ZN thats crazy. If your line is matched up with a front where they are having trouble. Taking a Wr off the field and adding a TE to block is a personnel grouping change in response to said defense
Also you mention the quick passing game employed by Brady and the Pats. That is correct that is another way to potentially address blocking issues except the Rams don’t do that. They should and I would love to see it but we have yet to see the Rams employee a quick passing attack to counter pass rush.
Would love to see that added as well
Quote
zn
Quote
Speed_Kills
He mentions games against the Bears and Eagles specifically. Your response was that personnel grouping had little to do with the Rams losses to those teams and by implication others as well
I mentioned tendencies and for some reason you are especially locked on that. Let that go
The fact of the matter is against certain defenses where the Rams cant pass block or run block as well out of the 3 WRs sets they need to be prepared to change the groupings and for the obvious reasons I have previously stated
And that is what kw3 is getting at as well
We're just talking past each other.
You yourself make the point that OL personnel was the issue in those games. That's not 11 personnel sets as such.
If in a given game if the blocking doesn''t hold up and to compensate for that you try different, heavier sets, okay.
That has nothing to do with my actual argument though. A defense cannot catch up with a personnel grouping. The issue there is not being in 11, it's having an OL that cannot block a particular D and that is OL personnel. A defense exploiting the limitations in a particular OL is just not the same as catching up with 11 personnel per se.
For example what also beats a strong defensive front is quick short passing in the Brady mold. And you can still do that from 11. It's how Marino beat the 85 Bears.
....
