Questioning the Rams defensive strategy against New Orleans

by Ryan Van Bibber on Dec 14, 2010 3:48 PM CST in 2010 St. Louis Rams season

Head coach Steve Spagnuolo of the St. Louis Rams watches the game against the New Orleans Saints at the Louisiana Superdome on December 12 2010 in New Orleans Louisiana. (Photo by Chris Graythen/Getty Images)

One of the more frustrating things about the St. Louis Rams week 14 loss to the Saints was their inability to generate a blitz. Drew Brees pretty much has his way with the Rams defense for four quarters.

The Rams sacked Brees just once and put hits on him just three times. Though this is a piece about pressure on the QB, it's worth mentioning too that the Rams' defense had just one tackle for a loss. Without pressure, the responsibility for shutting down the Saints' mighty passing game was left to a banged up secondary, without top cornerback Ron Bartell and key role player CB Justin King.

Good QBs can beat good coverage most of the time, and that was certainly true for Brees on Sunday. They key to stopping the bleeding in those situations is a strong pass rush. Had you landed on earth sometime in the last two years, you can be forgiven for being unaware that it was the same Steven Spagnuolo whose aggressive defense with the New York Giants upset Tom Brady and the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl with a potent pass rush.

And yet, this week, the Rams, led by that same Spagnuolo opted to make coverage the emphasis of their defense. Why?

You have to give some credit to New Orleans' offensive line and their pass protection. They've been one of the top units all season, allowing just 18 sacks. Conversely, the Rams defense has been one of the league's most prolific units for getting to opposing quarterbacks, with 36 sacks on the season and a 7 percent sack rate, 10th best in the league. And those sacks aren't coming exclusively from the front four; 11 of those 36 sacks have come from players other than the front four, including 5 from the safeties.

Rams S Darian Stewart had the only sack of the game, but the Rams mostly left the job of pressuring Brees to the defensive line.

As others have said, there's no surprise in losing to the Saints. They're the defending champs and it was plain to see why on Sunday. No, the most disturbing thing was the playcalling on the defensive side of the ball in this game, the decision to rely so heavily on coverage when the Rams clearly needed to be aggressive against a superior opponent.

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Bernie wrote this too...

But, I’d disagree with both of you. The Saints ran a ton of screens, which are especially successful against blitzes. Also, Brees found hot routes on our blitzes.

I do not have a problem with the scheme. The Saints are a very good offensive team and I agreed with the Rams approach. The bottom line on this game is that the Saints O-Line could handle our D-Line.

Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...

by Marmie is the best on Dec 14, 2010 4:13 PM CST reply actions

also

when the Rams have poor OLB’s, it puts more pressure on other positions to “over-perform”. and, when they can’t because other positions lack the necessary talent and/or desire, then the negative domino effect is “in play”.

by jlcdb70 on Dec 15, 2010 11:04 AM CST up reply actions

I disagree also

The Rams were already banged up in the secondary that wasn’t known for pass coverage in the first place. I understand why they’d want to not weaken it further by sending blitzers.

by TheSmart1 on Dec 14, 2010 4:26 PM CST reply actions

rubbish... hogwash...bullcrap

we had 2 guy per receiver and still Brees completes the pass. If the coverage plan doesn’t work in the first half……. DON’T DO IT IN THE SECOND HALF….. we will never know if we could have been better off blitzing because…. WE DIDN’T DO IT.

The only thing comparable to a Rams win is a 49er loss!

by DevsLaRams on Dec 14, 2010 4:41 PM CST reply actions

i also disagree

Go back and look at the tape. Was Brees setting back and throwing bombs? No. He was getting the ball out quickly with 3 step drops. If you listened to Sean Payton’s press conference before the game, you heard him say that they were going to game plan for the fact that the Rams were very aggressive defensively.

We saw that in their long drives that Brees was just throwing short 5-10 yard passes on every down. The Jets love blitzing and look what happened to them going against a similar offensive approach in New England.

by jb22 on Dec 14, 2010 4:43 PM CST reply actions

+1

My thoughts exactly.

Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...

by Marmie is the best on Dec 14, 2010 6:29 PM CST up reply actions

Yet

our D coaching did not account for this. Still the question…what did we do against an offense who was prepared for blitzes?

"Tamper not, lest the Big Goat Eat."

by Brawnwitch on Dec 14, 2010 6:39 PM CST up reply actions

Dink and Dunk

Dink and dunk.

When Rams score, Dinks and dunks on the drive usually are the reason why.

by jlcdb70 on Dec 15, 2010 11:06 AM CST up reply actions

the defense wasnt that bad actually

our offense had more yards than theirs. bradford had more passing yards than brees even. holding brees to 220 or so yards is a def win for any defense playing him. and thats with the offense turning the ball over to the saints for extra drives.

by mh39 on Dec 14, 2010 5:54 PM CST reply actions

They weren't that bad, they were simply terrible.

No pass rush at all. No OLB’s. Missing Bartell and having to play clowns like Dockery and Butler. Yecch!

by RamChop on Dec 14, 2010 7:37 PM CST up reply actions

but we only gave up 220 yards to brees.. how is that horrible.

by mh39 on Dec 14, 2010 10:46 PM CST up reply actions

Didn't the Saints convert like 10-11 third downs??? That's a horrible defense that can't get off the field. They get tuckered out and then our offense can't get many posssions to work with.

by RamChop on Dec 15, 2010 9:42 PM CST up reply actions

OLBs are overrated anyways

pass rush was horrible… but not many teams can against the saints. unless you have d ware coming in on him

by mh39 on Dec 14, 2010 10:57 PM CST up reply actions

Rams have no front 4 and no OLB's and most sacks come from the blitz

the defense is better then last year but we have a long way to go before we can say the Rams have a champion defense again

by Rams67 on Dec 14, 2010 6:44 PM CST reply actions

I agree completely VR. Even if you won't make me an author... :-)

Everybody loves the coach. Thus, he gets a free pass. But in all honesty, I’ve observed some flat out idiotic coaching mistakes this year ranging from play-calling, to clock management, and starting player selection. I think coaching mistakes have lost us 2-3 games this year. Just one man’s opinion…

by RamChop on Dec 14, 2010 7:34 PM CST reply actions

when in doubt blame spags

players just dont have responsibility

by mh39 on Dec 14, 2010 10:47 PM CST up reply actions

I agree with part of this

I think Spags made a scared move when he passed on picking up Moss. I think that Vorbora should have played more this season and starting Dockery against the 49ers was flaty out stupid. There has been numerous clock mismanagements.

So, I am not a Spags apologist, but I do not blame the scheme at all for the loss. I think the Rams played the Saints correctly.

Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...

by Marmie is the best on Dec 15, 2010 12:26 AM CST up reply actions

The short passes gave the Rams more license to

Blitz a strong safety, CB or set up some different alignments to use the LBs

Part of the problem is that we just need more diversity on the DL. Rams just don’t do a great job vs the better OLs

Follow Turf Show Times on Facebook and Twitter.

by Ryan Van Bibber on Dec 14, 2010 9:47 PM CST via mobile reply actions

with bartell and king out sticking people like butler and dockery against colston and meachem in man coverage even for 2 seconds is madness

we tried keeping the play in front of us, and only got beat in the unstoppable seam redzone throw. we didn’t give up too many deep throws from memory, we just got dink and dunked.
that o line is magnificent too, so while some more dynamic line players would help, many a dline has struggled vs this line.

Bradford to Onobun!

by Infemous on Dec 15, 2010 2:35 PM CST reply actions

Spagnuolo got cute with the gameplan again...

Deviated from the usual heavy-pressure/blitz scheme and instead tried to do something that they struggle to do in the first place. You always need to play the way you can play best, and coverage is not the Rams’ forte.

Winners train. Losers complain.

by Redbirds_n_Horns on Dec 16, 2010 3:11 AM CST reply actions