some interesting stats from the game

**Nick** · -10-18-2005

Originally Posted by maineram

The thing that got me of the defensive side for this game was defensive players wearing wrist bands to know the different packages that they were running.

Come on people !!!!! We're not talking about a starting rookie QB. This is the second year in this defense and they need to wear wrist bands with plays on them so they can remember what to do ????

Actually, it's the first year in this defense for Brandon Green, Dexter Coakley, Chris Claiborne, Corey Ivy, Terry Fair, Jerome Carter, Chris Johnson, and Mike Furrey, and I believe they were wearing wristbands to counter the up-tempo offense the Colts were running, but I could be wrong on that. It just seems that if there were Ram defenders who couldn't play this defense without a cheat sheet, they would have broken it out well before Week Six.

Originally Posted by sbramfan

I thought Marmie's D scheme was supposed to be very similar to the cover 2?

Actually, I don't think it is. I believe Marmie was sort of forced into playing more Cover 2 than he would have liked to last season, and was trying to get even further away from it this year. From what I've read, if I remember correctly, his defense is much more complicated than Lovie's Cover 2, and has players thinking before they react.

Keep in mind Lovie's Cover 2 worked by a very loose definition of the term. It basically only worked because of the turnovers forced. The Rams under Lovie's scheme still gave up yards and points, as visible in the last few games of 2003 when our run defense was basically as bad as it has been under Marmie.

***ramhard*** · -10-19-2005

I don't know why people keep trying to mold history and make it seem that Lovie wasn't a top D coach that fielded a D that could take you to the Superbowl. He has his scheme and it works. Seems like his D is doing pretty good in Chicago.

It is 2nd in the NFC in points allowed, and 2nd in the NFC in yardage allowed. I'd take double that right now!!!!!

***RamJackson39*** · -10-19-2005

Outside of Little, SHOW ME THE TALENT ON MY DEFENSE. Anyone please, shed some light because I can't see a dad gum stud anywhere on this defense.

Tinoisamoa, Kennedy, and Pickett. These guys are good. Pickett and Kennedy handle the front of the line, even though they are double teamed nearly every play. Tinoisamoa is just...amazing.

Hargrove would be better if only he wouldnt over pursue. He wants to make a play so bad that he often over pursues a play. We have got to find a way to calm him down.

***moklerman*** · -10-19-2005

The Rams under Lovie's scheme still gave up yards and points, as visible in the last few games of 2003

While that is true, I think at least part of the problem at that particular time was that everyone knew Lovie was gone at the end of the season. He may have even been dividing his attention in preparation for the new gig.

The results he's getting in Chicago would seem to indicate his philosophy is more sound than Marmie's.

***Rambos*** · -10-19-2005

plays 30-40%

Of the 30-40% plays, played how many where run plays. How may where run plays where the the runner did not get past the front four. 38 plays x .30% = 11.40 plays.

This was scheme more then anything, the Dolts can pass! We had to stop the big play and die slow that is what we did. If we did not give them the ball 4 times on our side of the field the game would have been closer for sure.

***Curly Horns*** · -10-19-2005

My understanding is that the wristbands were used to counter the colts no-huddle offense.

Normally the Rams substitute for situations. Since they did not have time to sub they had to go with the guys on the field.

They used the wristbands for assignments in situations that they might not normally be in without the no-huddle.

I think the colts adjusted well to the package that the Rams were using. Marmie on the other hand seemed intent on staying with the game plan and did not appear to make any adjustments. Seems he could have given the colts some different looks, but what the hell do I know.

***ramsbruce*** · -10-19-2005

Originally Posted by Ferter

My understanding is that the wristbands were used to counter the colts no-huddle offense.

I believe thats what they were for.

***Rambos*** · -10-19-2005

Vitt estimated that Claiborne logged only 12 plays against the Colts. Most of those came in either goal line situations or when the Colts were trying to run out the clock at the end of the game.

Of the 30-40% plays, played how many where run plays. How may where run plays where the the runner did not get past the front four. 38 plays x .30% = 11.40 plays.

Not a bad guess If I say so myself.The LB are playing ok when they are in the game.

***thoey*** · -10-19-2005

Originally Posted by adarian_too

TX says it's his D, I say fire TX.

LOL

A2... No, we don't want to lose Tx. If anything, we want to let him loose.

But, I got to ask, what the hell is that avatar of yours and what is it from? I refuse to be your translator if you are going to stand behind me looking like that...