The Eagles (11-1, 1st in NFCE) are #3 in the NFL in rushing attempts. Dallas (9-3, 2nd in NFCE) is #7. Baltimore (8-4, 1st in AFCN) is #8. Tennessee (7-5, 1st in AFCS) is #9. San Fran (8-4, 1st in NFCW) is #10. That's 5 of the top 10 teams in rushing attempts in the NFL, and of those 5, 4 are division leaders, and the other is the best 2nd place team in the league.
None of the teams you cited have anything close to a 2:1 run to pass ratio as the Raiders did in this game. That's a number I don't believe you can, with any consistency, win with in today's NFL, hence the "can't run the ball this much", not "can't run the ball a lot".
But it was a 16-3 game with 12:20 left. The Raiders only had one more drive after that, on which they had 3rd and 1, and failed to convert. At the point when the Raiders took a 16-3 lead, the Rams had 110 total yards. Their offense was completely incompetent. I think it is EXACTLY how BB would have played the same type of game. It took several very very very fortunate things to happen for the Rams to win that game.
I hear you. It would have worked though, had the stupid defensive player had the absolutely mindless unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on that last drive. I think Josh felt that the defense was doing the job, that a conservative game plan was sufficient, and Jacobs, of course, has been awesome this year. I can see his logic.
They went up 13-3 with 10 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter and basically decided that was enough. You don't let teams as bad as these Rams hang on all game under those circumstances.
See my edit with the drive chart. They got into the red zone again late in the half and threw a pick.
Also, most of those teams are unicorns. Baltimore and Philly have QBs that can put up 100 yards rushing at any point. Dallas probably has the best two back tandem in the league - besides perhaps San Francisco and Tennessee has one of the Top 3 backs of the last 3-5 years.
I’m with you. Playing conservatively to run out the clock against a team that scored 3 points in the first 50-odd minutes was a reasonable strategy. The defense just needed to execute. And as bad as they were down the stretch, they would’ve hung on if they didn’t take that dumb penalty.
I thought the second hold was blatant. The first was one of those that’s sometimes called and sometimes isn’t.
I saw something that the start made him eligible for the NFL pension.
To rephrase - was it more humiliating to lose to the guy who was coaching high school football (fairly unimpressively) earlier in the week or the QB only claimed by one team off waivers after getting cut by lol franchises like the Panthers and Browns and who had about 36 hours with his new team’s playbook and receivers.
The game is in Detroit, Minnesota isn't nearly as good as its record would suggest, and the Lions almost beat the Vikings in Minnesota earlier this year.
Good news is that they did complete a pass. Bad news is that they lost 32-8.
Lions have lost a bunch of one score games, Minney has won every one score game, so a few plays either way and both teams have the same record.
I was going to consider it a noble move by McVay but elsewhere in the thread someone says it's not 3 starts, it's 3 games on the 53 man roster. But I would imagine this is the right line of thinking -- instead of NFL Pension it's probably a Wolford specific contract incentive like we see the Pats and Red Sox do from time to time.
Yes, that PI against Detroit was absurd.
The play started at the Detroit 3. How could all of the officials not see what happened in the end zone right in front of them? It's a really bad look when they make a call five seconds after the play is over.
Actually, it's worse: that's Leonard Williams, one of the Jets' best defensive lineman. Doesn't look good for him :-(
Sorry I didn't hear the name before the break for commercial. Thanks for clarifying.
