Putrid. Well, the Hawks hung in there, but I think if the Rams utilized Stafford under center a lot more, and probably running a lot more, they would have dominated the game. The Seahawks run defense was putrid–not that their pass defense was great (although they were solid in the first half, but Stafford missed on a few throws–a couple 3rd downs, I think).
I really dislike the Seahawks offense, too. They put the QB under center on first down, but after that it’s shotgun, and the run game doesn’t seem to be much of a factor. I remember a 3rd and 3 and they go empty. Why? To me, they’re not a very balanced offense.
I actually thought Seattle committed to stopping the run and they did a great job. I know Henderson had a 30 yard run and a couple more runs of at least 10 yards, but if you take those away, I’m guessing he ran for less than 3 yards a carry. Sony Michel was even worse, but he had a long run as well, maybe 15 yards.
Stafford was worse in this game than he was against the Cardinals. Even some of his completions weren’t great. Cupp had a sure TD, that Stafford totally was inaccurate in which Cupp caught while sliding on the ground. The pass to DeSean was horrible, but who knows what Adams was looking at on that play. Stafford does have a finger issue which probably is the reason for his inaccurate passes the last couple weeks.
Wilson was just okay. Coming into this game, he was the highest ranked passer in the game in terms of QBR. He did have a pretty bad interception. But there is a QB controversy brewing because when Smith came in, he was a house of fire. I actually thought Seattle might win, until Lockett fell over himself.
My sense is that they did a decent job defending shotgun runs, but not a bad job against runs with the QB under center. If the Rams had more plays with Stafford under center–running more and passing from play action, I think the win would have been more lopsided.
Stafford does have a finger issue which probably is the reason for his inaccurate passes the last couple weeks.
I didn’t realize that, until yesterday. If that has been a lingering issue, that explains a lot.
As for Wilson, I think the QBR rating is misleading. Sometimes seems wrong–with him and the entire offense. Wilson may not be the main problem, but I can’t rule that out, either.
Not sure if you’re serious about the QB controversy, but I was surprised with how well Smith played. I had/have a very low opinion of him, even as a backup. But he played well. He looked better than Wilson did, and I’m not sure Wilson would have played better in the same situation.
I agree, I think Seattle should be better on offense. Their pass-pro was good in this game. The Ram’s defense needs Staley back, because they look mediocre.
I’ll just add that the Rams were horrible on short yardage plays. That isn’t to say Seattle’s D was playing well, but the Rams were pretty decent on chunk plays sans the missed throws. But the inability to get one or two yards on second and short, third and short, and fourth and short probably kept Seattle in this game. If not, I’m not sure if the game would have been that close.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *