The L.A. Rams Are Running Their Way Back Into Contention
By
Neil Paine
Filed under
NFL
View attachment 39685
The Los Angeles Rams
were the toast of football under second-year coach Sean McVay in 2018,
finishing 13-3 and going all the way to the Super Bowl before
losing a defensive struggle to Bill Belichick’s New England Patriots. Despite the defeat, L.A. remained the team to emulate; an
arms race to hire McVay clones became the
dominant theme of the following offseason. But the Rams struggled to keep building on their success,
missing the playoffs last year with a 9-7 record. By the end of the season,
there were concerns that opposing coaches had figured out Los Angeles’s tricks — and that the McVay magic was suddenly gone.
And yet, here the 2020 Rams are,
off to a 3-1 start and looking like
legitimate Super Bowl contenders again. Our forecast model gives Los Angeles a 71 percent chance of returning to the playoffs, with a 4 percent chance of winning it all — tied for eighth-best in the league. And although some of the principals involved have changed, McVay has managed to reclaim key elements of the formula that made the Rams so tough to stop during that charmed 2018 season.
Last year’s Rams were undone in large part by a noticeable decline on offense, dipping from third overall in schedule-adjusted
expected points added (EPA) per game to 14th. The biggest culprit? Surprisingly — given
how important the passing game is in determining a team’s offensive fate — it was actually the Rams’
rushing that fell off a cliff, falling from No. 1 in EPA per game to No. 28. Running back Todd Gurley, who had been so dangerous (4.9 yards per carry) for most of 2018, struggled with only 3.8 yards per carry, and his backups were just as ineffective. (It wasn’t all their fault: L.A. also dropped from sixth in yards before first contact per rush, a
measure of run-blocking, to 30th last year.)
Either way, for a hyper-modern offense that everyone was scrambling to copy, it’s amazing how quickly Los Angeles was made mortal by simply
neutralizing its efficiency running the ball.
L.A. is back to its successful formula
Leaguewide ranks in schedule-adjusted expected points added (EPA) for the Los Angeles Rams by season and category, 2018-20
�
| OFFENSE | DEFENSE | | | | | | |
|---|
| SEASON | TOTAL | PASSING | RUSHING | TOTAL | PASSING | RUSHING | SP. TEAMS | OVERALL |
|---|
| 2018 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 14 | 10 | 21 | 15 | 3 |
| 2019 | 14 | 9 | 28 | 7 | 12 | 12 | 21 | 10 |
| 2020* | 6 | 9 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 23 | 31 | 6 |
*2020 schedule adjustment uses a combination of 2019 and 2020 stats to measure opponent strength.
SOURCES: ESPN STATS & INFORMATION GROUP
That lack of rushing success had ripple effects. The Rams feature a heavy
play-action-based passing scheme, and while there’s
no evidence the effectiveness of a team’s rushing
boosts the effectiveness of its play-fakes, it is true that play-action does at least work much better in down-and-distance situations in which the threat of running is more credible.
1 So when L.A.’s early down rushing fell from sixth in yards per carry in 2018 to 27th in 2019 — and when it couldn’t force opponents to
stack more defenders in the box to help contain the run — the Rams often found themselves in situations in which play-action was less effective. As a result, Jared Goff’s QBR on
play-passes dropped from 77.2 (11th-best) in 2018 to 59.2 (25th) in 2019.
But this season, the Rams’ rushing attack has returned in a big way. Second-year running back Darrell Henderson is averaging 5.2 yards per carry,
11th-best among qualified rushers, and as a team, Los Angeles ranks third in schedule-adjusted rushing EPA per game. Rushing makes up 36 percent of the Rams’ total yardage this season, which ranks seventh in the league; compare that with last year’s 25 percent mark (28th), and you get a sense of how much McVay has gone back to the basics to rediscover what worked so well during L.A.’s Super Bowl run.
And because the Rams have been so much more successful running early in offensive series — they’re averaging 5.3 yards per carry on first down, for instance — they’ve put themselves in more favorable play-action situations again. Goff’s QBR after play-fakes is back up to 85.7, which ranks 15th among qualified passers this season, and Los Angeles ranks second in the league (behind the Tennessee Titans) with 51.8 percent of its passing yards coming off of play-action attempts.
