Bernie: Fisher, not Schotty, is the problem

[Boffo97]

And oh yeah, running Tavon (180 lb back) up the middle into the teeth of a defense on 2nd & 10. Brilliant.

This has been one of the favorite bugaboos of Schotty's critics, and I don't think it has validity. I hope whoever our next OC is doesn't just conclude such a run is a bad idea and never does it.

2 reasons:

1. Makes it pretty easy for the defense if they're convinced Austin will never be run on certain plays. Less to defend.

2. If the offense actually opens a hole for just a second, Austin's got a full head of steam running through it and the secondary isn't going to have an easy job trying to get him.

To me, this was just another case of didn't work = bad play = bad OC. And I don't buy that as necessarily true.

That said, I might not have called it AS MUCH, but that's Monday Morning Coordinating.

 

[RamsSince1969]

I think we are on the right track in terms of being able to score a lot of points at times beating the Colts 38-8 in 2013 and the Raiders 52 to 0 in 2014. But then we had 2 "6" total point games and a game with the Chiefs where we scored only 7 points this year as well. Fricken Jekyll and Hyde! I'm up for something new, I just hope it isn't Rex Ryan or someone from the Jags or another bottom feeder team that is notorious for not scoring enough points. It really kinda rubs me the wrong way with the two prior Rams head coaches being in the playoffs this year. Don't give them the entire responsibility, and they thrive. Again, Jekyll and Hyde.

 

[LACHAMP46]

I like Fisher....Just think he's adjusting to the new NFL....Gotta give him 5 years to really evaluate his performance. The roster is so much better...We are all chomping at the bit for some of this playoff action...Some more than most...Not sure about Bernie...the, don't wanna cover the team no more comment made me think, eff him. Seriously....No one knows except the players & coaches how much Schotty hurt the team..My main problem/beef with both of them, the lack of anticipation re: the injuries to the QB & O-Line (Fisher/Snead) & the lack of production after the half (Schotty)...

 

[WvuIN02]

Cant argue with the numbers. You have a HC and OC who never really did anything on the offensive side of the ball. Bad combination in today's NFL.

There needs to be a mandate from ABOVE Fisher. Look at Pittsburgh, they got too cute passing the ball for a few years abandoning the run game and the Rooney's demanded a return to a balanced offense. Subsequently, the drafting of Bell and the return to balance had the Steelers offense suddenly being the strength of the team and is what got them into the playoffs.

Sometimes you need to make the old dog learn new tricks, or get a new dog. And Bernie is right, a couple of years of injuries to Bradford is anomalous, but we have 19 seasons to go on.

 

[Rabid Ram]

News flash beanie can go write for the pat and gtfo town

 

[Merlin]

Well here's hoping the Colts get eliminated so we can at least read that Fish is interviewing Chud.

And re: Bernie the numbers don't lie. He is correct. But where I differ from him is I don't believe Fish is the typical hard-headed defensive head coach who dictates a low-risk plodding offense. Fish has said more than once the Rams need to score more points, and he's not an idiot the passing game is a big part of that. He allowed Schotty to open up the offense in last year's failed start to the season before doing what he had to do to get back to respectability after the players couldn't execute it well enough.

My hope when they hired Fish was that he would be better this time around much like we saw with Belichick. And I do think it is still possible, however for that to happen he needs to get this next hire right.

That's our future hanging in the balance IMO. Who he hires as OC. If he kills it the Rams are going to the playoffs and will be in the mix for the Super Bowl during their window over the next several years of this young group maturing. If he makes another poor hire at OC, he's gonna end up losing his job. So if we hear that he's interviewing Sparano, for example... Well, I'm gonna admit to myself that Bernie is correct and get my barf bag ready for this season.

 

[Prime Time]

I think Fisher has an important decision to make now. And I think it could very well decide whether he's in the NFL after next year - or not.

Does he, as Bernie seems to think, hold true to his beliefs (conservative, pound-and-ground offense)?

Or does he go in a more aggresive direction on offense (those last presser comments make me wonder if this isn't his plan).

The selection of the new OC will tell us a lot.

Should a head coach get players that fit his philosophy and then hire coaches who implement that or should he change his philosophy dependent on the players he has and then hire coaches who will help them to succeed?

If a coach is told by ownership that he will have 4-5 years to put together the type of team he wants then the former option would be best. The problem in the win-now-or-else NFL we have today is that the latter option is best. This is why we've had a constant turnover of coaches, offensive and defensive philosophies, and the subsequent confusion and failure that goes with it.

