were not the ones you are claiming you saw.
Sure they get beat once maybe twice a game but their other series are much more successful to getting 3 and outs compared to last year.
Sure they get beat once maybe twice a game but their other series are much more successful to getting 3 and outs compared to last year.
This is just an opinion that we all agree is your right to have but it is a problem if you don't back it up with anything but what you think you saw. That's fine, all human beings have a confirmation bias. You see more cover-1, which puts guys closer to LOS and you think, "It's better, therefore they are MUCH MORE successful getting 3 and outs"
What if the truth is the 2023 Rams are NOT more successful at getting to 3 and outs? What if the numbers are freakishly similar for all three years?
Will you then say well, take out the red zone? Or say stats don't mean sh!t? Or say that the game situation invalidates the numbers? Or then say you will do your own research because you don't believe the numbers? (And you are welcome to do that, Stathead is available for anyone to use)
As I said before it now seems nothing will please you. But it's not my job to change your mind. Think whatever you will. But I do think it is worth the time and effort to prove you are just off base in your assumptions. You say things you perceive and think the numbers will back you up.
You're a great guy who loves the Rams but you were wrong on all the third-down stuff and you are wrong about Rams being more successful this year than last in --- and I quote ---"much more successful to getting 3 and outs compared to last year."
The facts
