Robinson over Matthews, and why

[jap]

Those are very balanced numbers,i'm surprised. I wonder if those numbers were as balanced when he had McNair/E.George.

Has everyone forgotten McNair's nickname was "Air McNair"? The guy could and used to air it out.

 

[jrry32]

Those are very balanced numbers,i'm surprised. I wonder if those numbers were as balanced when he had McNair/E.George.

I doubt it but that was also a bit of a different game. The pass to run ratio for the entire league has gone up significantly since then in favor of passing.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I doubt it but that was also a bit of a different game. The pass to run ratio for the entire league has gone up significantly since then in favor of passing.

True it has,yet the two teams we're chasing in our division and arguably the two best teams in the league are doing it via the ground game.
2013 numbers:
SEATTLE run/pass(1st)
54.79%-45.21%

S.F. run/pass
54.77%-45.23%(2nd)

Those teams were 2nd and 3rd respectively in rush attempts/gm,but its the ratio we were discussing.

2012 numbers:
SEATTLE at 56.96%-43.04%(1st)

S.F. at 53.02%-46.98%(3rd)

Going back to my original statement...i still think(hope) that we see the numbers either remain fairly balanced,as you showed,or moving even more towards favoring the run game in 2014. Even if it means more carries for a guy like Austin in unique situations i think it's a good idea. Our skill position "kids" will eventually develop,but right now we should lean on our ground game to compete with Seattle,SF and AZ.
JMO

 

[jrry32]

True it has,yet the two teams we're chasing in our division and arguably the two best teams in the league are doing it via the ground game.
2013 numbers:
SEATTLE run/pass(1st)
54.79%-45.21%

S.F. run/pass
54.77%-45.23%(2nd)

Those teams were 2nd and 3rd respectively in rush attempts/gm,but its the ratio we were discussing.

2012 numbers:
SEATTLE at 56.96%-43.04%(1st)

S.F. at 53.02%-46.98%(3rd)

Going back to my original statement...i still think(hope) that we see the numbers either remain fairly balanced,as you showed,or moving even more towards favoring the run game in 2014. Even if it means more carries for a guy like Austin in unique situations i think it's a good idea. Our skill position "kids" will eventually develop,but right now we should lean on our ground game to compete with Seattle,SF and AZ.
JMO

But those two teams aren't the Rams. And I doubt our game-plan for beating the 49ers and Seahawks is going to be to copy them. We'll do what we do best.

I think we should use our ground game but don't overuse it. I like Sam and I think he's capable of throwing the ball 500 times successfully. Do what we did last year...lean pass but still emphasize the run(52% to 55% pass).

 

[Mojo Ram]

But those two teams aren't the Rams. And I doubt our game-plan for beating the 49ers and Seahawks is going to be to copy them. We'll do what we do best.

I think we should use our ground game but don't overuse it. I like Sam and I think he's capable of throwing the ball 500 times successfully. Do what we did last year...lean pass but still emphasize the run(52% to 55% pass).

I disagree. Its a copy cat league. I like Sam too,but the stout D and run-heavy approach is what is getting results right now.
We shall see.

 

[jrry32]

I disagree. Its a copy cat league. I like Sam too,but the stout D and run-heavy approach is what is getting results right now.
We shall see.

Any decent offensive approach with a stout defense will get results. And it's only a copy cat league for the bad teams. The good teams make their own way. The bad teams are always trying to play catch up.

The Rams should not try to emulate Seattle and San Fran. Because they're better than us at what THEY do. We should do what they do best and force them to adjust to us. That's what good teams do. They don't play the other team's game.

As far as the run-heavy approach getting results, 6 of the top 10 teams in rushing yards went to the playoffs. 7 of the top 10 teams in passing yards went to the playoffs. I'd say both approaches get results. 8 of the top 10 teams in points per game allowed went to the playoffs. So obviously, having a strong defense is the best approach.

But offensively? Either approach works. As does a balanced offense.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Any decent offensive approach with a stout defense will get results. And it's only a copy cat league for the bad teams. The good teams make their own way. The bad teams are always trying to play catch up.

The Rams should not try to emulate Seattle and San Fran. Because they're better than us at what THEY do. We should do what they do best and force them to adjust to us. That's what good teams do. They don't play the other team's game.

As far as the run-heavy approach getting results, 6 of the top 10 teams in rushing yards went to the playoffs. 7 of the top 10 teams in passing yards went to the playoffs. I'd say both approaches get results. 8 of the top 10 teams in points per game allowed went to the playoffs. So obviously, having a strong defense is the best approach.

But offensively? Either approach works. As does a balanced offense.

