Stats say It All

Looking foward to next week I did a little reasearch,
Hassleback has 13 sacks in 4 games
Bulger has 13 sacks in 5 games
Edge: Rams
Hassleback 6 TD's 7 INT's
Bulger 7 TD's 0 INT's
Edge: Rams

The key thing that's stands out more than anything on Defense is our +12 turnover ratio to there -1

A lot of people will say that Seattle is a Strong team, I don't concur. I think Seattle is an average team at best. Hassleback doesn't take care of the ball, and is careless with the ball, having more INT's than TD's. Also they have yet to get a solid running game established.

As much as people wanna complain that we have trouble in the Red Zone, what I notice is the fact the Bulger takes care of the Ball. 5 games with no INT's is a franchise Record shared with Roman Gabriel, who was no slouch.

Yes Seattle is coming off a bye, but, we are coming off a 3 game winning streak, and are also have homefield advantage this coming week. No we haven't blown away competition, but we have done what is neccesary to win.
A lot of people are looking past us, and we lurking below, the radar. I expected us to have a 4-1 record at this point, and I expect us to win agianst Seattle especially at home. This is a must win game, becuase of the game we lost against the ******. We have to win, 1 to keep first place, and if also establish a tie breaker, in case of an even record with them at the end of the Season.

I'm interested in seeing what the rest of you think.

I like your optimism, but reality is that we haven't been playing good teams. The shesquawks will determine what type of team we are. We are barely winning thanks to what some might call luck. Warner's & Favre's fumbles were the deciding factors. We could easily be 1-4.

great post love the info. Hasselback with no established running to date this season has been taking more chances down field. he has 2new receivers that he is getting acclimated to, so it takes time. This game once again will come down to wheter or not the rams can create turnovers and play great ball control offense...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjigga3000

Hassleback has 13 sacks in 4 games

---

I also think it's interesting to take a closer look as to how those sacks came about. Of the 13 sacks, ten of them came in the Lions and Bears games. All ten were from defensive linemen playing in a Tampa 2 scheme that emphasizes the line's ability to get pressure by themselves.

That's important to note because the Rams have not done a good job generating consistent pressure from their front four. Not including today's game, the Rams have only generated 7 sacks in four games. Three of those sacks were from Leonard Little. The rest of the defensive line accounted for just 1.5 sacks of the seven.

If the Rams can't get pressure on Hasselbeck with their front four, it's going to be a long game. Because in recent weeks, we've seen the Rams bring extra men only to have them either picked up, blocked out of the way, or just not get to the QB in time. Hasselbeck and his receivers will eat us alive if we bring extra heat but still can't pressure him. He may not statistically have had a good four-game start, but don't underestimate his talent when given time to throw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

I also think it's interesting to take a closer look as to how those sacks came about. Of the 13 sacks, ten of them came in the Lions and Bears games. All ten were from defensive linemen playing in a Tampa 2 scheme that emphasizes the line's ability to get pressure by themselves.

That's important to note because the Rams have not done a good job generating consistent pressure from their front four. Not including today's game, the Rams have only generated 7 sacks in four games. Three of those sacks were from Leonard Little. The rest of the defensive line accounted for just 1.5 sacks of the seven.

If the Rams can't get pressure on Hasselbeck with their front four, it's going to be a long game. Because in recent weeks, we've seen the Rams bring extra men only to have them either picked up, blocked out of the way, or just not get to the QB in time. Hasselbeck and his receivers will eat us alive if we bring extra heat but still can't pressure him. He may not statistically have had a good four-game start, but don't underestimate his talent when given time to throw.

---

I'd have to agree with this. Looking at the Chicago game (Which, thanks to ESPN asia, I had a chance to on Thursday) in isolation would be a mistake. Chicago can get tremendous pressure out of their base D, forcing Hasselbeck to throw into a bigger crowd than the Rams would present him.

Yes, the Seahawks would look to be struggling right now and we are playing at home, but I'd be a little cagey when asked to forecast a result here.

You can definitely count on Haslett bring a lot of different Blitz packages on Hassleback to create the turnovers. When he's pressures Hassleback isn't the smartest QB, and tends to make mistakes. I failed to mention that he has a rating of 74.6 while Bulger has 94.6, and after this game I believe it will be 103.3. Part of the reason he had the year he had last year was, 1. the ability to establish the running game, and 2 the offensive line. The line hasn't been consistent, and I doubt that Alexander plays, or they allow him to play. They are not going to let him risk the season for 1 game.