It’s all coming together to propel the Rams back near the top of the league in offensive EPA, with the team ranking sixth this season after last year’s drop-off. Together with the ninth-best EPA defense in the NFL so far, Los Angeles is one of only two teams — along with the Kansas City Chiefs — sitting among the top 10 on both offense and defense at the moment. Although the Rams play in a very tough division, featuring both the
surging Seattle Seahawks and the defending NFC champion San Francisco 49ers
2 — and their schedule gets tougher from here on — Los Angeles does seem to have fixed some of the major problems behind its Super Bowl hangover last season.
FiveThirtyEight’s NFL Elo ratings
How each team ranks through
Week 4 of the 2020 season, according to our quarterback-adjusted predictions
�
| CHANCE TO … | | | | | | | |
|---|
| RK | TEAM | STARTING QB | QB RK* | ELO RATING | PROJ. RECORD | MAKE PLAYOFFS | WIN DIVISION | WIN SB |
|---|
| 1 | Chiefs | Mahomes | 1 | 1737 | 14-2 | >99% | 95% | 25% |
| 2 | Packers | Rodgers | 6 | 1655 | 12-4 | 95 | 77 | 13 |
| 3 | Ravens | Jackson | 4 | 1648 | 11-5 | 87 | 47 | 8 |
| 4 | Seahawks | Wilson | 3 | 1639 | 12-4 | 92 | 60 | 10 |
| 5 | Bills | Allen | 7 | 1619 | 11-5 | 88 | 71 | 6 |
| 6 | Steelers | Roethlisberger | 9 | 1603 | 11-5 | 80 | 36 | 5 |
| 7 | Rams | Goff | 13 | 1585 | 10-6 | 71 | 24 | 4 |
| 8 | Saints | Brees | 5 | 1584 | 9-7 | 63 | 38 | 4 |
| 9 | Buccaneers | Brady | 16 | 1581 | 10-6 | 73 | 50 | 5 |
| 10 | Titans | Tannehill | 11 | 1580 | 11-5 | 79 | 57 | 4 |
| 11 | 49ers | Garoppolo✚ | 24 | 1575 | 9-7 | 47 | 11 | 3 |
| 12 | Colts | Rivers | 20 | 1572 | 10-6 | 68 | 40 | 3 |
| 13 | Bears | Foles | 21 | 1544 | 9-7 | 63 | 19 | 2 |
| 14 | Browns | Mayfield | 26 | 1539 | 10-6 | 64 | 17 | 2 |
| 15 | Cowboys | Prescott | 2 | 1530 | 8-8 | 58 | 54 | 1 |
| 16 | Vikings | Cousins | 27 | 1497 | 7-9 | 21 | 2 | <1 |
| 17 | Eagles | Wentz | 22 | 1496 | 7-8-1 | 37 | 33 | <1 |
| 18 | Raiders | Carr | 8 | 1495 | 8-8 | 28 | 4 | <1 |
| 19 | Cardinals | Murray | 10 | 1481 | 7-9 | 24 | 4 | <1 |
| 20 | Patriots | Newton✚ | 19 | 1464 | 9-7 | 61 | 28 | 2 |
| 21 | Panthers | Bridgewater | 17 | 1458 | 7-9 | 23 | 8 | <1 |
| 22 | Falcons | Ryan | 14 | 1447 | 5-11 | 6 | 3 | <1 |
| 23 | Chargers | Taylor✚ | 31 | 1444 | 6-10 | 8 | <1 | <1 |
| 24 | Dolphins | Fitzpatrick | 12 | 1438 | 6-10 | 7 | 1 | <1 |
| 25 | Texans | Watson | 15 | 1434 | 5-11 | 5 | 2 | <1 |
| 26 | Broncos | Lock✚ | 29 | 1433 | 6-10 | 15 | 2 | <1 |
| 27 | Lions | Stafford | 18 | 1421 | 6-10 | 10 | <1 | <1 |
| 28 | Bengals | Burrow | 25 | 1402 | 5-10-1 | 7 | <1 | <1 |
| 29 | Jaguars | Minshew | 23 | 1364 | 5-11 | 3 | <1 | <1 |
| 30 | Washington | Allen | 32 | 1364 | 5-11 | 11 | 9 | <1 |
| 31 | Giants | Jones | 28 | 1354 | 4-12 | 4 | 4 | <1 |
| 32 | Jets | Flacco | 30 | 1351 | 3-13 | <1 | <1 | <1 |
*Ranking among Week 5 starters, according to our QB Elo ratings.
✚ Starter is currently injured and may not play.
Simulations as of Oct. 7, 2020.
