Sean McVay admits he should’ve used Todd Gurley more vs. Steelers

Sean McVay tried to explain why Todd Gurley didn’t get in the game in the fourth quarter, saying Malcolm Brown was making plays.

The Los Angeles Rams could do very little offensively against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday, picking up only 16 first downs, 306 total yards and scoring zero touchdowns. What they did do well was run the ball with Todd Gurley.

He had 12 carries for 73 yards in what was his most productive game since Week 1 when he had 97 yards on just 14 rushes. Yet, Gurley didn’t touch the ball in the fourth quarter and wasn’t even on the field for the first two drives.

It’s hard to imagine why the Rams abandoned their most effective player on Sunday, and Sean McVay didn’t have a good explanation. On Monday, he did admit that he should’ve done a better job getting him involved more throughout the game, which hardly grants him a pass for that decision.

“Getting a guy like Todd Gurley more involved and more a part of it is definitely something that yesterday benefitted,” he said. “That’s where you say in hindsight, I should have done a better of doing that consistently throughout the game.”

The real reason Gurley was on the bench for most of the fourth quarter has to do with two things: Malcolm Brown and the Rams defense’s inability to get off the field. The former is something McVay can control. The latter is not.

When asked Monday why Gurley wasn’t part of the fourth-quarter game plan, McVay pointed toward Brown’s ability to “make some plays.”

“I think it really just had to do with that we had kind of gone into it and just feeling it out, we feel like he is doing really well, he’s playing at a high level. Malcolm made some tough hard-earned runs too. He’s been a guy that’s demonstrated he can make some plays,” he said. “It’s nothing really other than that. I think like anything else, when you want to be reflective as a coach, you say, ‘Could there have been some things that you wish you had done to maybe keep him in that rhythm?’ I wouldn’t argue with that. I would say, ‘You probably should have done that.’ Those are things that I’ll never claim to make all the right decisions. I think yesterday was something where you probably could have given him an opportunity to continue with that rhythm that he did have going there.”

The second part of the equation was that the Rams didn’t have the ball very much in the fourth quarter. They had it for less than two minutes in each of their first two drives to open the fourth quarter. They gave it up with 10:46 left to play and didn’t get it back until 2:46 – a span of 10 minutes without the ball.

McVay said that obviously played a role in Gurley’s lack of involvement, but there’s little reason to pull him from the game in favor of Brown, who only had 6 yards on two carries entering the fourth quarter.

“(Gurley) did a good job,” McVay said. “You really look at it, the two drives that he did miss, that second drive that Malcolm was in was at 12 and a half minutes left in the game. Then, the next drive starts at two and a half minutes. I think there was a little bit longer time in between drives that typically you usually see. It wasn’t necessarily like that was the true crunch time. Todd had been running really well, but that was the beginning of the fourth quarter in those drives that Malcolm was in there. Then, when you do get the ball back offensively, you’re in two-minute mode, playing down where you’re playing for a touchdown with 2:39 – I want to say – left in the game.”

He continued, admitting he would’ve gotten Gurley the ball if he knew the Rams would go 10 minutes without being back on offense.

“I think there’s always things that you look at as a coach and say, ‘Would you do it differently?’ I think – not to take anything away from Malcolm – but if you knew that that was going to be the last possession you get until two and a half (minutes) left, you probably would say, ‘I would’ve preferred to have Todd get into more of a rhythm and maybe get some touches there.’ There’s nobody to blame there but me,” he said.

Gurley said after the game that he’s “used to” not getting the ball in the fourth quarter. He also said “not really” when asked if he wants it more in crunch time.

McVay said didn’t seem too concerned about Gurley’s answers, saying “anytime that you’re a playmaker like him, you’re going to want that ball and you’re going to want more.”

This situation doesn’t seem to be sorting itself out, but McVay has to find a way to get Gurley more involved – even if it means abandoning the plan to conserve him for the end of the season. The Rams are reaching desperation time and they can’t afford to lose many more games.

POLL: Who wins Week 11 contest between Bears and Rams?

The Bears and Rams will meet in a rematch of last year’s defensive battle on Sunday Night Football. Will the Bears emerge victorious again?

The Chicago Bears (4-5) will hit the road to take on the Los Angeles Rams (5-4) on the primetime stage.

The Bears are coming off a 20-13 win over the Detroit Lions, which snapped a four-game losing streak. Quarterback Mitchell Trubisky had his best game of the season against Detroit, and he and the Bears offense will be looking to build on that success.

The Rams are coming off a 17-12 loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers, where Los Angeles’ offense struggled mightily and their defense wasn’t able to come up with a critical stop on fourth-and-1. But the Rams defense certainly impressed, and they’ll be looking to do the same against Chicago.

Chicago and Los Angeles met last year on Sunday Night Football in what was a defensive battle. The Bears emerged victorious with a 15-6 victory over the Rams, after making quarterback Jared Goff’s night a long one.

Will the Bears repeat their defensive dominance against the Rams on Sunday? Will Chicago extend their winning streak to two games? Or will the Bears fall victim to the issues that affected them during their four-game losing streak?

Who wins on Sunday?

VOTE!

[polldaddy poll=10455802]

Ex-Redskins coaches, players have found massive success since leaving

A number of the top minds in the NFL were at once a part of the Redskins organization, but they’ve found success elsewhere.

“I wish there was actually a way to know you’re in the good old days before you actually left them.”

Andy Bernard — played by Ed Helms — said that on the Season 9 finale of “The Office” years ago, but it fits pretty well with how the Washington Redskins might feel just about now. While they are currently sitting with the second-worst record in the NFL, a look around the rest of the league shows numerous staffers, coaches, and players finding great success in new locations. Whether it’s a coach who used to be a coordinator in Washington or a GM who found a new team to manage, it seems that the Redskins franchise was exactly the jumping-off point that these guys needed to get their careers going.

In case you need help remembering who all of those future stars were they go as the following: Kyle Shanahan, Redskins OC; John Schneider, Redskins VP of Player Personnel; Matt LaFleur, Redskins QB coach; Kirk Cousins, Redskins QB; Sean McVay, Redskins OC.

All of them were at one point in the building, working to bring success to Washington. Now, they’ve been able to find success elsewhere, and the Redskins are still sitting at the bottom of the league, looking for the right answers. Here’s to hoping that the good old days are right around the corner.

[vertical-gallery id=24890]

 

Who has bigger quarterback issues, Bears or Rams?

Bears QB Mitchell Trubisky’s struggles are no secret to Chicago. But what about his friend Rams QB Jared Goff, who’s also struggling?

[jwplayer rzKgNnfu-ThvAeFxT]

The Chicago Bears’ quarterback struggles are no secret this season in the NFL. Mitchell Trubisky has been scrutinized on a weekly basis — everything from his play to his weekly press conferences. That’s what happens when you’re struggling on a bad team that was supposed to be a Super Bowl contender.

Some Bears fans are already clamoring for the offseason, where they hope Trubisky’s replacement awaits. But Chicago still has another seven games left to evaluate the former No. 2 overall pick to see if he’s worth sticking with.

Trubisky’s off to a good start to the second half of the season after a three-touchdown effort and a 131.0 passer rating in a 20-13 win over the Detroit Lions last Sunday.

Another team that knows something about a struggling young quarterback is the Bears’ Week 11 opponent, the Los Angeles Rams.

Jared Goff, who struggled in his first season under defensive-minded Jeff Fisher, thrived in the next two seasons with offensive guru Sean McVay. He quarterbacked a Rams team that went to the Super Bowl last season — and he was paid handsomely for it, nabbing a four-year deal worth $134 million with $110 million guaranteed.

But lately, Goff has been struggling worse than his friend Trubisky. Goff, the former No. 1 overall pick of the 2016 NFL Draft, has had five straight games with a completion rate below 60 percent, according to NBC Sports Chicago. Trubisky has managed a passer rating above 60 percent in four of his last five games.

While Trubisky has an 85.2 passer rating this season, Goff’s is lower at 82.7. Trubisky has thrown eight touchdowns and three interceptions this season to Goff’s 11 touchdowns versus nine interceptions.

Goff has a slightly higher QBR of 39.4 (which ranks 28th) while Trubisky has a QBR of 35.9 (which ranks 31st).

You could say that the Bears are better off than the Rams, who have already paid Goff a massive extension. At least the Bears haven’t paid Trubisky yet.