See....now you're just debating to debate

We can go round and round. I can dig up the offensive/defensive ranks for SB teams in the last 20 years (again) and look at what the common theme's are(hint:dominating defense with anywhere from an average to very good offense)....then you can come back with some other numbers that tell a different story depending upon what YOU believe.
I don't play that game Jrry. I respect your opinions but constantly speaking in absolutes when posting reeks of pompous ass. Nothing personal.

 

[jrry32]

See....now you're just debating to debate

We can go round and round. I can dig up the offensive/defensive ranks for SB teams in the last 20 years (again) and look at what the common theme's are(hint:dominating defense with anywhere from an average to very good offense)....then you can come back with some other numbers that tell a different story depending upon what YOU believe.
I don't play that game Jrry. I respect your opinions but constantly speaking in absolutes when posting reeks of pompous ass. Nothing personal.

Which is exactly what I said. The best approach is a strong defense...beyond that...as long as you have an effective offense, it doesn't matter what you do.

So I don't think we should be copying Seattle and San Fran. We should do what the RAMS do best.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

1) I would hope we are...maybe not at LT but they need to be ready to start all 16 games somewhere on the OL.
2) Yea, I don't believe this. I'll call BS. At best, we'll be around 50/50 in run-pass ratio. IMO, it'll likely be around 54-46 pass to run. What we did with a limited QB like Clemens won't be what we do with Bradford.
3) We do have Boudreau but you can't just assume it's automatic that the guy will be coached up. Sometimes, a guy just doesn't have the ability to take what he learned and put it to use on the field even with a great coach. Some guys just don't care to.

IMO, even at OG, Matthews is a head and shoulders better pass protector at the moment...and is still an effective run blocker. I still prefer him. We have two blue chip prospects staring at us in the face, I can understand why someone might want upside. But me? I'll take the guy who both has a high ceiling and is a safe, polished, pro ready player.

Jrry, don't be coming up in here wit dat bullshit. First, I should have been more specific and said LT for 16 games-- I can't find the edit button. Second, my guestimation of the ratio was off, but the point is we are a RUN first team, regardless of how you use stats to pontificate your point. I welcome both players with open arms, but I want the power, you want the finesse-- no need for dogmatism.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I see Robinson's talent.

But give me Mathews bloodlines. Durability. Family. Waaaay safer pick!

 

[Rockman]

It looks to me like with Robinson or Matthews with a 2nd round pick? I think either option is good, but that other 2nd rounder sounds sweet.

 

[jrry32]

Jrry, don't be coming up in here wit dat bullcrap. First, I should have been more specific and said LT for 16 games-- I can't find the edit button. Second, my guestimation of the ratio was off, but the point is we are a RUN first team, regardless of how you use stats to pontificate your point. I welcome both players with open arms, but I want the power, you want the finesse-- no need for dogmatism.

I still want the power...just the pro ready power.

 

[mr.stlouis]

I agree. If this was the beginning of last year, all that "Saints offense" talk, I would want Mathews. I'm really tired of our interior getting pushed back. It smothers everything!

 

[Memphis Ram]

Jeff Fisher
2013 Rams - 56.0% Pass to 44.0% Run
2012 Rams - 59.1% Pass to 40.9% Run
2010 Titans - 55.2% Pass to 44.8% Run
2009 Titans - 49.6% Pass to 50.4% Run
2008 Titans - 47.8% Pass to 52.2% Run

Over the 3 game period(Carolina, Houston and Jacksonville) after we switched our offense from the ineffective spread to the traditional power I with Bradford, our pass to run ratio was 52.3% Pass to 47.7% Run.

So yea, I have a hard time believing we're going to be any worse than a 50-50 split. And I think it's more likely we'll be in the 53-55% range in terms of passing plays. Note the 2008 Titans finished with a 13-3 record.

Interestingly enough, as you see over those last 5 years, the passing percentages trended up before peaking in 2012 with the Rams.

Of course, win and losses play a role in those splits. Passing more to catch up or running more to hold a lead can affect those stats greatly.

 

[MTRamsFan]

I'm good with either. If both are truly equal, I think we draft Matthews due to Fisher's ties with Bruce at Houston/Tennessee. Just my hunch.

 

[RamFan503]

Just the thought of this OLine manhandling our division rivals' DLines off the line of scrimmage for 5 yards/rush gives me a hard on.

So it must be a real problem if a girl winks at you. :eek:

 

[Mojo Ram]

So it must be a real problem if a girl winks at you. :eek:

Stand back!

 

[MTRamsFan]

Stand back!

 

[Tron]

Mojo's Mojo is out of control
Stand back!

 

[Flipper_336]

So it must be a real problem if a girl winks at you. :eek:

I'm not sure that that situation has ever arisen.