Defense: what adjustments can be made

[InfiniteRam]

I am thinking if we pair another stud LB next to Jones next year, could move us into Baltimore Ravens territory in terms of defensive efficiency.

 

[Merlin]

How about the reality that there really isn't much the Rams can do to tweak things on this defense this year that hasn't been tried. There's no one to elevate, no scheme design that will unlock improvement, no street signing that will get us over the hump.

This is it boys. This is what we got. Enjoy the ride. We're playing with house money this year but we ain't making the final table with this group.

This is probably correct but conceding is difficult for me. Even knowing we don't have the pieces on that unit. I find myself going back over the depth chart and wondering if just maybe someone can step up in a different usage.

 

[Merlin]

2. Street signings. Basically call up your Eric Weddle. Who’s out there at positions of need?

I believe we need to get more pressure on the the opposing QB I've concluded there are so many deep shots thrown against us is because of the clean no pressure pockets.
My solution is try and find someone in FA there are a bunch of names that are better than Hoecht he can be kicked inside and Williams can back up. Maybe a 3rd down rush specialist. I believe we are stuck to next off-season. Next off season we need 3 key players a great FS Fuller is not the answer, a dominant OLaB and dominant CB to along with Witherspoon and an upgrade at OLB over Rozeboom.

Lastly we started the NO game off with constantly rushing 5 we need to keep that up we can't rush with 4 especially not on 3rd down and long the QBs have too much time in the pocket to survey and carve us up.

I want Houston on that edge rushing next to AD.

 

[shovelpass]

They do that some with him, in nickel, which is where Fox played most of his snaps



View attachment 63150View attachment 63151View attachment 63152

Yeah, I caught that in game, also saw your post about it before. I'm pretty sure they've used this front in previous years, could be wrong though. I guess I was misremembering how Fox was used. I thought they moved him out to the edge on occasion.

 

[JimY53]

Yeah, I caught that in game, also saw your post about it before. I'm pretty sure they've used this front in previous years, could be wrong though. I guess I was misremembering how Fox was used. I thought they moved him out to the edge on occasion.

They did a lot of Fox .... Hoecht plays edge, too, with Young as a DT.

Fox would spell Brockers, would play DT in 3rd down overloaded fronts ... and in 4-man fronts, and yes, I think he played a little DE, but usually he'd play passing downs and on the inside.

 

[snackdaddy]

For this year they just need to tighten thing up in the 4th quarter. I don't know if they're getting tired or just playing loose defense with a lead. But the Indy, Pitt and GB games they also struggled in the second half. Especially the 4th quarter. Blew a big lead against Indy before winning in OT. Its been frustrating.

 

[Ramstien]

They play too soft when they have a lead in the 4th quarter and it is going to bite them in the ass eventually.

 

[LARAMSinFeb.]

It seems to me if we could just clean up those blown coverages and moments of miscommunication back there, we'd be okay with our current personnel groupings. Just eliminating those would've given us a comfortable 4th quarter v. the Commodes and Saints, and a dub in Baltimore.

Remember when the criticism of Morris was too much cushion? He seems to have evolved with our personnel, but it's opened up a new set of problems; I keep thinking they're solvable but then it keeps happening every week. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[shovelpass]

They did a lot of Fox .... Hoecht plays edge, too, with Young as a DT.

So I could only find this 1 play. I don't have NFL+, so I'm left with highlights, I wouldn't have time anyway. This is only sacks, so we're talking a percentage of plays.

5 man rush. Top to bottom: Hoecht-AD-SJD-Floyd-Lewis.

It's not the best angle, all-22 would give a better view. Floyd might be too wide for a 5T, either way this is what I was talking about.
@2:10

 

[JimY53]

So I could only find this 1 play. I don't have NFL+, so I'm left with highlights, I wouldn't have time anyway. This is only sacks, so we're talking a percentage of plays.
View attachment 63221
5 man rush. Top to bottom: Hoecht-AD-SJD-Floyd-Lewis.