Although the thought of promoting an in-house coach to be the new OC is less than thrilling to me, it makes the most sense unless Fisher plans to radically change his style of offense.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Should a head coach get players that fit his philosophy and then hire coaches who implement that or should he change his philosophy dependent on the players he has and then hire coaches who will help them to succeed?

If a coach is told by ownership that he will have 4-5 years to put together the type of team he wants then the former option would be best. The problem in the win-now-or-else NFL we have today is that the latter option is best. This is why we've had a constant turnover of coaches, offensive and defensive philosophies, and the subsequent confusion and failure that goes with it.

Although the thought of promoting an in-house coach to be the new OC is less than thrilling to me, it makes the most sense unless Fisher plans to radically change his style of offense.

Regarding your first sentence, that's been confusing to me. The coach (OC) didn't change, but the strategy seemed to year-over year.

2012: Drafted Quick, Pead and Given. Acquired Wells. Not really sure what the strategy was, at least I don't recall.
2013: Moved up to get Austin, Bailey. Acquired Long and Cook. That year, they made no bones about it, they were going spread. Did not work out, as we all know, so went back to the ground and Stacy became a houshold name to Rams fans.
2014: Drafted Robinson and Mason. Acquired Britt and Joseph. Again, most reports indicated an emphasis on the running game (with stout defense). Except, we didn't really stick to it a lot. And the rushing didn't live up to the hype: 20th in yards, 17th in yards per attempt.

So...

They've added to the roster on some years, anticipating a spread offense, then went run.
They've added to the roster on some years, anticipating running the ball, then passed a lot.

I was listening to the STL ESPN station today and the two guys were trying to figure it out too. Given the changes in course since 2012, it's hard to figure out which kind of coach Fisher will hire.

Like I said, the coach remained the same (Schottenheimer), but the players (type of) seemed to change from year to year.

OK... just had a thought:
No matter who Fisher hires, still have to fix that Oline - can't pass sitting on your back... and can't run if the defense is in the backfield.

IF they can do that, I think they've built a roster (because of the changes in strategy) that can be productive either way. Call it luck... but that's OK!

 

[Alan]

Prime Time with this question:
Should a head coach get players that fit his philosophy and then hire coaches who implement that or should he change his philosophy dependent on the players he has and then hire coaches who will help them to succeed?

That would depend on a couple of things. Are you knowledgeable and versatile enough to run a different philosophy being the most important factor. Could Don Coryell run John Robinson's offense as effectively as a John Robinson type? Or vice versa? I'm not sure there are people that good.

It's easy to say I don't have the personnel to run the offense I know and prefer but the horse has already left the barn hasn't it? Why would a GM hire an OC who isn't a fit with his players? Why would an OC accept a job knowing he doesn't have the players that fits the offense he prefers? Does he hope that he will eventually get the type of players he needs to run his preferred system?

I sincerely hope that we get a new OC who is capable of going with who we have because who we have fits his style of offense. We have neither the time or patience to start over.

 

[Prime Time]

Regarding your first sentence, that's been confusing to me. The coach (OC) didn't change, but the strategy seemed to year-over year.

2012: Drafted Quick, Pead and Given. Acquired Wells. Not really sure what the strategy was, at least I don't recall.
2013: Moved up to get Austin, Bailey. Acquired Long and Cook. That year, they made no bones about it, they were going spread. Did not work out, as we all know, so went back to the ground and Stacy became a houshold name to Rams fans.
2014: Drafted Robinson and Mason. Acquired Britt and Joseph. Again, most reports indicated an emphasis on the running game (with stout defense). Except, we didn't really stick to it a lot. And the rushing didn't live up to the hype: 20th in yards, 17th in yards per attempt.

So...

They've added to the roster on some years, anticipating a spread offense, then went run.
They've added to the roster on some years, anticipating running the ball, then passed a lot.

I was listening to the STL ESPN station today and the two guys were trying to figure it out too. Given the changes in course since 2012, it's hard to figure out which kind of coach Fisher will hire.

Like I said, the coach remained the same (Schottenheimer), but the players (type of) seemed to change from year to year.

OK... just had a thought:
No matter who Fisher hires, still have to fix that Oline - can't pass sitting on your back... and can't run if the defense is in the backfield.

IF they can do that, I think they've built a roster (because of the changes in strategy) that can be productive either way. Call it luck... but that's OK!

I agree with fixing the O-line being the #1 priority for this team. The problem is that one can't predict injuries. Had Long and Wells been healthy things would have looked much different. It's not that there was no attempt to fix the O-line it's just that it didn't work out.

As far as the receivers we drafted goes...we needed help at that position and that's who they selected for better or worse. Even a ground-and-pound team needs a passing attack.

So I don't totally agree that those selections were confusing except for Tavon Austin, at least imo.

