[AvengerRam]

the post i responded to, that started this debate:

a01.png

and snack's not alone, nor did he come up with this notion on his own, it's a popular argument in stafford's defense, and has been for a long time, that his lack of a good running game, that his lack of 100-yard rushers in a game, is responsible for him not having a more successful career.

but oddly no one is trying to defend josh allen's 2020 season in this manner, no one is pointing to the bills' 20th ranking in rush yards, 21st ranking in yards per carry, or no 100-yard rushers... and no one is trying to defend brady's 2020 season in this manner, no one is pointing to the bucs 28th ranking in rush yards or 24th ranking in yards per carry.

in 2017 the lions finished 7th in offensive scoring despite finishing last in rush yards and yards per carry avg.

So you don't think that balance on offense matters at all?

[aeneas1]

So you don't think that balance on offense matters at all?

not exactly sure what you mean by "balance on offense"?

i think there are a lot of threadbare nfl isms still being thrown around that no longer hold water (or never did hold water), and i think analytics have proven that some things that intuitively make sense are wrong, for example the notion that a team needs to establish the run, needs to run the ball successfully, in order for play-action to work.

brady has played in 10 super bowls (i don't think i will ever be able to wrap my head around that number) - his teams ranked as follows in yards per carry for those 10 seasons: 12th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 22nd, 24th, 24th, 25th, 25th, 30th.

[AvengerRam]

not exactly sure what you mean by "balance on offense"?

i think there are a lot of threadbare nfl isms still being thrown around that no longer hold water (or never did hold water), and i think analytics have proven that some things that intuitively make sense are wrong, for example the notion that a team needs to establish the run, needs to run the ball successfully, in order for play-action to work.

brady has played in 10 super bowls (i don't think i will ever be able to wrap my head around that number) - his teams ranked as follows in yards per carry for those 10 seasons: 12th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 22nd, 24th, 24th, 25th, 25th, 30th.

Yards/carry does not necessarily tell the whole story. I'd rather have a team that runs the ball more, eats up clock, but only averages 4.2 ypc, than a team that runs the ball infrequently, but has an inflated ypc because the QB runs for good yardage on broken pass plays with regularity.

You've mentioned last year's Bucs a couple of times. In wins last year (regular season) they averaged 109.3 yards rushing. In losses, 63.4. In the playoffs, they averaged 122.5.

The arguments can be circular. The classic argument is that running the ball sets up the pass, which leads to points, which leads to playing with a lead, which leads to running the ball to run down the clock, which leads to wins. Or is it, you pass the ball to get a lead, then protect the lead by running the ball against a defense over-compensating for the pass, which leads to wins. Both can be true.

The point is, in Detroit, Stafford played on a lot of teams that were pretty inept at running the ball. That, and poor defenses, caused an imbalance in their attack that I believe hindered him over the years. I further believe that in McVay's system, opposing teams will not be able to key on the pass as much (and, if the Rams defense remains strong, they won't jump to big leads with regularity). I think this will result in better production (or, more specifically, efficiency) from Stafford, and more wins than he was able to achieve in Detroit.

Time will tell.

[aeneas1]

You've mentioned last year's Bucs a couple of times. In wins last year (regular season) they averaged 109.3 yards rushing. In losses, 63.4. In the playoffs, they averaged 122.5.

is that surprising? teams tend to run a lot in the 4th quarter when they're winning and less when they're losing, which of course results in winning teams having high rush yards... last year teams that rushed for 150+ yards in a game owned a 91-28-1 (.763) record, but that doesn't mean teams simply have to try to rush for 150+ yards in order to have a lot of success (altho i still hear talking heads and booth guys making this exact ridiculous claim).

Yards/carry does not necessarily tell the whole story.

of course not, then again what does? but it usually tells a better story than rush yards, for several reasons, including what i mentioned above.

I'd rather have a team that runs the ball more, eats up clock, but only averages 4.2 ypc, than a team that runs the ball infrequently, but has an inflated ypc because the QB runs for good yardage on broken pass plays with regularity.

why are those the choices? i don't get it.

The point is, in Detroit, Stafford played on a lot of teams that were pretty inept at running the ball. That, and poor defenses, caused an imbalance in their attack that I believe hindered him over the years.

again, i was responding to the notion that stafford wasn't successful in detroit because of a bad running game, i think this take is way overblown at best and nonsense at worst - stafford led the lions to 7th in offensive scoring in 2017 despite a bad running game, the bucs won the 2020 super bowl and finished 2nd in offensive scoring despite a bad running game, and allen led the bills to 3rd in offensive scoring despite a bad running game, there's no shortage of examples really.

