Good article posted on another board

[moklerman]

This is during Martz tenure as HC.

2000 only 70% pass/run - Trent Green won.
2001 only 1 70% pass/run - Rams lost.
2002 4 70% pass/run - 2-2 (Bulger win and Martin win in last game of season vs Niners)

3-3 over those 3 seasons.

So expand this some and make it 65% passing

2000 6 games with 65%+ passing = 2-4
2001 3 games with 65%+ passing = 1-2
2002 11 games with 65%+ passing = 3-8

Now does anyone honestly believe Martz knows his team went 6-14 when they pass on 65% or more of their plays from '00 to '02?

2003

2 games over 70% passing - 0-2 dropping the record to 3-5
5 games over 65% passing (including Carolina game) -

[Yodude]

Good stuff, Mok....but if we've learned anything by now it's that people don't appreciate it when you cloud the issue with irrefutable facts.

Common sense, statistically proven.

[Nick]

There definitely seems to be a trend there, and it would be great to have more balance, but I'd be interested in seeing how many of those games were games where the Rams fell behind early and were forced to pass to try and catch up. Obviously it's hard to pound the ball on the ground when you're looking at the wrong end of a losing score.

[r8rh8rmike]

Those stats are very telling, but Nick has a point. You can't run for the sake of running, rather you have to put yourself in a position where you can be effective running. That being said, more balance has got to become a priority.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

That being said, more balance has got to become a priority.

Especially early in the game or when defenders are automatically dropping back into pass coverage. Martz needs to be able to see that and adjust to that, and this might be a situation where having the OC booth view is beneficial. Maybe he should send Fairchild up there if he isn't already.

[RamDez]

Tell me what the stats were for the superbowl WIN ??? mmmmm

[r8rh8rmike]

Tell me what the stats were for the superbowl WIN ??? mmmmm

Now there's a great question. No wonder he's the boss.

[r8rh8rmike]

Although Martz was not the head coach and a lot of the players have changed, here are the numbers from SB 34, which we won by passing 77% of the time:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rams Titans
First Downs 23 27
Rushing 1 12
Passing 18 13
Penalty 4 2
Third Down Eff. 5-12- 42 6-13- 46
Fourth Down Eff. 0- 1- 0 1- 1-100
Rushes-Yards 13- 29 36-159
Average Per Rush 2.2 4.4
Comp-Att-Int 24-45-0 22-36-0
Net Passing Yards 407 208
Sacks-Yards Lost 1- 7 1- 6
Average Per Pass Play 8.8 5.6
Return Yards (exc. KOs) 8 -1
Int Ret-Yds 0- 0 0- 0
Punt Ret-Yds 2- 8 1- -1
Kick Ret-Yds 4- 55 5-122
Punts-Average 2- 38.5 3- 43.0
Fumbles-Lost 2- 0 1- 0
Penalties-Yards 8- 60 7- 45
Time of Possession 23:34 36:26
-------------------------------------------------------------------

RUSHING--ST. LOUIS: Mar.Faulk 10-17, Rob.Holcombe 1-11, Kur.Warner 1-1,
Mik.Horan 1-0. TENNESSEE: Edd.George 28-95, Ste.McNair 8-64.
PASSING--ST. LOUIS: Kur.Warner 24-45-0-414. TENNESSEE:
Ste.McNair 22-36-0-214.
RECEIVING--ST. LOUIS: Tor.Holt 7-109, Isa.Bruce 6-162, Mar.Faulk 5-90,
Az-.Hakim 1-17, Ern.Conwell 1-16, Ric.Proehl 1-11, Rol.Williams 1-9,
Rob.Holcombe 1-1, Fre.Miller 1-(minus 1). TENNESSEE:
Jac.Harris 7-64, Fra.Wycheck 5-35, Kev.Dyson 4-41, Edd.George 2-35,
Isa.Byrd 2-21, Der.Mason 2-18.
MISSED FIELD GOALS--ST. LOUIS: Jef.Wilkins 34 TENNESSEE:
Al .Del Greco 47 47

[RamDez]

I win I win I win I win

[AugustaRamFan]

Great stats, but what the numbers don't tell you is.. why?

In the NO game (which I did not see or listen to), it appeared that the Rams were playing ahead in the score for the most part, which to me allows one to question the Martz play calling.

However, in those games where they passsed the ball 65%+, how many were games where the Rams got behind early and had to resort to the pass as the only alternative (to allow them to score faster)?

I would like to think that MM has a more balanced game plan for most teams. (But, then I should watch my Cornflakes at little more too!!)

[WILLN107]

I don't know off hand ,but how many times since '99 have the Rams been that far behind to were we had to pass to get back into a game? Also some times a flare pass or screen to Faulk is as good as a pitch to him to get him to the corner quicker so these numbers could be misleading as far as percentages go.

[Nick]

Look at the years that correspond with the percentages, too. In 2000 and 2001, the GSOT years where we were putting up points and dominating, there are more balanced games, more than likely because we were able to get an early lead and chew clock later in the game running the ball. In 2002, when the team wasn't doing well and often fell behind, the number of pass-heavy games has risen.

In 2003, there were two games - we lost both - in which 70% or more of our plays were passes. One was the first game against the Giants in which we had problems moving downfield because of turnovers and also fell behind. The second was the away game against San Fran. Note that Marshall Faulk and Lamar Gordon were both injured for this game, and once again, we fell behind early (losing 24-3 at the half).

I'm willing to bet that the 65% passing games went about the same way. I'm not saying the Rams would call 20 passes in a row and then start running the ball, but I think it all depends on the scoreboard and what the team's actually doing. If we're down by ten and not moving the ball well on offense, then we're going to need to go with plays that are going to get us the best yardage we can, and more often than not, that's through the air. Look at the yards gained per attempt for both passing and rushing, and consistently, you gain more yards passing on average.

It's a simple matter of what our offense is able to do against the defense and what's on the scoreboard. If we fall behind by a touchdown or two, does anyone really want us to chew clock so we can be balanced since statistically that's the key to winning? I'd hope not.