So in addition to relying on rookie OL, Fisher’s brain trust shifted to a new zone blocking scheme which, in the OC’s words, takes precise synchronization between the players. And no one has run it before.

All after insisting that this year we needed to start fast.

A couple weeks back, I pointed out that relying on a rookie OL and seeking a fast start with a really tough early schedule were contradictory. I was told that I was being silly. Now we find out that it’s even worse.

It was not reasonable to expect a fast start with this offense constructed as it was.

I think the record bears out the simple observation that this regime runs miles to avoid taking responsibility for actually winning games.

But, you you know, they’re … close. Oh, so close. One of these days …

• This reply was modified 8 years, 7 months ago by rfl.

PA Ram wrote:

Never said it was elite. Don’t think it is at this point. I just said they were not as bad as they looked.

OK. If I misread, it’s my bad.

So, then, I gather that you’re not one of those expecting 10-6 or better?

Unless this team has a truly elite defense, then no sane fan would expect better than .500, and probably not that.

I have never seen a Ram team that was surrounded by a muddier, more bewildering consensus of expectation.

And I have never seen a Ram team and its coaching staff more endlessly buffered by excuses and defenses. Honestly, I do not understand what it will take for a consensus to form, among fans, the StL media, and the league, that Fisher’s staff is seriously bungling the chance to operate a defense with superlative talent.

PA Ram wrote:

So take away those runs and they rush for about 49 yards.

The thing is, you CAN’T “take away” a few plays! They all count.

In the NFL, a running game which achieves 3 big plays that result in points has had a helluva day, even if the rest of the plays are pedestrian. ALL NFL running offenses fail a lot if not most of the time.

And that’s the point about run defenses. Good ones don’t give up 3 big running plays that shift the competitive balance of the game.

PA Ram wrote:

The defense is not as bad as it looked.

But what does this remark add up to? Is anyone saying the Ram defense is “bad”?

No. Everyone is saying that the Ram defense is or can be expected to be elite. The whole point of the newsworthy aspect of this is that an apparently mediocre WASH offense mangled an apparently elite defense. And, see, the fact is that IT DID!

And I return to what I have been arguing virtually alone on this board for more than a year:

THIS IS NOT AN ELITE DEFENSE!!! No elite defense is as erratic, vulnerable to the run, and passive in yielding quick throws as this defense is. The whole point of being elite is that you pressure and contain offenses week after week. WE DO IT RARELY. And between the impressive games, we are nothing more than mediocre.

I honestly don’t know how long this has to go on before it is widely realized that the leadership of this team has no clothes and that this defense is wildly over-hyped.

The only way anyone can maintain the illusion of excellence is to “take away” the bad plays, the somnolent games, the inconsistency, the recurring vulnerabilities …

And the inability to do the most fundamental task which good defenses have taken great pride in doing for more than 100 years:

Stop the damn run!

Don’t ask me to believe this is an elite defense until they can do that without having to “take away” big, killer plays.

zn wrote:

here are things the Fisher Rams do not do tremendously well:

1. Road games (8-1-15 on the road last 3 years)

2. Following up a big win against a tough division opponent with a consistent effort. Like the Jets after SF in 2012.

3. Blocking 3/4 defenses.

A list without at least 12 more item is critically incomplete.

THEY DON’T DEFEND THE RUN!

No elite defense is as vulnerable to the run as the Rams are. And if you can’t stop the run, you cannot play sound defense.

We are sub-standard against the run except during brief flashes of brilliance.

That in itself is enough to doom this team to mediocrity.

Let’s for a minute accept the premise here. You can’t pressure the short patterns behind blitzes. Not sure I wholly believe it, but let’s just say it’s true.

OK. Now consider coaching our D with our DL. What do you do?

How about blitzing RARELY? Be creative in deploying 7 DBs and LBs to create havoc and make it HARD for QBs to get the quick throw off.

And let the DL do its thing.

How about that?

I think Williams faces a challenge this year. He has to adapt to his talent level on the DL and channel his creativity in directions other than blitzing. We’ll see how he does.

