Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Domination or Passable?

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

  • Domination or Passable?

    Which would you rather do: Dominate on one side of the ball, be it offense or defense, or be average on both sides of the ball.

    :helmet:
    34
    I prefer domination on one side of the ball
    70.59%
    24
    I prefer balance on both sides of the ball
    29.41%
    10

  • #2
    Re: Domination or Passable?

    If by balance you mean being equally mediocre, than no. You can take the logic stream from here.
    Semper Fi!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Domination or Passable?

      Tough question. I'm assuming that along with domination, the other side of the ball is really bad? I guess you gotta ask yourself "can you make the playoffs being totally average?" and "can you do it with a totally one-sided team?" I went with a balanced team, but I believe if a team is trying to take that next step to go deep into the playoffs, it would they would take similar paths.

      A one-sided team is a couple players away from upgrading their offense/defense, and a balanced team is a few play makers away from dominating on offense/defense. A couple of one-sided teams that come to mind are the Colts from a couple years ago (awful defense) and the Ravens (bad offense). It seemed that the Colts achilles heal was always their defense (until that string of good playoff performances) but it always seemed to be holding them back. Then again, how many average teams make the playoffs?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Domination or Passable?

        Well let's see .. last year we couldn't stop anyone consistently with our defense, and we could barely score on offense. I'd say that overall we were pretty well balanced .. Whatever we are in 2010, I hope we can at least move up from a single win to multiple wins ..

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Domination or Passable?

          Wells lets use Madden Scale here. Team strength 0-99.

          A Balanced Team is 75 Offense, 75 Defense

          While a dominating one-sided team would be 90 Offense, 60 Defense or vice-versa

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Domination or Passable?

            Originally posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
            Which would you rather do: Dominate on one side of the ball, be it offense or defense, or be average on both sides of the ball.

            :helmet:

            Easy analogy please refer to the Bears of 07 when their D and Special Teams actually outscored their O. The made it to the Superbowl but were routed having a terrible QB fumble away the game. The real reason that having a dominating side of the ball is better is because it re leaves pressure from the other side of the ball and places it on the opposition. It can be a huge strength and a huge weakness, but in all you are going no where with mediocrity, but with one dominant aspect you stand a chance.

            Lets hope for a double headed dominant monster like last years Steelers!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Domination or Passable?

              I prefer a stronger offense than defense. I really dont think there is such a thing as a clearly dominant team. Most teams have some sort of balance. I think a Dominating offensive team these day would be the Colts and the Saints. Their defenses aren't terrible, but their offenses are just way better. I think the Rams have the pieces to be a manageable defense you have the playmaking Safety OJ, The leader and key cog at MLB Lauranatis, the pretty good corner in Bartell, and the pass rusher Long. Is that Dwight Freeney, Garry Bracket, Bob Sanders, and Kelvin Hayden? Is it even Will Smith, Jonathan Vilma, Darren Sharper, and Jabari Greer? No not yet, but they could be easily because they are all young with tons of potential. If the Rams can build better depth and get the second star on the d-line like the Freeny Mathis Combo or Smith Ellis combo. IMO we are a Suh, a decent LB, and depth away from a good defense.

              Offense is where we need to put in the most work. Line has some really good players in Bell, Smith and Brown, so you really don't need all stars on the right side. Even though today you don't necessarily need an all pro running back the Rams have one and his versatility is definately a plus. Its obvious the Rams need a Franchise QB, but they need weapons just as much. If the Rams found a bonified number 1 receiver and TE that is matchup problem for DBs and LBs we have the young complimentary receivers to have a great receiving core.

              IMO top top priorities in no specific order. Dominant DL mate for long (IMO DE or DT doesn't matter), Number 1 receiver, and a Franchise QB. Not saying we don't have other needs, but if Billy D could fills those top 3 holes it will take the Rams a long way right now and in the future.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Domination or Passable?

                IBetcha you can't guess what I voted for???

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Domination or Passable?

                  Originally posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
                  Wells lets use Madden Scale here. Team strength 0-99.