I further believe that in McVay's system, opposing teams will not be able to key on the pass as much (and, if the Rams defense remains strong, they won't jump to big leads with regularity). I think this will result in better production (or, more specifically, efficiency) from Stafford, and more wins than he was able to achieve in Detroit.

mcvay alone should be reason for optimism, assuming he's the offensive genius we all hope he is... that said, i expect the rams to try to push the ball downfield much more than last season with stafford under center, and perhaps lighten up on the (failed) 12-personnel experiment that they've tried to install during the last couple of years.

stafford's a seasoned vet, a talented qb, who has a helluva an arm, so it seems like a no-brainer that he should have a lot of success with mcvay, but proof's in the puddin'... personally i want to see if defenses change how they attack mcvay's offense with stafford under center, or if the rams will continue to see cover 0 packages, multi-man fronts, dropping linemen into coverage at the last minute, etc., until mcvay can prove he (and stafford) can beat these looks.

[PARAM]

Question?
If Henderson has reliability issues / is injury prone where does this injury put Akers? Missed 3 games last year, 16 this season. I think we've had more than our fair share of RB injuries. Gurley, Henderson, Akers

[aeneas1]

Question?
If Henderson has reliability issues / is injury prone where does this injury put Akers? Missed 3 games last year, 16 this season. I think we've had more than our fair share of RB injuries. Gurley, Henderson, Akers

even including 2019 gurley played in 73 of 76 (96%) regular season games, hendo has played in 28 of 32 (88%), cam tho is a different story it seems.... anyway, these guys have such a small window to prove / earn a hefty second contract, having to sit out a season during your rookie contract is tough.

[AvengerRam]

again, i was responding to the notion that stafford wasn't successful in detroit because of a bad running game, i think this take is way overblown at best and nonsense at worst - stafford led the lions to 7th in offensive scoring in 2017 despite a bad running game, the bucs won the 2020 super bowl and finished 2nd in offensive scoring despite a bad running game, and allen led the bills to 3rd in offensive scoring despite a bad running game, there's no shortage of examples really.

Yes, and I’m sure there’s no shortage of examples of people who have survived car accidents despite not wearing seat belts, but that doesn’t disprove the notion that wearing a seatbelt is, in most cases, a good idea.

The suggestion that the Lions’ poor running game contributed to Stafford’s lack of success is not “nonsense,” and your examples certainly don’t prove that it is. Frankly, given the number of coaches (all of whom know more about the game than you and I combined) who consistently emphasize the importance of the running game, I find your position odd, to say the least.

[AvengerRam]

Question?
If Henderson has reliability issues / is injury prone where does this injury put Akers? Missed 3 games last year, 16 this season. I think we've had more than our fair share of RB injuries. Gurley, Henderson, Akers

It would be nice to find a RB as durable as Steven Jackson (it’s his birthday, by the way), would it not?

[/zn/]

If one were to assert that Stafford's lack of success is solely due to the lack of a running game, that would be a gross overstatement.

Asserting that it has been a factor, on the other hand, is not nonsense. .

Yeah agreed. Here's what this combination of elements means--no run game? no defense? playing from behind a high percentage of the time? Well obviously it means defenses can tee off. It means that even if you are high in scoring you're still stuck in duels where you have to keep scoring while the other team can tee off against the pass.

The main thing for me is that the Rams will not have those disadvantages. Stafford could still play well as an individual thrower under those conditions, he just couldn't win. Well, the Rams can run the ball (even without Akers though I wish they still had him), the Rams defense may not be 1st again but it is light years better than Detroit's, and the Rams do not play from behind the same high percentage of the time (last year Goff threw the ball when behind 39.3% v. Stafford in 2020 did it 64.8% of the time).

[aeneas1]

Yes, and I’m sure there’s no shortage of examples of people who have survived car accidents despite not wearing seat belts, but that doesn’t disprove the notion that wearing a seatbelt is, in most cases, a good idea.

You've mentioned last year's Bucs a couple of times. In wins last year (regular season) they averaged 109.3 yards rushing. In losses, 63.4. In the playoffs, they averaged 122.5.

good that you and zn are on the same page tho!