He asked more questions.

In a recent post, I argued that McVay needed to ask more questions of defenses this year. I thought he did that very well in Game 1.

I appreciated Moose Johnston’s general commentary in the 2nd half regarding McVay having learned from last year to recognize and adapt to the particular rhythm and flow of a given game. I think that is an apt way of seeing McVay’s approach.

The factors: a green interior OL, an opposing defense with a superb defensive front, and recent games—the Bears through the SB—in which good fronts shut us down.

Now, I pessimistically figured he would come out in that tight double wing and hammer Todd into the heart of the DL for no gain. Instead, he came out empty with 4 wide and threw and threw and threw on that first drive. OK, the drive broke down. But the short throws and the horizontal stress alleviated the pressures on our green OL and let them work into the rhythms of the game. I thought it was brilliant.

Gradually, as the game went along, he diversified the offensive sets and the plays. Many of the running plays that were successful attacked the perimeter and used counter actions to ease the OL’s task. Furthermore, these plays flowed from horizontally stretched sets and in a generally passing context. I think we got more running out of the matchup of OL and DL than we could have gotten using last year’s limited sets.

Of course, the passing game was pretty pedestrian by McVay standards. Part of that was Goff being off. (He was.) But I think McVay saw that CAR was committed to playing the deep ball and took what was there. We were ragged and the timing was sketchy, but I tend to think we got a bit more out of things because McVay was willing to adapt than we would have by running last year’s plays and sets.

I think McVay put a lot of stuff on tape that future DCs will have to deal with. And I am sure there is more there than what he showed in this game.

I really feel that McVay played to our strengths in the context and the result was a 30 point game. I saw a lot of evidence of a maturing offensive pilot.

Now, I do have a couple of quibbles. As mentioned in an LA Rams post from yesterday, calling the timeouts at the end of the half was indeed greedy and foolish. MAYBE the first one … but not the 2nd. The score we gave up was unwarranted.

And the Henderson debut was bewildering. This guy is a race car who thrives in space. We bring him in for 1 carry on the 5 YL against a superb D front where there is no space. What a weird time to bring him on, and what a waste of 1st and goal on the 5. Fortunately Goff and Higs bailed us out. McVay still has strange moments.

In general, though, I really liked McVay’s tactics yesterday. And I felt he indeed asked a wider range of questions than he has in the past.