                  A Balanced Team is 75 Offense, 75 Defense

                  While a dominating one-sided team would be 90 Offense, 60 Defense or vice-versa
                  The madden scale....... Anyways I prefer domination on the offensive side. The GSOT proved that defense doesn't win championships! Oh wait, mike jones saved us, so I guess defense does win championships...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Domination or Passable?

                    It's a great question really.

                    My vote is to be dominate on one side of the ball. The question in my mind is which side?

                    The NFL via continuing rule changes that favor the offense has made the league an offensive league. So do we focus on the offense or go against the grain and focus on the defense?

                    I guess unless we come up with a franchise type QB we should focus on the D.

                    :helmet:
                    sigpic :ram::helmet:

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Domination or Passable?

                      I prefer the Rams' scoreboard number be larger than the opponents' scoreboard number.

                      I could give two poops about what the numbers are, just as long as they achieve the desired relevant contrast.
                      The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Domination or Passable?

                        I picked too be a balanced team. Although I personally would love to see the rams build a dominating defence. Their if just a certain swagger and respect that comes from that.

                        For me having a balanced team means that you are just a maybe a piece or two away from banging on a championship door. I feel that just dominating one side of the ball a little uneasy. It is difficult to watch I find knowing that teams can just game plan so easily against that.

                        I.E if the other team has a strong offence but a mediocre defence than you just run the clock on them pound the ball. If they have a strong defence and a week offence. You make sure to keep their defence on the field for as long as you can to they will get tired and deflated.

                        Go Rams :helmet:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Domination or Passable?

                          i would love to outscore teams in a track meet. dominating offense is more exciting.
                          LA RAMMER

                          It's Jim not Chris
                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HNgqQVHI_8

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Domination or Passable?

                            I would prefer a dominating offense with a passable d. I do think with spags, it will be just the opposite. Whatever it takes to get the W

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Domination or Passable?

                              Originally posted by Trevor View Post
                              The madden scale....... Anyways I prefer domination on the offensive side. The GSOT proved that defense doesn't win championships! Oh wait, mike jones saved us, so I guess defense does win championships...
                              Actually, the 1999 GSOT had a dominant defense to go along with that dominant offense.

                              I think defenses help win championships. A great offense combined with a decent defense seems to be a winning formula these days, although it can work the other way judging by the success the Steelers have had recently.

                              My preference would be to have a dominant offense, to be able to keep your team in games or ahead, with the ability to come from behind if necessary. I also think a high scoring offense helps a defense by keeping pressure on the opposing team, taking them out a comfortable game plan and rhythm, which often leads to mistakes. The GSOT did this, as have the Saints the last few years.

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              • laram0
                                Defense vs. Offense
                                by laram0
                                The RAMS defense ranked 23rd overall last season and 28th in the points allowed category. For the season the RAMS scored 367 points while allowing 381 points that's a (-14) point differential. Out of the 12 teams that made the playoffs only the Seahawks (-6) and Giants (-7) had negative point differentials. There are alot of areas of concern on our Defense. DE, DT's, SLB, Safety and even cornerback has been brought up. It will probably take more than 1 year to upgrade all the areas of concern defensively.

                                So let's think outside the defensive box for a minute or two.

                                Our offense was ranked 4th passing and 17th rushing with an overall ranking of 6th. Considering the offense got off to a slow start last season and Marc Bulger was sacked 49 times.(Only 3 teams allowed more sacks) Also taking into consideration the COLTS won the Superbowl.

                                How many areas of concern are there on the offensive side of the ball? Imagine if Marc Bulger was sacked 1/2 of the 49 times from last season.
                                Could our offense be potent enough to overcome some of the defensive inefficiencies. I use the word "some" because I feel like the Rams will be able to address some of the issues on defense for 2007 but not all. Again, the offense could take us to the promise land (playoffs) thus allowing the team to plug the holes on defense intelligently without haste. The key question in my mind is how much tweaking needs to be done on the offense to makes us that potent. Should the RAMS focus on the offensive needs this off season 1st and foremost? Understanding that the defense will get the obvious attention it needs, just not all in one off season.

