So WTF happened to the Rams this year?

wv wrote:

I dunno exactly. Its like a total meltdown now.

WTF happened to this team? They were 3 and 1, and looking like a scrappy, tough, wildcard team.

w
v

You want a theory?

It’s 2 things.

#1.

Boras was a first-time OC installing a revised offense after a move. That means they entered the season dead in the water and out of sync. They still got up to speed and then were tough in the first quarter because Boras was a good enough coordinator to get them into games.

But he couldn;t handle on the fly adjustments after that, that is adjustments to adjustments. From the 2nd quarter on he was always behind the 8 ball.

From the day Boras took over in 2015, the Rams stopped being able to out-adjust teams in the 2nd half. Which means that Gurley dominating in the 2nd half was strictly a Cigs thing.

And btw I don’t think Cigs was fired because of the product on the field. I suspect Cigz was a load behind closed doors.

MOST OF THE THINGS PEOPLE COMPLAIN ABOUT would just be minor irritants if the offense were able to keep them in games and produce more wins. So it LOOKS like there;s this long list of complaints and problems but I think that’s bs. Had they won, most of that stuff would either disappear or wouldn’t have mattered that much. And they couldn’t win because they could not produce offensively after the 1st quarter, when it was time to adjust to the adjustments.

2016:

Rams were 18th in 1st quarter points per game
Rams were 32nd in 2nd quarter points per game
Rams were 30th in 3rd quarter points per game
Rams were 28th in 4th quarter points per game.

(Note: want to see what they were in the 4th quarter in 2012 and 2013? 2012, 16th. 2013, 19th.)

Let’s say they stayed 18th in points per game for an entire game. Which means being able to effectively adjust to the adjustments. That would put them at about 22.5 points per game. If everything else remained the same, that would mean 3 more wins right there. They would be 7-6 right now even with a rookie qb.

#2.

In addition to that it’s the qb.

First, teams caught up with Keenum. They were out of sync for 2 games, then used Keenum well for a few games—in spite of not being able to run. Then teams figured out that daring Keenum to beat you actually didn;t work. So they found ways to reduce Keenum, and since he was a limited passer, that worked.

Goff then took over but he is still a rookie. That means among other things this–he is not as good as a vet at recognizing blitzes and coverages. It’s a myth for example that the OL doesn’t protect Goff. The truth is Keenum was better, because he was more experienced, at calling protections and seeing blitzes.

Rams sack percentage with Keenum (same OL): 6.8%
Rams sack percentage with Goff last 3 games (same OL): 10.5%

10.5% is just wretchedly bad.

And remember–same OL.

***

The truth? If those 2 things do NOT improve any new coach will not win either.

If those 2 things had been better all along Fisher would have won.

But I expect both things to improve.

….

wv wrote:

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

But i dunno.

Might be a few more things.

w
v

No. I promise you.

All the rest is a mirage.

You fix those 2 things and some of the other problems people complain about either diminish, go away, or nobody cares as much.

Remember you asked what is unique to 2016.

Well those things are unique to 2016. In fact they’re the only things unique to 2016.

They arguably had worse problems every year from 2013-15. 2016 was the only year where they had that particular combination of issues.

The qb thing was exacerbated by not being able to run, but the Rams have never been able to run consistently with Gurley. BUT they set him up to have big plays in 2015, most of which came in the 2nd half from adjusting. That stopped in 2016. Once that stopped the offense was ALL on the qb. And then–other teams figured out Keenum after a short spell of games, and Goff is still a rookie (without a running game).

(Note: want to see what they were ranked in 4th quarter scoring in 2012 and 2013? 2012, 16th. 2013, 19th.)

…

Yeah I would agree with zn on that.

Zooey wrote:

A third thing is that they have to stop dribbling footballs off their facemasks. You aren’t supposed to dribble the ball at all in football. That’s hockey.

So they need to work on fundamentals.

I don’t think it does them any good at all to get better at the fundamentals of dribbling. So I don’t buy that.

I will say this. If Cunningham is in the game instead of injured, that never happens. Why? He doesn’t CARE about the fundamentals of dribbling. That’s why.

I agree with your points ZN but only to a degree.

In point 2 you state the O-line being bad is a myth and I completely disagree with that.

Yep…Keenum is better at reads and adjustments than Goff….and also Keenum, at one point, was among the league leaders at time to get rid of the football. That tells me everything was quick drops and quick reads with a priority at getting rid of the football.

We knew Goff was gonna be behind Keenum in reads and he would be confused by the D more easily than the experienced Keenum…no surprise there.

The O-line was continually pushed back…kinda why they passed on 3rd and 2 and kinda why TG is near the lead as far as getting hit in the backfield….they had no shot to get the push to enable the RB to get the 1st down. No sense in running a play action pass, it wouldn’t fool anyone in the stadium…the line just could not get it done and is the single most important upgrade required going in to next year, IMO.

PA Ram wrote:

Yes–I will echo sanbagger. I do think that you make strong points, zn. But I do think the o-line failed this year. I think Gurley also failed and that lack of a running game killed them.

I don’t really know why.

sanbagger wrote:

The O-line was continually pushed back…kinda why they passed on 3rd and 2 and kinda why TG is near the lead as far as getting hit in the backfield….they had no shot to get the push to enable the RB to get the 1st down.

Why did the OL perform BETTER with Keenum?

Why did the same OL perform better in 2015 with Gurley?

