Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ineffective running game???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ineffective running game???

    I'm not sure where the notion is coming from that our running game has been so blatently ineffective that Martz has to pass on 80% of the plays as he did against the 'aints. Our running game is 7th in yards per attempt at 4.7 yards per carry. We are one of only five teams that have no runs for more than 20 yards. (Translation: there aren't a couple of 60,70, or 80 yard anomaly runs skewing that yards per carry average.) Yet we are dead last in runs per game. And we have the lowest run-pass ratio in the NFL. Why must our run-pass ratio be so low?

    Some teams that are traditional passing teams, like Green Bay (who run 45.9% of the time, 3.9 ypc) you can understand. Or teams like Dallas (36.3%, 4.0 ypc) & Cincinnati (41.5%, 3.8 ypc), who are new-found passing teams. For that matter, there are the teams that are forced to pass more because of suspect RBs like Arizona (42.0%, 3.3 ypc), Philly (37.3%, 4.6 ypc), Miami (38.5%, 2.1 ypc), Tampa (35.2%, 3.5 ypc) or Detroit (43.7%, 3.5 ypc).

    And yet, with Faulk & Jackson and their combined 4.7 ypc (which is higher than every team mentioned above), we run less (34.5%) than any of them.

    Again I ask, why are we not running the ball?
    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  • #2
    Re: Ineffective running game???

    Originally posted by HUbison
    We are one of only five teams that have no runs for more than 20 yards. (Translation: there aren't a couple of 60,70, or 80 yard anomaly runs skewing that yards per carry average.)
    What is skewing that yards per carry average, though, is the game against Arizona, a team that ranks dead last in the league in rush defense (180.7, 32nd) and is among the worst in average yards per carry against (5.3, 29th) after three weeks.

    Looking at the last two games, we're averaging only 3.0 yards per carry from Faulk and Jackson, which isn't good at all. We were slightly better against the Saints, but not good enough to make me feel very confident in our running game.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ineffective running game???

      What get's overlooked all the time are the intangibles that rushing "attempts" bring into the equation. Does any defense in the league think that the Rams are actually going to run the ball? No, which makes it that much more difficult to pass. Obviously, the yardage is nice but the scoreboard is what really matters and the Rams aren't scoring points that well.

      Against 2 of the weaker defenses in the league the Rams averaged just 21 points. What's worse is that the Saints are giving up 170 yards per game rushing and the Rams didn't put any effort into exploiting that weakness. There are REASONS, more important than yardage, for running the football. For the Rams, nice, long, sustained drives that keep the defense off the field would be very helpful right about now.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ineffective running game???

        Originally posted by Nick
        Looking at the last two games, we're averaging only 3.0 yards per carry from Faulk and Jackson, which isn't good at all. We were slightly better against the Saints, but not good enough to make me feel very confident in our running game.
        Over the past two games:
        Faulk 24 carries for 64 yards (2.7 ypc)
        Jackson 5 carries for 25 yards (5.0 ypc)

        I would say this serves Avenger's Jacksonite argument more than why we run the ball less than any team in the NFL.
        The more things change, the more they stay the same.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Ineffective running game???

          I doubt Jackson would have had much more success had the numbers of carries been reversed, but I could be wrong. Regardless, I think the Arizona game spoiled us into thinking that we had our running game back. Little did we know...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Ineffective running game???

            I would say this serves Avenger's Jacksonite argument more than why we run the ball less than any team in the NFL.
            Oh really? Do those stats take into account the goal line carries that Faulk has? With so few attempts, a goal line attempt or two is going to bring his average down. Does it take into account the situations Jackson carries the ball? I know he had a run where he rattled off 8 or 9 yards against the Saints where he was the second option. Saints keyed on Faulk, gave Jackson an easy run.

            Never mind. Faulk is done. Put him on special teams coverage so we can at least get something out of him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Ineffective running game???

