that is all that Martz did win games - long ACCURATE post

that is all that Martz did win games - long ACCURATE POST based on factual events

Before McVay, the Rams made it 5 times in 6 years with Martz running the offense to the playoffs.

Without Martz, I believe they were like 0-20.

The NFL is Not For Long and the only team able to maintain has been the Patriots, Reid was very good always with the Eagles and than there was Martz.

1998 - 4-12
1999 - 13-3
2000 - 10-6
2001 - 14-2
2002 - 7-9
2003 - 12-4
2004 - 8-8


Martz arrived in 1999 and completely changed the culture. some of the team bailed on the year end meeting in 1998 and it was at his all-time low. Martz convinced Vermeil to move on from Tony Banks that that team needed the culture change, he convinced him to use plays that many teams saved for 3rd downs to use on 1st down. He changed the offense to create space for Marshall Faulk and had a plan on how to use his abilities. He convinced Vermeil to stay away from Bruce and let him be his own guy. To not drive him in the ground in preseason where he had nothing left for the season and Bruce responded..


Here is a simple fact:

The Rams won one superbowl and it was Mike Martz running the offense. There has been no other superbowl wins. it isn't easy to win a superbowl as the Chiefs finally broke through with a superbowl so the comparisons are very good and make perfect sense.

But you are onto something. In the beginning, the front office did support Martz and let him do what he wanted. After the defensive breakdown in 2000, Martz knew the team needed the same facelift that the offense had prior to 1999. The team replaced 8 of the 11 starters and a defense that was a shambles went to being the #1 ranked defense in the NFC conference and 3rd overall. 3 of those 8 players replaced were no longer in the NFL the following season and the other 5 had limited success elsewhere. It was something that I do not believe the NFL has seen where in just a few seasons both sides of the ball were turned over with personnel and Martz was part of both where the unit went near the bottom to the very top. I believe had Vermeil been in charge, he would not have been able to bring himself to make the hard decisions. Despite being a tremendous leader, I believe Vermeil even alluded to that fact that he saw that coming. When Vermeil was with the Chiefs, he made the playoffs I believe one time with a magical 13-3 season. The team appeared to be superbowl bound but the defense blew a flat tire I believe against the Colts and lost in a high scoring playoff game. The defense needed the same facelift as the Rams did after the 2000 season, but Vermeil stayed pat and stayed with his guys. The result was that the Chiefs while he was there never played in another playoff game. The defense was the weak link and the corrective actions that the Rams did never got done and the result was no playoffs.

given the overwhelming actual events, I often marvel how something so clear in similar situations that many folks believe the Rams may have won more superbowls had Vermeil stayed. Don't get me wrong, I love Vermeil and believe he is one of the greatest leaders of all time with coaching the guys he had, but the 2000 Rams defense guys couldn't play any more. The fact that the Chiefs faced a similar scenario and didn't even make the playoffs makes me wonder how people can't see what actually happened.

but back to Rams history

The Rams responded with another spike and a 14 win season and a trip to the superbowl in 2001. The superbowl was lost to a very good Patriots team. It was not lost by Mike Martz. The Rams turned the ball over 3 times and it was Kurt Warner who made a very bad decision for a pick 6. Proehl fumbled the ball and the other interception was because Holt slipped or maybe was bumped. I believe there was a missed field goal as well. These were keys to the game. The Rams moved the ball fairly well and racked up yards but the missed field goal and 3 turnovers were key. Some of the worst analysis is the idea that Martz didn't run the ball enough during that game. The reality that was probably the only mistake Martz made was trying to force the run too much. Faulk had like 17 carries with only 2 in the 4th quarter and I believe like 10 or 11 of those were a cloud of dust causing unfavorable down and distance. In the 4th quarter when Martz went pass pass pass with Faulk only get 2 carries, the Rams put up 14 points. I believe had that been done in the first 3 quarters, the Rams wear down the Patriots and put up the 50+ points (14*4) = 56. Why would passing the ball move be a bad thing, when really the best success of the game was done in the 4th quarter, doing exactly that, passing the ball. This is one of the most head scratching analysis I have ever seen. Watch a game and thing you do the very best over an entire quarter, fans say. Lets not do that as much. Lets do the things that didn't work as well.