                                Imagine making the playoffs in 2007 knowing that there are still a few defense holes to fill for 2008. How would we look for 2009,2010 etc..
                                A long run of playoff appearances and possibly another SUPERBOWL or 2?
                                -02-15-2007, 01:09 PM
                              • Curly Horns
                                Defending the defense while offending the pessimists
                                by Curly Horns
                                :l


                                Defending the defense might seem like a tough task to a lot of Rams fans these days. Why I choose to take on such a low, down, dirty task is beyond me. Maybe I'm the consummate Rams fan. The type that has always been in love with a bit of an underdog. Hey, if you have been a Rams fan for very long, you know what I'm talking about.

                                So where does one begin to defend this defense amongst all the pessimism? Since we can not predict the future, I say history is the best option.

                                Most of us remember what it was like to be a perennial basement dweller only to rise to the top after the '99 season with a shiny new Lombardi and high hopes for a repeat the following season.

                                And why not a repeat? We had the GSOT and a pretty good defense. Granted the defense was not the best, but it was no slouch. The majority of defensive starters returned, the defensive coordinator returned, the same scheme returned, and yet we all know that the bottom fell out in 2000.

                                Hmmm. Just goes to show how easily a group of players can rise and fall from season to season. Scheme, coaching, talent level are certainly factors, but ultimately it comes from within the group of players. They can rise. History has proven it.

                                So how good does this defense really need to be to win a championship? Our own Rams history and very recent history has proven they do not need to be the best defense in the league. They simply need to be good enough when it matters most.

                                Let's look a little deeper into that magical season of '99. There are those who claim that your best defense is a potent offense. I'm quite sure this is not entirely true. However, we have seen it work to our advantage. The potent offense of the '99 squad certainly helped the defense. The offense was able to score quickly and often. This put the defense in a good position against opposing offenses as they were forced to play catch-up. Our 2007 offense has the ability to be quite potent. This can help the 2007 defense. History has proven it.

                                Now Let's look at recent history. Most of us know that Baltimore had the #1 defense last season and where that got them. Did most of you also know that the Raiders had the number #3 defense in the league? I'm sure we all know where that got them. Our Rams of course came in at #23. Not good enough, some might say. Okay let's look further. Remember the Colts of last season? They finished at #21. Well, the Rams have no pass rush, some say. True, to some extent, however they were #8 in pass defense and #3 against receiving. Ah, but the Rams run defense is crap, some might add. Well that is correct. The Rams run defense finished just ahead of the last place Colts run defense.

                                Hmmm. How good does the defense need to be to win a championship? Certainly not the best. History has proven it.



                                Ultimately the best way to defend our...
                                -03-12-2007, 09:43 PM
                              • Barry Waller
                                Building a WINNER Not All About Balance
                                by Barry Waller
                                Fans always think a team with a good offense and average defense should go all in on defensive help first when spending free agent money and high draft picks.

                                However, if the goal is to win it all, balance should be secondary to superiority on one side of the ball.

                                How should that effect the Rams? They should look at the model Seattle and SF have used, to build the defense and running game up first until it is getting you in the playoffs.

                                Sure, if TOP offensive weapons are availabvle, go try for them, but if the Rams can add a great OLB, and two great safeties, plus another inside pass rusher and a fourth corner, this could be a world class defense.

                                The Rams DO have three young WR that have very good upside, maybe great, and they will add talent and speed in the draft.

                                That late first and early second round will feature some very good WR talent, and that's why I hope the Rams just stay out of the foolish bidding for these WR,

                                I think TE nd OT should be where they go on offense, and they should instead, spend what it takes on defense to really make this good unit a top 5 squad.

                                They have the pass rushers and the starting CB, meaning you can add cheaper positions like safety and linebacker with true stars.

                                WHen the greatest show faded and started losing because of lousy defense, EVERYONE was crying to go for a defensive type squad, like the Ravens, Steelers, Giants, Bucs, and others had done.

                                Everyone wanted a defensive coach as head coach, and were thrilled when they got Spags, and now the same people are crying for Air Coryell.

                                The thing is, even if they had that kin dof firepower, Fisher and Shotty are not goon just start winging the ball all over, because they KNOW what it takes to WIN games in the NFL.