[lawrence-related id=430635,430631,430602,430534]

Coaching staff, front office to blame for Rams’ offensive line regression

The Rams have had the worst offensive line in football this year. You can blame the players, but blame falls on the guys that trusted them.

Things continue to get worse for the Rams’ struggling offensive line. After another horrifying performance against Pittsburgh on Sunday, the team has announced it’ll be without two starters up front for Week 11. Rob Havenstein has been ruled out for Sunday and could be out for a few weeks, while, starting center Brian Allen has is out for the remainder of the season.

For the first two years of Sean McVay’s tenure as head coach, the Rams rolled out a healthy and reliable offensive line. Not a single starter missed significant time as the offense rolled to back-to-back NFC West titles. The offensive line was the engine that kept the offense rolling.

In Year 3, the Rams have fielded the NFL’s worst offensive line, and the offense has struggled mightily as a result. They’ve gone from one of the most feared offensive units in the NFL to one of the league’s most exploitable and turnover-prone. The difference between McVay’s 2018 and 2019 offenses is night and day.

Injuries have devastated this offensive line. Still, they were bad before the injuries, and they’ll likely continue to be bad in the weeks ahead. The players deserve blame for their poor play. But the front office and the coaching staff deserve more of the blame for actually thinking this would work.

Stability and consistency were staples of the Rams offensive line in 2017 and 2018. Six players started meaningful games for the Rams in that stretch: Andrew Whitworth, Roger Saffold, John Sullivan, Rob Havenstein, and Jamon Brown, who was replaced by Austin Blythe in 2018. They weren’t a perfect unit, but it was rare that they’d be the reason the Rams lost a game, even with Sullivan’s slump in 2018. Jared Goff and Todd Gurley were comfortable playing behind that unit, which allowed Mcvay to unleash the offense he wanted to run.

The Rams chose to break up this unit. It wasn’t forced upon them, it was a choice. The decisions to move on from Sullivan and Saffold were financial ones. Sullivan wasn’t worth the money he was owed, but as far as we’re aware, the Rams made no attempt to bring him back on a cheaper deal. They simply declined his option for this season.

As for Saffold, it’s obvious that the Rams didn’t want to pay him the money he had coming to him. Saffold signed a four-year, $44 million deal with the Titans after eight seasons with the Rams. But Saffold’s contract has a cap number of just $6.375 million with an out after the 2020 season that wouldn’t result in a devastating cap hit. The Rams could have made this contract work if they thought he was worth it. They’re paying Clay Matthews similar money this season and had the cap space to give Tyler Higbee a four-year, $29 million contract extension. The Rams could have afforded to pay Roger Saffold, they just didn’t want to.

(Photo by John McCoy/Getty Images)

Still, walking away from Saffold wasn’t the worst decision. The bigger problem was how the team chose to replace Saffold and Sullivan. When the Rams didn’t add a single offensive lineman in free agency, many figured they’d choose to address the need with their first-round pick in the 2019 NFL Draft.

They didn’t. The Rams chose to trade out of the first round and move back 14 picks. Six of those 14 picks ended up being offensive lineman. The Rams still had a chance to take center Eric McCoy at 45. They decided to move back again and chose safety Taylor Rapp at 61. While Rapp has turned out to be a solid pick, McCoy is currently the starting center in New Orleans and has the second-highest PFF grade in the league at the position. The Rams did select two offensive linemen during the draft: Bobby Evans in the late-third round, and David Edwards in the late-fifth round.

The decision to move on from Saffold and Sullivan and not replace them in the offseason was due to the team’s trust in 2018 mid-round picks Joseph Noteboom and Brian Allen. Both the front office and the coaching staff must have agreed that Allen and Noteboom were good enough to replace Saffold and Sullivan despite no in-game evidence proving as much. Neither guy played any real meaningful snaps in 2018. Still, it sounded like McVay trusted them. That was enough to keep most fans optimistic about the pairing heading into 2019. Clearly, it wasn’t the right decision.

The team’s decision to add essentially no depth behind their new offensive line may have been an even worse decision. Drafting Evans and Edwards was the extent of the Rams adding offensive linemen this offseason. Since McVay doesn’t play his starters in the preseason, which included Allen and Noteboom this year, the backups got a chance to shine on the offensive line. They shined about as bright as a dull rock that had been buried under thousands of pounds of dirt for centuries. Jamil Demby, the team’s first lineman off the bench at every position, looked like he didn’t even belong in the NFL. It became clear quickly that the Rams would be in big trouble should a starter get injured.