Agamemnon wrote:

Because he does the dirty work in taking up double teams, Brockers’ strong play doesn’t always show up in the box score. And the defensive tackle said last week he’s more than OK with that.

“I play the big man game, he plays the little man game,” Brockers said of his and Donald’s roles. “I have embraced my position and I think I can be the best nose tackle in this league.”

And Brockers showed just how far he’s progressed on Sunday, when he led the team with 13 tackles, according to the coaches’ film evaluation.

So happy that Brockers is getting some love.

He has been widely–even among some fans–disparaged by people looking for fireworks from the guy who does the grunt work to make fireworks possible in someone else!

nittany ram wrote:

Don’t think this current team is ready to finish 14-2 like that team did but 2-0 would still be a nice start.

Agreed. Their ceiling is not where it was for the ’01 team.

I’m thinking that, if they pass this test and go on to play tough all year, they’ll have a realistic shot at 10-6 and maybe a playoff win. That’s being competitive.

If they fail to capitalize on the SEA game, I see them more at the 8-8 stage, on the verge of competing, but not really getting there.

For this team, …

2-0 would be an enormous propellant toward competitiveness and excellence.

Of course, they have to play the game. And this game has all the hallmarks of the banana skin hazard for a team trying to take the step up. The situation and the perceived level of the opponent all pull toward the team tendency to sloppiness and erratic execution. And they were plenty sloppy and erratic in Week 1.

I couldn’t begin to assess where the team is. I will not be surprised if they slide back toward their comfort zone. This team has been comfortable losing for a decade.

But, they have a lot of hungry vets and at least 2 emerging leaders in AD and Foles. I think Cignetti gives us an edge we didn’t have before. So, there are reasons to be hopeful that the team will sustain its focus. And I figure a focused, intense Ram team will be too much for WASH.

At any rate, this is a crucial test. Pass this test, and I think they will be operating at a different level, in part because of the general trend you mention, but even more so because of who they have been. This team at 2-0 would become a player in the league race to post-season.

If it fails the test, I think we’ll know they aren’t really ready to be winners.

It’s a big, big game. Bigger than the Steelers game the next week or the GB game. It could mark a turning point in the season, one way or the other.

Comfort zone: can they move their CZ up into the level of actual competitors? We’ll see.

wv wrote:

the Rams have as much or more talent than the Seahawks.

I mean, if you look at each unit on defense, offense, special teams, secondary —
the Rams were not outmanned. Not anymore.

So, from here on in, its all about execution, motivation, poise, coaching.

Agreed.

This is what I have believed all along. I mean, last year there was probabl;y a gap, but I don’t think a large one. This year? Nope.

Coaching. Execution. Poise. Signs of a winning team.

We’ll see.

InvaderRam wrote:

now they gotta maintain that level. something about donald tells me he is going to inspire this unit to do that. he just has that relentlessness that the great ones have. he’s got that tenaciousness that i used to see in london fletcher every time he lined up.

Agreed. Donald is a truly special player. And they are ALWAYS driven from within!

• This reply was modified 8 years, 8 months ago by rfl.

PS, watching the NFL Channel replay of that last play, one saw BOTH Ram DTs destroying the rushing attempt.

I mean, that’s defensive football heaven, when BOTH of your DTs step up like that.

However, I see on the stats sources that we gave up 125 yards or so rushing. I imagine some of that was RW scrambling? Hmmmmm.

nittany ram wrote:

Rams d got 6 sacks.

I happily stand corrected.

Well, I wouldn’t-a-thunk-it!

Got back from the driving range and am amazed by the result. Fantastic.

Sounds like it was a weird game. Hard to tell from the box score what really happened.

But, I see we got 3 sacks? That’s encouraging. Seems as if the D played fairly well, with 14 points yielded by the O and STs. (Just watched the NFL Channel highlights)

I’ll be interested to see reports on the OL.

But for me the biggest issue is how our DL is empowered to play. With 3 sacks and Lynch held to 78 (?) that’s a pretty good sign.

A good start. Over .500 for the first time in forever. Next week 2-0?

We need it. And you know what? Ram fans DESERVE IT!

So, like, maybe there might have been some cap room for vet OL?