                                So quit hollering about need need need all the time (meaning another Torry Holt or Ike Bruce)

                                Add a tackle and a tight end and this offense is already better.

                                WHen it comes to who you sign, you sign guys that are worth their contracts, no matter what need, big or small, they fill. You don't go QB, DE, or DT probably, but the rest si all ready for upgrade, and making t his good defense great is just as crucial, amybe moreso, as adding "explosive" offensive weapons.

                                Just look at the SB winners below , and you see that having one great unit is far more imporatnt than having two good ones.


                                In 1999, the Rams won it all with the best offense, and a quite average defense.
                                In 2000, The Ravens won with the leagues best defense, one of the best ever, and a very medocre offense witha journey man passer.
                                In 2001, New England won, without a good offense, with a vfery young, untested passer.
                                In 2002, Tampa Bay won solely with defense.
                                In 2003, New England's offense was 17th, again they won...
                                -03-12-2013, 01:36 PM
                              • SwingOnDeez
                                How to Beat the Colts
                                by SwingOnDeez
                                What I see for Monday Night is a next-to impossible situation for the Rams:

                                A solid offense and a poor defense (Rams)
                                vs.
                                A great offense and a solid defense (Colts)

                                I say "solid defense" for the Colts just to be safe. Some would say that the 29 points we've given up in 5 games means that we're far better on defense than merely "solid," but I'll be conservative.

                                So....

                                This game is not impossible for the Rams, just darn close.

                                In my humble estimation, the following must occur for the Rams to win:

                                1) The Rams must get ahead early and make the Colts come from behind. "Duh," you may say, but seriously, you can't play catch-up against the Colts. Our D is good enough to slow you down, and our running and short passing games are good enough to keep the clock running.

                                Furthermore, if you're behind, you must pass. Then Mr. Freeney comes to town. (FYI, Robert Mathis, our other speed rushing end has more sacks than Freeney). Getting yourselves into obvious passing situations is dangerous, because we have the best 4-man pass rush in the game. Bulger will have some passing yards, but they can't be in a comeback effort, or there's no hope.

                                2) Bring your defense up and force Peyton to beat you long. No one has done this yet, and Edge has eaten defenses alive. Everyone plays bump the WR's, then get BACK. No one seems to notice Peyton's problem of overthowing receivers on long routes. They see the Indy offense and the great WR's and think that you have to allow the short pass and the run to take away the deep ball. I'd send the house and make Peyton throw long. He can self-destruct.

                                3) Don't get forced into stupid turnovers. The Colts Defense is not the stiffling, pound you into the ground, iron monster that other successful defenses have been. The Colts have speed, and they force preventable turnovers. Take the sack, throw out of bounds, get down instead of risking a fumble. Our linebackers are STILL mediocre. Cato June has 2 INTS and 2 TD's. You can't tell me he's a Pro Bowler, but yet, offenses are making him look like he is. Granted, you have to take risks to beat a better team, but if Bulger can just get through the gae without throwing a stupid interception or putting the ball on the ground, he will GREATLY increase the Ram's chances.

                                4) Don't miss field goals. Enough Said.

                                5) Don't onside kick. The Titans and 49'ers thought this would be a good idea. It's not. All it does is tell your players, "Well boys, we have no chance of stopping them, so let's just throw in all our chips now and get out of here early."

                                6) Throw Deep. Particularly if one side of our secondary is Jason David and Mike Doss, we aren't a shut-down secondary. Why the hell haven't the 1st 5 teams thrown deep on these guys? Challenge them. They will screw...
                                -10-16-2005, 07:25 PM
                              • RamWraith
                                Hate to say it...
                                by RamWraith
                                ...but I told you so.

                                I go back to my comments I made earlier this preseason. We are going to have to rely on the defense for the next couple of weeks while these players get use to this new system. When we start clicking, look out folks. This could be a fun season of growth and maybe even a few wins along the way. The team in my book looked solid. And I fully expected the offense to stumble this week.
                                -09-10-2006, 06:05 PM
                              Working...
                              X