call me crazy, but i think our defense stunk it up as well yesterday

[drpugilist]

i think i read last night in a few different threads here saying that our defense seemed to play well? other than containing ap, what did we do well? i saw several missed tackles on the patterson td...and if we give up 30 something to the vikes, dare i ask how many we give up to the eagles, niners, hawks, chiefs, and broncos?

 

[hilltime]

i think i read last night in a few different threads here saying that our defense seemed to play well? other than containing ap, what did we do well? i saw several missed tackles on the patterson td...and if we give up 30 something to the vikes, dare i ask how many we give up to the eagles, niners, hawks, chiefs, and broncos?

the d played decent but was rundown after we had to punt like 30 times

 

[drpugilist]

the d played decent but was rundown after we had to punt like 30 times

true.

 

[dbrooks25]

I'm gonna call you crazy. The D played well yesterday. 7 of Minnesota's points came off of the pick 6 thrown by Davis, another 7 came from the D being put in a bad situation due to the Hill pick right after they forced Minnesota to punt, and the td to Rudolph was the result of the roughing the kicker call which again put the defense in a bad position. Go back and look at the game and you will see. Other than the Patterson td, the Vikes could not establish a legit drive from their territory.

 

[drpugilist]

thanks for the input dbrooks. it didnt seem to me that we could stop anything minny did in the first half. true, it was a field goal fest for them in the first half but if i remember correctly, they drove down the field on every possession with ease.

 

[thirteen28]

thanks for the input dbrooks. it didnt seem to me that we could stop anything minny did in the first half. true, it was a field goal fest for them in the first half but if i remember correctly, they drove down the field on every possession with ease.

We must have seen a different game. If they were driving down the field with ease in the first half, it certainly wasn't reflected in either the score or the yardage totals. They didn't get a TD until our O gave them a turnover in our own territory. I think brooks analysis is spot on.

 

[dbrooks25]

They really didn't move the ball with ease against the defense. I saw the game live and didn't record it so I can't go back and look at it, but when they started at their own 20 or around, the best they could do was the 52 yard field goal by Walsh and another field goal. Two of their td's were the results of them having great field position, one being from the interception from Hill, the other being from the roughing the kicker call. Both of those plays came on the heels of the defense stopping Minnesota and forcing them to punt.

 

[drpugilist]

we didnt turn them over one time, only had one sack and gave up a 60 yard rushing td that included players playing flag football

 

[HometownBoy]

I agree completely with dbrooks. The d actually did really well, a lot better than a lot of us thought they would, especially the secondary, barring a handful of Patterson plays they were solid.

They only looked bad because of the offense's ineptitude. They were ran ragged by the middle of the second.

 

[thirteen28]

If you mis-diagnose the problem, you'll never get the right solution. Our biggest problem on D yesterday was a few penalties. If we get even a semi-competent performance from our offense yesterday, it's a completely different ball game. If we actually had (shudder the thought) a good performance from our offense, we win.

 

[AnarchyRam]

The great defenses don't really get tired.

Seattle can punt 5 times in a row and still rely on their defense.

The Rams defense was not good yesterday.

But the offense was worse

 

[ChrisW]

i think i read last night in a few different threads here saying that our defense seemed to play well? other than containing ap, what did we do well? i saw several missed tackles on the patterson td...and if we give up 30 something to the vikes, dare i ask how many we give up to the eagles, niners, hawks, chiefs, and broncos?

The defense did play well. The only problem that I saw was missed tackles. And don't underestimate the Vikings with Norv at the helm of the offense. His Air Coryell offense can explode for high point totals in any given game.

 

[Athos]

The great defenses don't really get tired.

Seattle can punt 5 times in a row and still rely on their defense.

The Rams defense was not good yesterday.

But the offense was worse

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Whhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaat?

I hate the Hags, but they have a ridiculously good run game with Lynch that bleeds the clock like crazy, which contributes to the freshness of their D.

And damned if they punted that many times against the Pack and damned if their O gave up TOs inside their own territory.

 

[Sum1]

I thought they played well...but they weren't without fault.

They definitely missed some tackles that should have been made. But I think they played well enough to win, if the offense had shown something.

 

[Fatbot]

The Rams defense was not good yesterday.

But the offense was worse

I agree with this summation. I don't think they stunk it up but hard to be happy with the defense when:
* gave up six runs over 10 yards, including the 67 yarder
* instead of rising up after the Hill INT, with 1:09 left allowed Cassel to go 3-3 for 30 yds and the TD right before halftime.
* generated 1 sack, zero turnovers.

 

[bomebadeeda]

Were there missed tackles. yes there were. But in comparision of other openers, I thought we did a much better job. I wasn't real thrilled on a couple of play McCleod took wrong angles on a play or two. But overall not bad. Now Patterson's run was a fluke. Long had just went out w/ an injury and I'm not sure hayes was completely ready for the play to come his way and slid inside allowing them to seal him off better. Our OLB tried to turn Patterson back inside but gave too much cushion which gave him a better lane to run into. McCleon took a wrong line which took him out of position and then the "kick return" was on. Anytime anyone but Peterson touched the ball the team was pretty flat footed.

 

[RamFan503]

The great defenses don't really get tired.

Seattle can punt 5 times in a row and still rely on their defense.

The Rams defense was not good yesterday.

But the offense was worse

Really? EVERY defense gets tired. Great defenses are almost always helped by at least a decent offense. When was the last time you saw Seattle punt twice in a row let alone five times. I am trying to think of a single great defense that didn't have an offense that could move the ball.

I would have to say though that the defense started out looking pretty soft. I only watched the first couple series of the game before I had to leave. I liked how they stiffened toward the end zone on that series to force a FG. But there is no way that D allows 34 points if the offense helps even a little.

 

[ericf706]

I do not think your crazy, although I haven't been able to objectively look at the game... I will admit yesterday was about as demoralizing a way to open the season as possible. I'll still go to games but I no longer have any positive expectations for the year. Hopefully I'm wrong and they can pull it together starting next week.

 

[GreeneCounty]

Man had missed tackles like Spag days.

 

[Kevin]

A "good" defense is not affected by a poor performance by the offense. A "good" defense will realize that the game is on their shoulders and own it regardless what the offense does. Fatbot pointed it out; too many long runs given up, only one sack and no turnovers. Stupid penalties on both sides of the ball, defense had their share.

This team is rather young on defense. Let's see how much pride they have in themselves next week.