              Since when is 10-12 carries a yardstick by which you determine the running game isnt gonna work? By these standards perhaps ONE CARRY would be a determinate factor. These running stats are a joke. This is a RECURRING THEME in nearly EVERY RAMS LOSS in recent years...NEGELCT THE RUN AND LOSE. What an 'offensive genius'.
              "You people point your 'f'in' finger and say theres the bad guy....what that make you....good?" Tony Montana

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Ineffective running game???

                Fargo is right. We can't run the ball a dozen times per game and say it doesn't work.
                Originally posted by Nick
                What is skewing that yards per carry average, though, is the game against Arizona
                Here's another way to look at it:

                Arizona's run defense against:
                NE + Atl = 5.1 ypc
                Rams = 5.9 ypc

                Atlanta's run defense against:
                SF + Ari = 3.1 ypc
                Rams = 2.0 ypc
                The 'cons shut us down. That I'll stipulate.

                New Orleans' run defense against:
                Sea + SF = 4.5 ypc
                Rams = 5.2 ypc

                Our opponents combined run defense against:
                their other opponents = 4.4 ypc
                the Rams = 4.7 ypc

                The Falcons were the only team to hold us to less ypc than their other opponents. I don't think the Arizona game is skewing our ypc numbers. We're running better than other teams regardless of the defense.

                Which brings me back to my original thought....Martz, buddy, pal, please run the ball more than you have been. I'm begging you.
                The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                Comment

                Related Topics

                Collapse

                • RamWraith
                  How do you...
                  by RamWraith
                  ...go back to Faulk after a performance like that of Jackson's against one of the best run defenses in the league.
                  -12-05-2004, 12:43 PM
                • ramsanddodgers
                  Okay, Jackson ran for 1,042 yards
                  by ramsanddodgers
                  and only 16 Running Backs had more than 1,000 while another 4 had 900+.

                  The question is, is 1,000 yards still the goal that it used to be?

                  I realize that in today's NFL where the passing game is so much more relied upon that it may be harder to get enough carries to get the yards but one need only average 62.5 yards a game to get the 1,000.

                  Averaging 75 yards a game will get one 1,200 yards and 93.75 will garner 1,500.

                  Is it time to set a loftier goal for "premiere" runners or is 1,000 yards still going to be the 'magic number?
                  -01-02-2009, 10:10 PM
                • RamWraith
                  Why the Rams Must Run
                  by RamWraith
                  By Bernie Miklasz
                  09/22/2007

                  Just a follow-up on my Saturday ďBitsĒ column in which I made a quick point on the need to give the football to Steven Jackson.

                  In the first two games, the Rams have attempted to pass the ball on 77.3 percent of their plays in the second half.

                  They have scored zero touchdowns in the second half.

                  This is no coincidence.

                  You just canít have that kind of flagrant imbalance and expect to keep the defense off guard. You canít abandon the run and become so predictable that you make it easy for the defense to blow in and attack QB Marc Bulger. Iím not saying I want to see a Chuck Knox offense, but reasonable balance in your offensive approach is always a plus.

                  I know Jackson has to play better. Iíve said that multiple times in print, on the blog, and on my 1380 ESPN radio show.

                  But if last year is our guide, Jackson is a back who thrives on heavy work.

                  In 2006, he was at his best once he got more than 15 carries in a game.

                  On his 16th to 20th carries in a game last season, he averaged 4.8 yards per rush.

                  On his 21st to 25th carries in a game last season, he averaged 5.5 yards per rush.

                  On his 26th to 30th carries in a game, he averaged 4.1 yards per rush.

                  And on Jacksonís handful of carries beyond 30 rushes in a game, he averaged 6.5 yards per attempt.

                  To add it all up, on his rushing attempts that exceeded 15 in a game last season, Jackson had 114 carries for 476 yards, for an average of 5 yards per run.

                  Moreover, the Rams must call more plays that suit Jacksonís profile.

                  And what he does best is power up inside, between the tackles.

                  Since the start of the 2005 season, Jackson has 193 inside runs for 1,026 yards, for 5.3 yards per carry. The Rams call too many plays that have Jackson dancing around on the perimeter. Heís not effective running to his left, and better going to his right. But the inside game is where Jackson delivers. Heís a big strong back who punishes tacklers. His coaches should play to those strengths.

                  One more note about the predictable nature of the Ramsí offense:

                  This team isnít using the middle of the field nearly enough in its passing game.

                  In the first two games, the Rams threw the ball 25 times to the left side, 49 times to the right side, but only 9 times over the middle. (There were also 13 pass attempts that originated behind the line; the quick outs and such).

                  Does that make sense, considering that the team signed free agent Randy McMichael to upgrade the receiving skills at tight end?

                  In the running game, and in the passing game, the Rams should make a more concerted effort to attack the middle.

                  Perhaps weíll see more of that at Tampa Bay.
                  -09-22-2007, 03:51 PM
                • DJRamFan
                  Battle of strengths key Minnesota's Saturday matchup
                  by DJRamFan
                  By David McCoy Minnesota Daily
                  Minneapolis, MN (U-WIRE) -- Anyone who has been paying even remote attention to Minnesota's football team the past three weeks has noticed the way it has been able to run all over its nonconference opponents with ease.

                  After those three games, the Gophers are averaging 335 yards per game.

                  That figure is No. 1 in the country.

                  But the Gophers know they can't get too excited about that fact.

                  After all, they haven't exactly faced the nation's toughest run defenses, such as, well, Purdue.

                  The 11th-ranked Boilermakers have the nation's best run defense, giving up an average of just 16 yards on the ground per game.

                  And they just happen to be Minnesota's next opponent at 11 a.m. Saturday at the Metrodome.

                  "Everything goes up a notch," Gophers center Greg Eslinger said. "You've got to play at your absolute peak. There's no such thing as taking a play off or getting a bad block, because if those things happen, you're going to have some serious consequences because you're going up against the best opponents in the league."

                  On the flip side, Purdue's running attack is ranked fourth in the Big Ten at 225 yards per game while the Gophers' run defense is ranked sixth, giving up an average of 95 per game.

                  Their passing attacks are similarly ranked. The Gophers are seventh in the Big Ten in both passing offense and defense, while the Boilermakers are ninth in passing offense and 10th on defense.

                  The present scenario could mean one of two things: The team that wins the key matchup between the Gophers rushing offense and Purdue's run defense will have the crucial advantage, or the two strengths will cancel out and whichever team can revive its mediocre passing attack will dominate through the air.

                  Wide receiver Logan Payne said the Gophers receiving corps not only feels responsibility for taking the pressure off their top-ranked running backs, but also feels the need to make big plays as well.





                  "The home run is going to be there," Payne said. "There's no way that they can stop our run and also take away the home run. The challenge is there, and we need to make those plays."

                  While the Gophers' ground game has been consistent each week, their passing attack has been spotty at best.

                  But quarterback Bryan Cupito said he saw a lot of improvement in the passing game between the Colorado State game (190 yards, two touchdowns, one interception) and Saturday's game against Florida Atlantic (230 yards, two touchdowns, no picks).

                  "We proved that we can catch the ball as good as we can run the ball," Cupito said. "We're ready for Purdue."

                  Not quite on the former. Better be on the latter.
                  ...
                  -09-20-2005, 02:29 PM
                • r8rh8rmike
                  The Dichotomy Of Carolina
                  by r8rh8rmike
                  This is going to be another interesting test of where the Rams are as a team. At 2-3, Carolina has been all over the place, especially the last few weeks. They were slammed by the Cardinals two weeks ago 22-6, then did some slamming of their own last week, beating Minnesota 35-10.

                  They have a great defense (7th in passing yards allowed per game, 3th in rushing yards allowed per game, 2nd in points allowed per game), and a mediocre offense (27th in passing yards per game, 7th in rushing yards per game, 19th in points per game).

                  With their two units at opposite ends of the spectrum, I can't wait to see how the Rams respond, on both sides of the ball. Can we run on them? If not, can we switch gears and pass on them? Can we stop their running game? Can we slow down Newton, who went from a 47.8 rating against the Cardinals, to a 143.4 rating against Minnesota?

                  Again, it should be interesting, and telling.
                  -10-15-2013, 05:57 PM
                Working...
                X