Quote:

---

You can definitely count on Haslett [to] bring a lot of different Blitz packages on Hassleback to create the turnovers. -- JJigga3000

---

For sure. I think the Rams defense, injuries not withstanding, will want to be fully prepared for this game, perhaps more than any one game up to this point in the season. Get Matt out of his confort zone this coming Sunday; we didn't do a very good job at that today Vs. Favre until his very last play -- whew!

I agree, it will be most interesting to see what the 'Stats' speak of after game 6!

I dont aggree. Almost all of those stats came aganist the bears and the rams would be the same way if they didnt have SJ against the bears. And we havent faced a team the quality of the bears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjigga3000

When he's pressures Hassleback isn't the smartest QB, and tends to make mistakes.

---

I don't know, I think Hasselbeck is a very solid QB both in intelligence and ability. That said, if Alexander does not play, there will be an awful lot of weight on those shoulders and he'll be vulnerable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

I also think it's interesting to take a closer look as to how those sacks came about. Of the 13 sacks, ten of them came in the Lions and Bears games. All ten were from defensive linemen playing in a Tampa 2 scheme that emphasizes the line's ability to get pressure by themselves.

That's important to note because the Rams have not done a good job generating consistent pressure from their front four. Not including today's game, the Rams have only generated 7 sacks in four games. Three of those sacks were from Leonard Little. The rest of the defensive line accounted for just 1.5 sacks of the seven.

If the Rams can't get pressure on Hasselbeck with their front four, it's going to be a long game. Because in recent weeks, we've seen the Rams bring extra men only to have them either picked up, blocked out of the way, or just not get to the QB in time. Hasselbeck and his receivers will eat us alive if we bring extra heat but still can't pressure him. He may not statistically have had a good four-game start, but don't underestimate his talent when given time to throw.

---

Exactly and Favre's ability to sit and wait with little pressure in today's game is a perfect illustration of what it might be like to feel like the Giants when they played the c-chickens.

I put little faith in stats even thought they are the only menas we have to compare players/teams with another.

Stats fail to reveal the quality of the opponent and injury factors as well as rivalry content and officiating errors.

Stats tend to be a tad more realistic further into the season after the teams being compared have played more common opponents, but in my book stats will rarely if ever tell the real story.

Nonetheless stats are all we have, so skew them to your advantage the best you can! lol

RnD

GO RAMS!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alec22

I dont aggree. Almost all of those stats came aganist the bears and the rams would be the same way if they didnt have SJ against the bears. And we havent faced a team the quality of the bears.

---

Yes we have we faced the Bronco's. We beat a good team when we played them. Also SJ is a better back than SA. SA is one dimensional, and needs a great line to get the yardage he got last year. In fact last year the Hawks had the best tandem in the NFL.

What's funny to me is some you fans wanna believe the worst than the best. I don't get it. I could see if I had no basis for my opinion. We have played good teams, records don't say it all. The Lions almost beat the Hawks, and the Hawks couldn't score on them, we put up 41. Denver has since won two in a row since we've played them against good teams. Arizona with exception of Warner is a decent team, we beat them in their own home. Green Bay is a hard place to win for any team.

I don't buy that look who we've played, we haven't played anyone. You play your schedule given and win the games it's as simple as that. The Rams don't make the schedule their given the schedule, and they've won every game except for one.

And if I'm to take your philosophy, the Bears have yet to play a team with a serious running game, and a decent Offensive Line. Their D has had 3 years to gel.

So can we please stop with this we haven't played anyone yet. So what happens when we play Seattle, and SA doesn't play and we beat them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjigga3000

Also SJ is a better back than SA.

---

Sorry jigga, but you're 100% nuts on this one. Alexander needs to receive the credit he deserves, which is being a top three RB in this league. To say Jackson is better right now is crazy talk, IMO.

As for the teams you listed, let's examine...

-LIONS (0-5): The Bills also blew out the Pats in the season opener in 2003 only to finish 6-10 on the year. Teams usually aren't playing their best in their first game of the year, so saying the Lions are good because of how they played Seattle in Week One is not a good indicator to use.

-BRONCOS (2-1): Yes they beat the Pats, but struggling at home to beat a Chiefs team that's without Trent Green shouldn't be listed as a major accomplishment.

-CARDINALS (1-4): Um, last I checked, we played them with Warner and still were lucky to get out of there with a win. You can't just completely write out a significant player on a team to try and make the case that they're good.

-PACKERS (1-4): Historically Lambeau has been a tough place to win, but not recently. They're 0-3 at home this year and 7-12 at home over the last three seasons. It doesn't carry the magic like it used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjigga3000

So what happens when we play Seattle, and SA doesn't play and we beat them?

---

Then we can finally say we beat someone? :x