Quote
JamesJM
As I mentioned I saw only the last 3/4 of the second half. That's all I can go by as of now... I'm definitely going to watch the entire game.
I saw improvement everywhere. That isn't to say I saw good football. I have nothing to say about the starting OL, apparently the 'low' spot of the game, I didn't see the starters, much. The team just looked different to me, noticeably different.. top to bottom. Everything was quicker paced. The "D" quite remarkable in this regard but the offense quicker as well.
I'm thinking, comparing, 1st preseason game last year vs this year. The Ram's are a different team.
Expectations... when I think of big improvement in W's for any given year I don't think in terms of sudden and eye-opening efficiency. I think that may be different than a lot of you who do see big improvement in that way... sudden, immediate. Most of the posts I'm reading after this game seem to be comparing what the Ram's did yesterday to that 'immediate' hope. As positive as I am about this year I didn't expect a whole lot of 'sudden'... yet the overall pace, mostly the coherence of play, approached that quick level of 'improvement' to me despite a lot of bad plays.
As I watched I truly believe I saw a cohesiveness quite extraordinarily different compared to last year. They looked more in sync. Sloppy, a lot, but almost without fail 'on the same page'.
I came to the board expecting to see others who noticed that as well.... but didn't. Hmmm. I was, in all honestly, somewhat surprised by that. The score tally took precedence? I don't know perhaps. The fumbles blinding anything else that might have occurred in the game? Maybe.
As the game ended I had been convinced that this is a very different team. Better? We'll see.... but while not 100% sure I'm 90% sure that the McVay/Wade era DID begin. Lot of ways to be bad, lot of ways to be good... whichever turns out to be the case change has come. - JamesJM
I think some people are expecting dominance, or flashy attack style passing.
Actually last year Cousins and Keenum threw short and medium about the same.
COUSINS 2016
% of total attempts thrown 10 yards & under: 69.7%
% of total attempts thrown 11-21 yards: 18.4%
% of total attempts thrown 21-30 yards: 7.5%
% of total attempts thrown 31+ yards: 4.4%
KEENUM 2016
% of total attempts thrown 10 yards & under: 70.8%
% of total attempts thrown 11-21 yards: 18%
% of total attempts thrown 21-30 yards: 5.6%
% of total attempts thrown 31+ yards: 5.6%
Interestingly, at first I thought Washington's higher YPA came from completing more in the 11-30 yard/medium & deep medium range. But that's not the case. Completion percentage in that range:
COUSINS, 52.7%
KEENUM, 61.8%
It actually comes from completing more in the short ranges, 10 yards and under:
COUSINS, 74.1%
KEENUM, 67%
Add in the fact that YPA includes RAC yards while this metric I did here doesn't. So a huge portion, it looks like, of Washington's high YPA last year comes from RAC yardage.
If you add in RAC, on the short ranges (10 and under), Rams averaged 4.8 yards per attempt while Washington averaged 6.2 yards per attempt.
The difference is Washington gets a higher YPA without fielding a more wide open, downfield attack necessarily. (Though granted last night was without Watkins.)
That's partly level of talent (ie. in Washington) and it's partly play design.
So the flashy downfield passing game maybe some people want? It's not McVay. What one should look for instead is greater efficiency and production per play, even though a lot of that will just be built around a short passing game.
I agree with your whole post, btw.
,.,.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2017 04:37AM by zn.