It's not the best angle, all-22 would give a better view. Floyd might be too wide for a 5T, either way this is what I was talking about.
@2:10

I am confused, I apologize, you are showing Hoecht ... not Fox ... yes, Hoecht does play edge and did last year...and I thought you mean they should use Hoecht more like they did Fox.

And I am saying they do -- a little bit. But, to your point, maybe they should do it more. Maybe they should,

But then we were talking about Fox. And I was saying that mostly used him inside, but that he did play edge. But then you showed a shot of Hoecht on the edge...

Anyway, I was agreeing with your points ... except to say that they are doing what you suggest, but maybe not as much as they should.
and that Fox was mostly inside, but as you point out, if memory serves, did play outside some.

So, maybe not enough sleep for me last night.

 

[Ballhawk]

They play too soft when they have a lead in the 4th quarter and it is going to bite them in the ass eventually.

I agree, and since we seem to be doomed to give up at least one deep ball a game to a blown coverage, we might as well go ahead and blitz at bit more.

 

[shovelpass]

I am confused, I apologize, you are showing Hoecht ... not Fox ... yes, Hoecht does play edge and did last year...and I thought you mean they should use Hoecht more like they did Fox.

And I am saying they do -- a little bit. But, to your point, maybe they should do it more. Maybe they should,

But then we were talking about Fox. And I was saying that mostly used him inside, but that he did play edge. But then you showed a shot of Hoecht on the edge...

Anyway, I was agreeing with your points ... except to say that they are doing what you suggest, but maybe not as much as they should.
and that Fox was mostly inside, but as you point out, if memory serves, did play outside some.

So, maybe not enough sleep for me last night.

It's all good, I was confused as well. I definitely haven't had enough sleep as of late. Agree on the points about Hoecht/Fox. It's one of the few times having a PFF subscription would come in handy, I believe they provide player snap counts at every position.

The image/clip was pointing to them using an edge (Floyd) at 5T in certain rush situations. Hoecht being in there was coincidental. Oddly enough the clip is from the 2021 season. Again, I think was confused on what you were saying.

 

[JimY53]

The image/clip was pointing to them using an edge (Floyd) at 5T in certain rush situations.

Okay, now I understand --- Yes ... Rams have used their edge guys inside, Floyd---is in your example. Now I get it...And they have used Young there, too in overloaded fronts.

 

[Riverumbbq]

Watch: Bobby Brown is Rams’ ultimate hype man in the best mic’d-up video of 2023

We promise Bobby Brown's mic'd-up video from Week 16 is the best one you'll see all year

sports.yahoo.com

 

[JimY53]

Saw a thing elsewhere ... someone lamenting the old days the Rams got 5-6 INTS in a game--it was in reference to the BAL-SF game. Anyway, they felt that the Lovie teams, I guess, judging from the comments were a swarming defense and got a lot of picks.

Well ... they did well, they were 8th in NFL in INTs per game --- which is good. THing is last 3 years Rams are 8th as well.

Back then the Bucs led at 1.71 picks per game... now it's Dallas at 1.10 per game.

#perspective

No one is saying .91 picks per game is as good as 1.10 ... but .91 per game is also not terrible the same was is 1.25 was not as good as 1.71 but it was bad.

Now, this is just an example of faulty memories. Again, what will happen here is folks will try and not discuss this and probably (maybe not) change the subject to others aspects of the current defense they don't like. I will take that as a concession.

This just illustrates that perspective often allows more light and understanding.

 

[Merlin]

View: https://twitter.com/arjunmenon100/status/1739709872659456455

 

[JimY53]

View: https://twitter.com/arjunmenon100/status/1739709872659456455

Ironic....
2023 Rams 5.7 explosives per game allowed ( 2.0 run and 3.7 pass) - 18th in NFL

2022 Rams 4.8 explosives per game allowed (2.2 run and 2.6 pass) - 2nd in the NFL
2021 Rams 5.2 explosives per game allowed (2.6 run and 2.6 pass) - 3rd (tied) in the NFL

 

[majrleaged]

It seems to me if we could just clean up those blown coverages and moments of miscommunication back there, we'd be okay with our current personnel groupings. Just eliminating those would've given us a comfortable 4th quarter v. the Commodes and Saints, and a dub in Baltimore.

Remember when the criticism of Morris was too much cushion? He seems to have evolved with our personnel, but it's opened up a new set of problems; I keep thinking they're solvable but then it keeps happening every week. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It is true they are giving up some quick scores, but I would argue it is better than a slow march to death.
1. it leaves our offense on the side lines getting cold and makes it hard to keep a rhythm. Leads to 3 and outs.
2. it tires out the D. No matter how many times they hold a team to 3 points the time of possession is always working against us.
3. I think it also mentally wares out the team. It is easier to shake off one play and or point to a reason and move on. As opposed to
knowing they are dominating you.
4. Ask any Defensive player how he would want to play and they would tell you attack, be aggressive. It is way more fun.
5. No fun to watch.

 

[Kupped]

It is true they are giving up some quick scores, but I would argue it is better than a slow march to death.
1. it leaves our offense on the side lines getting cold and makes it hard to keep a rhythm. Leads to 3 and outs.
2. it tires out the D. No matter how many times they hold a team to 3 points the time of possession is always working against us.
3. I think it also mentally wares out the team. It is easier to shake off one play and or point to a reason and move on. As opposed to
knowing they are dominating you.
4. Ask any Defensive player how he would want to play and they would tell you attack, be aggressive. It is way more fun.
5. No fun to watch.

I’d be fine with that.. if you had a D capable of creating a bunch of big plays.

This defense doesn’t.

 

[JimY53]

It is true they are giving up some quick scores, but I would argue it is better than a slow march to death.
1. it leaves our offense on the side lines getting cold and makes it hard to keep a rhythm. Leads to 3 and outs.
2. it tires out the D. No matter how many times they hold a team to 3 points the time of possession is always working against us.
3. I think it also mentally wares out the team. It is easier to shake off one play and or point to a reason and move on. As opposed to
knowing they are dominating you.
4. Ask any Defensive player how he would want to play and they would tell you attack, be aggressive. It is way more fun.
5. No fun to watch.

These are false choices. It's like people think it is 1975. The game has changed so, much that offenses have all the advantages. The offensive line rarely called for holding. OPI is rarely called and you breathe on a wide receiver and it's DPI. Defenders cannot hit the QBs hardly at all. Cannot hit receivers hardly at all. So, IMO, myth of "domination" is misguided. Because of rules no on plays dominant football.

Also, what wears out an offense is having to work for everything. Not getting quick scores. That gives the evidence the ability to think that can do it. That is what McVay has said. That is why he wanted Fangio's defense

I think things boil down to your #5, People don't like how it looks.

It makes them mad when looking at the TV. They get angry, frustrated and need a scapegoat. Not saying that is you, I have no idea but it leads people to saying some awful things and some false things. (Again, not saying you).

But the flaw in logic is that some folks assume the kind of defense that they are talking about would work and would have worked better than what McVay wanted.

McVay wanted this scheme because it frustrated him. It's not my favorite but like with this rebuild, McVay has earned the right for me to trust him. Same with the DC. A ring is the thing. And for whatever reason McVay didn't think he could get one with an attacking, aggressive defense -- whatever that is being defined as.

I will look at something ugly when it gets a Super Bowl ring. And when it's better than most of the defense in the NFl over a period of time. Sure, would like to have 4 stud DLmen and 2 stud CBs and play the Saleh, DeMeco Ryan, Quinn-type defenses.

But not a thing I can do about it.

Besides, the Chiefs fans had Spags for the past few years and have wanted him fired .... right up until the playoffs last year. Then they all got shut up with Spags getting a ring as DC. He was called all sorts of names, it was kind of funny in a way.

But we as fans are really not enough in the know to make some of the judgments we make online. We're just venting and playing frustration without anything to back those opinions up.

That is how I see it. We like to think we know things, but none of us really know what we think we know.

... lol