How to beat the Rams

[bela]

Don’t turn the ball over…

There’s been lots of talk about the quality of the teams the Rams have played. More interesting to me though has been the Rams impressive, albeit uncharacteristic, turnover differential. Through 5 games they are +12.

Maybe the Rams have vastly improved their D and changed the character of their offense, or maybe there’s something else going on.

At +12 through 5 games, they are on pace for +38 through the season. I don’t know what the record is, but my hunch is that 38 would be it. Consider, the league leader last year was Cincinnati at +24, in 2004 it was Indy at +19, KC at +19 in 2003, and GB at +17 in 2002. The Rams were -19 in ’02, +7 in ’03, -24 in ’04 and -10 in ’05.

Realistically you need to expect some regression to the mean. Even if they were to match Cincinnati’s performance in ’05 (and the Rams are not the ’05 Bengals), they would average about +1 per game for the rest of the season.

For fun, assume the Rams play lights out the rest of the year and match cincy, averaging +1 for the rest of their games. Now, you look at the games they’ve won this year it gets interesting.

Only one game this year were the Rams less than +2 in turnovers, and that was against San Fran - the only game they lost. Their “impressive” win against Denver required a +5 differential to pull off. Show me a single game where a team was +5 and didn’t win.

Twice they needed late game gifts, against Arizona and Green Bay to win. Both of those games they were +2. The only games they won convincingly required a +3 against Det, and a +5 against Denver.

The formula is pretty simple:

+3 to +5 = Convincing rams win
+2 = Barely beat bad team
+1 or less = Rams lose

So if you concede that the trend does not continue, what happens to the Rams when the turnover well dries up?

[AvengerRam]

Why shouldn't the trend continue? The Rams are playing a high risk, pressure style defense. That is why they give up a fairly high number of yards, but have a lot of takeaways.

As for things "balancing out"... they probably will. And, likewise, the Rams probably won't finish the season with an .800 winning percentage (which would put them at 12.8 wins).

That said, I expect the Rams will do well in the turnover ratio department in their remaining home games, where crowd noise can be a factor as well. The Rams have 6 remaining home games, so they are in decent shape for a playoff run.

[MauiRam]

You never know what is going to happen on game day. Obviously turnovers help a team to win, but anything can happen. From my perspective as a Ram fan, this Sunday is where the "rubber meets the road". If we play well and manage a win, then maybe we can think playoffs. If we get blown out at home probably not ... If our offense comes out hot and in sync, we could get by without continuing the plus turnover trend. We'll just have to wait and see .....

GO RAMS!!!!!

[LaRamsFanLongTime]

If our offense comes out hot and in sync,

Bulger hasn't thrown an interception in his past 214 attempts and has recorded a combined 857 yards and six touchdowns in his past three starts. Furthermore, he has also found success against the Seahawks -- Bulger has averaged 296 yards and thrown for 11 touchdowns in his past six overall starts against them.-Michael Fabiano on why Bulger is a good fantasy pick this weekend.

If that trend keeps up the offense wil be hot. I really think we need to pound Jackson and control the clock in this one. Let Bulger get us a lead and then just pound, pound, pound!!!

[jjigga3000]

Clock control is going to be key. In this case offense will be the best defense. We have to soften up their defense by pounding it to the inside, then wear them out by running to the outside. We have homefield advantage, if we stay the course as we have all year. We will get turnovers, cause Hasslebeck is turnover proned especially with pressure. This will probably be a close game, 3-7 points, but we will win. Book it.

[laram0]

Originally Posted by bela

Don’t turn the ball over…

There’s been lots of talk about the quality of the teams the Rams have played. More interesting to me though has been the Rams impressive, albeit uncharacteristic, turnover differential. Through 5 games they are +12.

Maybe the Rams have vastly improved their D and changed the character of their offense, or maybe there’s something else going on.

At +12 through 5 games, they are on pace for +38 through the season. I don’t know what the record is, but my hunch is that 38 would be it. Consider, the league leader last year was Cincinnati at +24, in 2004 it was Indy at +19, KC at +19 in 2003, and GB at +17 in 2002. The Rams were -19 in ’02, +7 in ’03, -24 in ’04 and -10 in ’05.

Realistically you need to expect some regression to the mean. Even if they were to match Cincinnati’s performance in ’05 (and the Rams are not the ’05 Bengals), they would average about +1 per game for the rest of the season.

For fun, assume the Rams play lights out the rest of the year and match cincy, averaging +1 for the rest of their games. Now, you look at the games they’ve won this year it gets interesting.

Only one game this year were the Rams less than +2 in turnovers, and that was against San Fran - the only game they lost. Their “impressive” win against Denver required a +5 differential to pull off. Show me a single game where a team was +5 and didn’t win.

Twice they needed late game gifts, against Arizona and Green Bay to win. Both of those games they were +2. The only games they won convincingly required a +3 against Det, and a +5 against Denver.

The formula is pretty simple:

+3 to +5 = Convincing rams win
+2 = Barely beat bad team
+1 or less = Rams lose

So if you concede that the trend does not continue, what happens to the Rams when the turnover well dries up?

You're really diggin' deep to convince yourself that the Seahawks will win this game.

[Rambos]

late game gifts

I will give you Warner fumble as a gift but Little made a great play to create a fumble. By the if Marc does not give AZ a gift 30 seconds early, we get out of there witht the win.

[theodus69]

Originally Posted by Rambos

I will give you Warner fumble as a gift but Little made a great play to create a fumble. By the if Marc does not give AZ a gift 30 seconds early, we get out of there witht the win.

And this is very true! Maybe I'll recant my(the worst 4-1 team in the league)...................UH, not yet!

[Fat Pang]

You could substitute any team in the NFL for the Rams in the wording of that question.

Turnover the ball more than the opposition and you ordinarily lose. It's fairly straightforward.

In response to those who claimed that 5 turnovers against the Broncos should have lead to a blowout, I responded that the tendency of winning the turnover battle was that you would win the game. It generally gives little indication of how much you should win by. That response is equally applicable here.

Turnovers cannot, as some have suggested, be entirely attributed to having divine blessing either. They are schemed and practiced as much as any other aspect of defensive play. The last time we had a DC who preached an aggressive ball hawking style of defence, we went from conceding 29.0 ppg to conceding 17.0 ppg in a single season, whilst improving modestly in yardage rankings. We all saw what happened when he left, we had Marmie mediocrity.

The difference was turnovers, good DC's get them, bad ones don't with largely the same group of players (Smith vs Marmie. I acknowledge our player base has changed this season). On that basis, I fully expect the turnover trend to continue, along with our tendency of getting gashed by a big play. Our front four isn't exactly the fearsome foursome and our need to send the sink on occasion means we'll die by the sword as well as live by it this season.

So I expect that our games will continue to be close all season long. We are not the kind of team that is going to consistently blow teams away and our propensity for giving up the big play means that most games will be interesting until the 4th.

Take the turnover's away and we'll struggle like any other team, but at least this season the opposition knows we have the ability and more importantly intent to bag a couple a game.

[Alec22]

Can we please stop with the "rams have weak wins" thing??
The seahawks(hurts to say it correctly) got killed by the bears and had a nice win against the giants. They only beat detriot 9-6(atleast the rams won by 4) and had a good win vs arizona.

So the way i see it.

Rams-lose to the 49'ers = sea. getting embarresed by the bears on national tv
Rams beat det in a close game = sea same thing
Rams beat arz. Sea. had a "better win i guess you could say against them, but a win all the same.
Rams beat GB. Sea bye
Rams beat Broncos = Sea. dominating NY

soo basicly get ready to be pounded SEA!!!

[bela]

Originally Posted by Alec22

Rams-lose to the 49'ers = sea. getting embarresed by the bears on national tv

Are you comparing the ***** and Bears? Or just equating losses?

[bela]

Originally Posted by Fat Pang

You could substitute any team in the NFL for the Rams in the wording of that question.

Turnover the ball more than the opposition and you ordinarily lose. It's fairly straightforward.

In fact, you win about 80% of the time. The point of my thread isn’t that the Rams won turnover battle in their wins. Rather, what I'm saying is that they didn’t, or barely, won unless they completely dominated in turnovers.

My second point was that the current +/- pace that the Rams are on is unmaintainable. I appreciate the fact that a new DC can bring a new defense and how that affects +/-. But, you are not going to go from -24 in ’04, -10 in ’05 to shattering the NFL record with virtually the same personnel. Even if you end the season over +20, which would be astounding, that would be less than +1 throughout the rest of your games.

Again, my point is very straightforward: [First, turnovers are critical to the Rams success. And second, the pace at which the Rams have been generating turnovers is likely to decrease both because of the law of averages (they aren’t going to double the current record), and because of the quality of your upcoming opponents.

Do you disagree with either of those statements?

[general counsel]

If i wanted to beat the rams, i would run the ball repeatedly and then use play action. Defensively, i would blitz up the middle and get in bulgers face as much as possible. As most others have said, turnovers are critical.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[AvengerRam]

This thread is starting to remind me of Hank Goldberg, who will give stats like: "The Seahawks are 13-2 on natural grass in games that start before 4:00 and in which the opposition's fumble total times the square root of Mike Holmgren's waiste size is greater than the number of passes thrown to the left on second down by left handed quarterbacks on Monday night."

[RAMMAN68]

Twice they needed late game gifts, against Arizona and Green Bay to win. Both of those games they were +2. The only games they won convincingly required a +3 against Det, and a +5 against Denver.

You are very off on this point. The AZ game was a GIFT, (or one could say that Warner was showing that he is still a Ram and gave it up for the Clan.) the GB game was a FORCED fumble.