First remember Gurley in 2015. Gurley was never a big yards per carry guy. He would keep battering…with the same OL as in 2016…but then break big runs in the 2nd half (usually). At the time, Fisher himself kept saying that they saw what the defense was doing with Gurley and adjusted. You know that that “2nd half Gurley” stuff stopped the day Boras took over.

Now I want to be clear—even performing optimally it would not be a top line. But then there are lots of teams that do well even though they have average lines (Seattle cough cough).

But (to me unsurprisingly) it was clearly better when they had a veteran qb who recognized things pre-snap and was very good at calling protections, spotting blitzes, and making adjustments. Goff should not be expected to be as good at that and sure enough starting with the Saints that has been what he has faced—heavy blitzing. (Miami didn’t do that an in that game Goff was sacked once—MIami relied on a top DL, and the result was, even in the rain, it took the defense to lose that game. Why was the OL better against Miami, even given the quality of that DL?).

The absolutely ideal qb to have behind a more limited line is Brady. Not many can expect to be at that level. But right now Goff is the opposite.

And yes if we put even part of Keenum’s awareness and knowledge in Goff’s head, IMO, people would say the OL was playing better.

To me, if you had a veteran qb and a coordinator who could adjust to defenses at least as well as Cigz did (who was an experienced OC unlike Boras), then I honestly believe people would not be as down on the OL. It would perform better. Not talking Dallas. But clearly and obviously better. I base that on the fact that they DID perform better when other things were in place to let them.
…

Well. The people with the torches and pitchforks got what they wanted.

I’m not sure it’s the best thing.

I’ve been wondering like everybody else what the story is.

And I argued just recently that the OL has had plenty of time to learn its assignments, and so on, that the move should be behind them.

But I do wonder if we are just seeing a lack of focus.

Moving to LA from St. Louis has to be a mental distraction, and up until now, I was just thinking in terms of finding a place to live, and all that stuff. And that stuff is over.

But it’s a totally different culture. And a zillion distractions and bright shiny things around. New roads to learn. New restaurants and clubs. The ocean.

I dunno. Maybe it just mentally took them out of their mindset enough.

In any event, the next coach will inherit a team with better talent than the one Fisher got. Somebody somewhere mentioned that Fisher might be like Moses…leading the team out of the wilderness, right to the edge of the Promised Land, only to die, and have someone else lead them in. Maybe. Maybe the new coach will get lost, and end up miles away.

I don’t care about Fisher per se. But I really do wonder. I just don’t know that this was really his fault, or anybody’s fault, really.

I do know that it was public relations that got him sacked.

Zooey wrote:

I do know that it was public relations that got him sacked.

That’s true to a degree. But if he had a better record….

But that’s me–a Recordite.

I look at years of Jeff Fisher mediocrity broken up by a few good seasons. I just believe he was a mediocre coach.

But yes–I got what I wanted.

Now I want a Superbowl win.

And I WILL get it, I tell you. I WILL!!!!!!

Agamemnon wrote:

Somebody somewhere mentioned that Fisher might be like Moses…leading the team out of the wilderness, right to the edge of the Promised Land, only to die, and have someone else lead them in.

I did the Fisher equals Moses thing.

Nice one.

Nothing like a good Old Testament allusion.

Zooey wrote:

Nothing like a good Old Testament allusion.

Well you know. For everything there is a season.

.

Hee come the Contextistas to enter the fight.

Special shout out to Ag…think I have it

• This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by sanbagger.

zn wrote:

To me, if you had a veteran qb and a coordinator who could adjust to defenses at least as well as Cigz did (who was an experienced OC unlike Boras), then I honestly believe people would not be as down on the OL. It would perform better. Not talking Dallas. But clearly and obviously better. I base that on the fact that they DID perform better when other things were in place to let them.

they never should have traded up for goff.

they should have concentrated on strengthening the oline. perhaps through free agency. they should have focused on restocking the secondary. and gone forward with keenum and mannion.

if the oline wasn’t good enough to deal with a rookie qb, then i put that on coaching and personnel for not recognizing that. there was no need to trade that much to go and draft a rookie qb who didn’t even have experience in a pro system.

and fisher should have hired a veteran offensive coordinator. he had the second half of last year to evaluate boras. keeping him falls on fisher’s shoulders.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by InvaderRam.

sacram wrote:

During his entire tenure the majority of his offensive acquisitions whether via FA or the draft just didn’t perform.

See I don’t see it that way. They had several years worth of combined OL injuries and qb injuries and melt downs which meant being stuck with #2 caliber qbs. I can’t think of any team that has been effective under those conditions.

zn wrote:

sacram wrote:

During his entire tenure the majority of his offensive acquisitions whether via FA or the draft just didn’t perform.

See I don’t see it that way. They had several years worth of combined OL injuries and qb injuries and melt downs which meant being stuck with #2 caliber qbs. I can’t think of any team that has been effective under those conditions.

THIS years offense was barely touched by injuries and whatever the reason, (Keenum as a starting QB, Boras as the OC, a young Oline, or any combination of these or any other factors) it starts and ends with Jeff Fisher. He made all of those decisions.

With the (supposed) defensive strength, all we needed was a slight improvement, say from 32nd to somewhere around 22nd to 25th in scoring and we would probably would be contending for a playoff spot. Instead with HIS offensive staff and offensive players they have had their worst year offensively in his 5 years and are dead last again.

I know your theory on the Foles meltdown, the freak Bradford injuries, the Oline injuries and inexperience…..but THIS year we had none of that type of stuff, with the exception of the Oline inexperience, happen to the team and the offense just seems to continue to get worse.