In 2002, that was Martz's low point, but this is wear the front office failed him. Ziggy lied about the salary cap and made it appear that the Rams could only keep 1 of the 3 key free agents (Hakim, Fletcher, Little). I believe Martz chose Little who turned into an exceptional pass rusher, but losing Fletcher and Hakim was so impactful. They were like little engines on each side of the ball that generated energy and there was no reason they had to go. The Rams saved very little money with plan B and lost the "IT" factor those 2 players gave. Given that, Martz did have the superbowl slump and came out of the games 0-5. But once again, the team showed resiliency through his leadership. There was an article I remember because it was discussed in leadership training class I was in how Martz reached the team by focusing on going out and getting the players to find their inner love of the game and to play out of that love. The team recovered despite many injuries to key players including some of the Hall of Famers and went 7-4 the remaining 9 games with a 3rd string QB leading the way on Bulger. This is when the fallout with Kurt Warner started as in one of the games he was completely ineffective because he played with the injured hand. That I do put on Martz as playing injured players in the NFL is something that is done too much. There comes a time when the injury is such that the player cannot be effective.

Fast Forward to 2003 - In the opener, Warner was a complete mess, Not sure if it was still the hand or the concussion, but he simply couldn't hang onto the ball and fumbled 5 times. The Rams lose that game. At that point, it was obvious that Warner just couldn't do it. He wasn't right and Martz made a decision to go with the healthier player which probably should have been done in 2002. The team rebounds and again with some of the offseason moves rises back to the top with yet the 3rd quarterback in just a short time, a no name becomes a top QB in the NFL. The team goes onto a 12-4 record. At one point in the season after Kurt Warner has had time to recover from concussion and a bad hand, Martz talks to Kurt about going into the game in the second half of the Bears game, but Kurt tells Martz to let Bulger ride it out. That is maybe a moment Martz made the mistake. He was still in charge and I don't think Kurt would have flat out said no if he was strong and said, I need you to go in right now, but it didn't happen. What I find out is how many fans wanted Kurt back in right after a broken hand and concussion. The fact is that Mike Martz probably saved Kurt Warner's career by sitting him in that 2003 season. Kurt wasn't right and was a complete mess with over a 2 year stretch of ineffectiveness because he kept trying to play injured. If you look at his QB rating, his fumbles, his interceptions, his win loss record, he simply got outplayed repeatedly by Bulger. Was it apples and apples? No, because Kurt had a hand and head that wouldn't cooperate, but in the Not For Long NFL league, you have to play the player that gives you the best chance to win now. Bulger was the better player because Kurt Warner wasn't healthy and couldn't hang onto the ball turning the ball over at a high rate.

2004/2005 - (Other than the Fletcher Hakim lie), this is when the front office completely bordered on sabotage with Martz. The Front office and Kurt Warner with all the drama forced a trade to create fresh new starts. I believe the Rams, however, have another bounce back year had the free agent and trade market been explored, but for some reason the coffers were closed. The Rams had many injuries in the secondary that year and no deals were struck, no signing, just stay the course with what was there. If you go to 2006 and look how much salary cap money was available that year, you realize how bad it was. If I remember, the Rams had like 2 times more salary cap money than 1/2 the teams in the NFL. It was because there was no support in 2003 and 2004 so Martz really did not have a chance. Had he gotten that support, the probability of another 2001 or 2003 spike where in 2001 the Rams increased win total by 4 games and in 2003 the Rams increased win total by 5 games, is almost a guarantee.

Eventually, the lack of support, and the grind, and the health, did Martz in that final season.

You look at that chronological following of the actual factual events that took place and you see that was the greatest ride in Rams history those 5 playoff seasons, 2 superbowl appearances in the 6 seasons Martz was there. When you consider that was sandwiched in the middle of a quarter of a century of 0 playoff seasons without Martz and the only 5 playoff seasons was Martz's years, you can see the cause and effect that he had on the greatest football in Rams history. They were bad before him, they were great with him, and after he left, they were bad again.

All of this badness continued, until Coach McVay came along and implemented similar approaches that Mike Martz was a proponent of. Being aggressive with player personnel moves both trades and free agency (Unless the front office ties your hands), and creating an offense based on creating space and unpredictability so the defense is always on their heals.

Despite a quarter of a century of bad football the Martz and McVay's years make it all worth while. I would same the "The Greatest Show on Turf" is simply the most entertaining, best football to watch in NFL history.