It became just as clear that the Rams were already in big trouble early on in the season. Not only were Allen and Noteboom completely in over their heads, the right side of the line seemingly forgot how to play football, and father time continued to catch up with Whitworth. The Rams couldn’t have predicted that their three vets would regress like they did, but they should have known that their new additions would have failed to pick up the slack. They put all their eggs in the Allen and Noteboom basket. That basket was filled with holes, and now all we have to show for it is broken eggs.

In addition to Noteboom and Allen being exposed this year, the team’s lack of line depth came back to haunt them. Demby graded out as one of the worst offensive linemen in the NFL while filling in for Noteboom and went from starting to being a healthy scratch. Edwards has looked better than expected filling in at guard, but he’s not exactly setting the world on fire. With both Allen and Havenstein set to miss next week’s game against Chicago, the team will turn to Blythe at center and likely in-season acquisition Austin Corbett at left guard. Bobby Evans could take over at right tackle with Edwards remaining at right guard.

Goff and Gurley have been noticeably worse in 2019. McVay’s play-calling has been questionable at times. But the source of the offense’s regression starts and ends with the offensive line. They replaced veterans with un-proven youth, and the youth failed to prove anything. They’ve been bad, but maybe they weren’t that good to begin with? You can’t blame bad players for being bad. You have to blame the people who trusted them to be good.

The Rams dug themselves into this hole in the offseason. They’re going to need a pretty big shovel to dig themselves out of it. They’re not getting that shovel this season, and it might be tough to find a shovel big enough to dig themselves out of the hole this offseason. Snead and McVay have quite the task ahead of them when it comes to salvaging this offensive line.

Todd Gurley on not getting the ball in 4th quarter: ‘I’m used to it’

Todd Gurley on not getting the ball in the fourth quarter: “I’m used to it.”

Todd Gurley has been a catalyst for the Rams’ offense the last two years. He was a first-team All-Pro in 2017 and 2018, and was named Offensive Player of the Year in Sean McVay’s first season as head coach.

This season has been alarmingly different for Gurley. He’s not getting the ball as much, he’s finding very few running lanes and the Rams are leaning heavily on Jared Goff’s arm. That recipe cooked up by McVay has backfired terribly with the Rams limping to a 5-4 record through nine games.

Gurley seems to have grown frustrated with the offense, specifically with his usage. In Sunday’s loss to the Steelers, Gurley didn’t touch the ball once in the fourth quarter and didn’t even play the first two series to open the final frame.

After the game, he was asked whether he wanted the ball more with the game on the line in the fourth quarter.

“Um, not really. I’m used to it,” he told reporters, via Vincent Bonsignore of The Athletic.

So, you mean to tell me the guy who led the NFL in touches, yards and touchdowns the last two years doesn’t want the ball more in the fourth quarter? That’s hard to imagine, but it says a lot about the current state of the Rams.

In two short sentences, Gurley said more than he has all season. It’s troubling enough that he apparently doesn’t want the ball more with the game on the line, but it might be even worse that he’s “used to it.”

This isn’t to say there’s a rift developing between Gurley and McVay, but it’s clear the running back isn’t happy with his role on offense. As for why Gurley didn’t get the ball in the fourth quarter of a one-score game, McVay said it was “kind of just the rotation.”

“I thought Todd really had some tough, hard-earned runs,” McVay said in his press conference. “We got some drives going, but then at the end of the day, we ended up being in some two-minute situations at the end of the game and it was kind of hard to get back into any sort of flow running the football.”

The part about the Rams getting into two-minute situations late in the game isn’t entirely true. They shouldn’t have felt rushed at any point in the fourth quarter besides their final two drives of the game. Entering the last 15 minutes, the Steelers held just a four-point lead.

And after the Rams’ sack with 12:46 left to play, Pittsburgh was only up two points. What about that situation caused the Rams to panic and completely abandon the run after Gurley racked up 73 yards on 12 carries?

McVay and the coaches have a lot of questions to answer, but none are bigger than their usage of Gurley – and the running back has clearly taken notice of his role on offense.

[vertical-gallery id=625270]