THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF: Stuart Banner of the Volokh Conspiracy laments this year's demise of the St. Louis Rams' offense in a heartfelt post. Having twice seen said Rams defeat my Eagles in the past sixteen months, before this week's splendid reversal of fortune, I can't claim to have much sympathy for his viewpoint (except as a fantasy football owner of Marshall Faulk's in a keeper league), but I can add some explanation.
Stuart cites the Rams' injuries, and, yes, Kurt Warner hasn't had a solid hand in some time, and Marshall Faulk has been dinged up some. But the real story is a simple one: scheduling and realigment.
From 1999 through 2001, the Rams were in the old NFC West, and not only played their eight home games under the dome, but also had annual road visits to Atlanta and New Orleans. During each of those seasons the Rams played eleven games under climate-controlled domes on artificial turf, quite conducive to their speed-based game, and only five games per year exposed to the sky.
The results? The Rams were 27-6 indoors (.818 winning pct), but only 10-5 (.667) when forced to play under the same conditions that Saints Lombardi and Halas would have preferred.
With the new divisonal realignment of the Falcons and Saints joining the new NFC South, being replaced in the Rams' division by Seattle and Arizona, the Rams had zero dome road games this year.
So, what happens when the Rams are forced to play in natural weather conditions? The Rams are 4-2 at home, 1-5 on the road, the only road win being against the pathetic Arizona Cardinals.
The dome advantage is manifest this year in the Rams' wide receivers' stats. Torry Holt averages 2.3 more yards/reception under the bubble. For Issac Bruce, 4 more yards/reception, plus all five of his touchdowns are indoors.
In short, the Rams have been returned to the land of the mortals because they've been forced to take their turf-enhanced game into the great outdoors, and it just hasn't worked out for them. Fortunately, they'll have a nice, long winter to figure out what to do next . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment