Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

[AvengerRam_old]

Which of the following statistical milestones do you think is most likely tobe met by the Rams in 2010?

[txramsfan]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I'm not sure if any of those are reachable but I went with Top 16 in D

[Judaxi]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I went with the starting DE's having 15 plus sacks. Last year our starters had 11.5. 3.5 more seems doable. I see Chris Long getting around 10 this year so the other one would only need to get 5. I think with the new DT help we will be able to put more pressure on the QB than last year. Or atleast I hope...

[HUbison]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I went with the starting DE's having 15 plus sacks. Last year our starters had 11.5. 3.5 more seems doable. I see Chris Long getting around 10 this year so the other one would only need to get 5. I think with the new DT help we will be able to put more pressure on the QB than last year. Or atleast I hope...

True on the 11.5 last year, but 6.5 of those were from Little. With the DEs still on the roster, the starters only had 9.5 (Long's 5.0 and Hall's 4.5). I too hope Long can post a 10, but Hall would have to step up his game a little as well. Maybe so.

I don't know that he will be considered a "starter", but if Selvie blooms at his situational spot, he could post 6-8 sacks this year. He may not do anything else, but he could be a sweet option on passing downs.


I would love to say Bradford rating an 85.0, but those Matt Ryan type rookie seasons don't come around very often.

My vote is going to the O-line holding sacks down to 36. That's a workable number when considering our QB should have a little more mobility (assuming Bradford is on the field sooner rather than later), and maybe I'm just dreaming, but I see Smith/Saffold as better than Barron/Goldberg.

[Warner4prez]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I took a slightly pessimistic route and shot for someone other than Jackson having 500 yards rushing. I'm not saying that he'll end up injured yet again but I do think that the coaching staff is going to avoid giving him the rock 300+ times again. I'm thinking we'll see Jackson on the sidelines catching a breather a few more times than normal this year.

If I could vote twice, I'd also cast a vote for less than 32 sacks allowed. Really!? I'm thinking like 20-25.

[AvengerRam_old]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I went with +5 on the turnover ratio. I think the Rams will play a style of offense that will limit turnovers, and there are a lot of young defenders who will (perhaps, at times, at the expense of risking big plays) force some turnovers.

[MauiRam]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

The more one looks at these choices, the more one realizes how difficult it could be to reach any of them ..

1) 1,000 yards receiving by a Rams WR. Can any of them stay healthy long enough? I'll pass on this one

2) A Rams RB other than SJax has 500+ yards rushing. Doom and gloom isn't my thing, however this one could be achievable if SJ's back limits his touches.

3) Rams allow less than 32 sacks. Rookie QB (most likely he'll start) Can't go with this one.

4) Rams starting DEs total 15 or more sacks. Not likely unless fat Freddie can collapse the pocket consistently, and I'm not betting on it ..

5) Rams finish +5 or better in turnover ratio. This one seems achievable.

6) Rams achieve team passer rating of at least 85.0 Will anyone choose this one?

7) Rams finish in top 16 in total offense (yards). I'm still too shell shocked from watching last years O to go with this one.

8) Rams finish in top 16 in total defense (yards). This one seems remotely possible, but we'd probably have to stay very healthy to make the top 16.

Since I'm asked to choose one, I'll go with the +5 turnovers, as luck could play a big part. We've had some rotten luck the last few years - maybe the pendulum will finally swing the other way - you know - like when we fumble, the ball bounces back to us. We sign OJ .. Fletcher makes some plays .. We get a few helpful calls from the zebras .. ANYTHING !!!!

Tough choices Av ..

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

Well the Rams were on pace last year to give up less than 32, until the line went to hell. I'll go with that one. Imma give our DEs 15 sacks this years as well. Unless Jackson goes down, I don't see anyone else getting 500 or better because Spags doesn't seem willing to limit Jackson's carries and neither does Jackson want him to apparently.

[Nick]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

Like Maui, I'm going to break these down individually...

1,000 yards receiving by a Rams WR: Had Robinson stayed healthy, he still would have been short of this mark based on projecting his numbers to a full 16-game season. Unless someone steps up big time, my guess is the ball will be spread too much for someone to achieve this.

A Rams RB other than SJax has 500+ yards rushing: Don't see it happening unless the Rams add someone who isn't on the roster now.

Rams allow less than 32 sacks: Could happen, but I doubt it. Two young tackles including one rookie and a quarterback from a predominantly shotgun offense with questions regarding how well he handles backside pressure? I'll pass here.

Rams starting DEs total 15 or more sacks: This one could happen, but would require big improvements from Long and Hall. Maybe they're up for it. I have faith in Long, but I feel like Hall is moving in the wrong direction for this accomplishment.

Rams finish +5 or better in turnover ratio: Not with a first-overall quarterback, I don't see it. There's going to be some bumps in the road, and turnovers will likely be one of them.

Rams acheive team passer rating of at least 85.0: Hard to see this one as well, considering the situation Bradford is coming into and the learning curve he's going to have.

Rams finish in top 16 in total offense (yards): Maybe if the passing game improves enough and the Rams get another heroic effort out of Jackson, the offense moves into the top 20. But Top 16 would take some leaps and bounds.

Rams finish in top 16 in total defense (yards): The defense showed some flashes last year, and made some improvements at linebacker, added DL depth, and will strengthen the secondary (as long as Atogwe doesn't leave). The biggest helping hand in this equation will likely be what the offense does, but I think of all of them, this one might be the most possible.

So I'd probably go with the Total Defense prediction.

[RAMarkable]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I went with the Rams allowing less than 32 sacks for the following reasons:

1.) Bradford is much more mobile and athletic than Bulger and will do a better job of avoiding the rush.

2.) Cogs was never a very proficient pass blocker. Whoever replaces him (come on Johnny Greco, CARPE DIEM!!) will be a better pass blocker.

3.) Ditto for A. Goldberg at RT. Adam is a better guard and gets exposed by speed rushers too easily at right tackle. I'm saying that Saffold can pass block better than Goldie at the tackle position.

4.) With an improving defense and better game planning the Rams will not dig themselves a huge hole and fall behind so much that they have got to pass every down. This will force the enemies defense to play it straight and prevent them from blitzing us to oblivion.

The Rams WILL give up LESS than 32 sacks this year.


WHAT SAY YE?

[PeoriaRam]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I'm going with the less than 32 sacks.

1. Jackson is going to still be fed the ball. A lot.

2. We're going to keep passes short and quick, due to a combination of reasons that most can guess.

3. It was mostly addition by subtraction (adios Incognito and Barron), but the line has gotten....well more reliable anyway, if not better.

[Shan the Ram Man]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I voted for Rams DE's getting more than 15 sacks. I think Chris Long will get 10+ sacks this season by himself.
I'm hoping the rest of the DE's can at least get 5 more . Even if there coverage sacks.

Defence builds championships!

[thickandthin]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

I think we can allow less then 32 sacks, very possible with our (healthy) line.

[39thebeast]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

Everything obviously depends on health, but I had 2 things in mind.

I voted for less than 32 sacks. I think we have much better interior depth compared to last year, but we have put alot of stock into our two young tackles. If those guys play well and we can stay remotely healthy the line will be really good. There I like Bell and Brown and there will be alot of competition at RG and whoever wins that I think will be pretty good.

Top 16 Defense call me crazy but I really like our defense. Lets not forget Steve Spagnulo i s one of the best defensive coaches in this league. Our back 7 looks pretty good to me. Last year we were really thin in the secondary and we were ravaged by injuries this year our secondary is deep and could be the strength of our defense. Lauranits is a stud, but last year at OLB we had a revolving door at SLB and Paris Lennon at WLB. I think this system is perfect for Carpenter and he will be an impact player. He is great as a cover LB and he has good speed and range. With our improved secondary and the NFL becoming a passing league Diggs or Vobora can be run down thumpers on the strong side. The D-line it is all about the youth stepping up. The light definately turned on for Chris Long and Dorrell Scott towards the end of last year the Rams need that kind of play from them for 16 games. Cliff Ryan IMO one of the most underrated guys in the league 3rd in the league among DTs in tackles for loss he needs to play at that level or even higher. RE its all about Hall James Hall and Hall Davis. James Hall will play well against the run, but will he get consistant pressure? Hall Davis great athlete great power and athleticism, but he is verry raw. As a rookie with James Hall moving inside on passing downs he could likely be the guy who has to step up opposite Long on the outside. As a whole defensive unit we are much bigger and much more physical I just don't see us being near the bottom against the run. With our deeper granted younger secondary I also don't see us being terrible against the pass. There big question is the pass rush if Long and others step along with the defensive coaching of Spags I think we will be top 16.

[Nick]

Re: Which of the following stats is most likely to occur in 2010?

1.) Bradford is much more mobile and athletic than Bulger and will do a better job of avoiding the rush.

So was Kyle Boller, but that didn't work out quite as well. You also have to consider that Bradford is going to be transitioning to a new pro-style of offense, which I think also works to cancel out any athletic advantage he has in the sack avoidance department. There's going to be a learning curve, and that's going to involve taking some sacks. I just don't see this one happening.

Top 16 Defense call me crazy but I really like our defense. Lets not forget Steve Spagnulo i s one of the best defensive coaches in this league.

While I agree that Top 16 Total Defense is probably the most likely of the choices, I'd be careful about assuming Spag's history as a strong defensive coordinator is going to translate to better results on defense. I assume whenever the Ravens hired Brian Billick, they thought their offense would become what Billick had helped build in Minnesota as an offensive coordinator. But the Ravens' offense was never anything better than average under Billick. Ultimately, you have to have the talent, and while we've made some improvements, I don't think we've yet reached the point in our rebuilding where I'm ready to say I really like our defense, personally. We're getting there, but not there yet, IMO.