Could Don Coryell run John Robinson's offense as effectively as a John Robinson type? Or vice versa? I'm not sure there are people that good.

It's easy to say I don't have the personnel to run the offense I know and prefer but the horse has already left the barn hasn't it? Why would a GM hire an OC who isn't a fit with his players? Why would an OC accept a job knowing he doesn't have the players that fits the offense he prefers? Does he hope that he will eventually get the type of players he needs to run his preferred system?

No
No
Yes
Because he's a dumbass
For a paycheck or a promotion
You would have to ask him

 

[V3]

This has been one of the favorite bugaboos of Schotty's critics, and I don't think it has validity. I hope whoever our next OC is doesn't just conclude such a run is a bad idea and never does it.

2 reasons:

1. Makes it pretty easy for the defense if they're convinced Austin will never be run on certain plays. Less to defend.

2. If the offense actually opens a hole for just a second, Austin's got a full head of steam running through it and the secondary isn't going to have an easy job trying to get him.

To me, this was just another case of didn't work = bad play = bad OC. And I don't buy that as necessarily true.

That said, I might not have called it AS MUCH, but that's Monday Morning Coordinating.

I agree that they should at least try plays up the middle with Tavon but the problem is they did it way too much.

 

[Alan]

Prime Time with a comprehensive (yet pithy) reply:
No
No
Yes
Because he's a dumbass
For a paycheck or a promotion
You would have to ask him

:bow:
I almost never get all my questions answered. Shock and awe! :banana:

Judging by your reply I seem to have answered your (probably rhetorical) question too.

 

[Robocop]

I agree and this was my problem with the approach this year. To me not enough commitment to the running game. I think Schotty wanted to run a more open pass first offense....as seen at the open of 2013 season. Draft guys like Quick, Austin and Mason make sense for this approach. I may be totally wrong but the O seemed to lack an identity for much of Fisher/Schotty time in St. Louis.
The balanced approach is really going to be best in most cases....run to pass or pass to run, either can work. Its fine with me if the team wants to pound the ball, but, to me the players that have been brought in (Quick, Britt, Austin, Cook) are (potentially) big play guys in a pass offense.
I think Fisher is aware (obviously) of where the game has gone and the advantages the passing game has. Fisher/Schotty have been forced to sort of abridge their O I am sure based on personnel short coming and injuries. Even if the new OC comes from within I don't expect things to be status quo.

exactly. that spread in 2013 did showcase a little of what Bradford can do which was nice. but I think fisher realized Schotty was not gonna run the philosophy he wanted but didn't wanna give him the boot too soon. there's plenty of ways to run heavy and spread the ball through the air. all of which will depend on the new line next season

 

[RamFan503]

Now wouldn't that be something?

Isn't that Joey? (few will get the reference)

 

[RamFan503]

Bernie-The-Hut has less insight to the coaching of the Rams than most of the members here. He doesn't go to the games, he doesn't attend the Ram press conferences, the team clearly can't stand him, he has no person inside the organization tipping him off... I could go on and on.

I actually read something from Blowvious Monday that was wonderful.... he said he didn't want to cover or write about the Rams anymore. This was music to my ears. crap, the mother freaker had already written about how he doesn't personally like Bradford. His breakfast with Bernie video horror scenes are nothing but garbage. When I heard that he'd no longer be covering the team, I should have known it was a pipe dream.

How many times do I remember seeing Brian with his huge play list on the sidelines calling the next offensive play ... and how many times do I remember seeing Fish getting in the middle of that process. Paaaaaalllease. Schotty was the play caller.

Bernie's crap is going to get much worse as the stadium leveraging moves along. I've gone over to his forum and called him out in the past for his clown show breakfast with Bern embarrassments. My fandom made me do it. I feel the urge to do it again in a more ruthless manner when I read this piece. Then I remind myself that he's just wanting clicks,,, he has no insight,,, he hates the Rams for shutting him completely out. His brand of "entertainment" has zero value to me.

He's not worth our time. He's nothing more than the jester crap stirrer for the PD forums.

Mega Like. But you had me at Hut.

 

[ramsince62]

Not as much as winning.

With this "D" winning would be a forgone conclusion, nes pas?

 

[Mikey Ram]

FWIW


Bernie:

I would agree that Fisher's offenses haven't been good enough. Here's the avg reg season ranking in points scored for each of the winning Super Bowl teams in the last 10 years///followed by their respective defensive rankings in points allowed.

Seattle 8th///1st
Baltimore 10th///12th
NYG 9th///25th
Green Bay 10th///2nd
New Orleans 1st///20th
Pittsburgh 20th///1st
NYG 14th///17th
Indianapolis 2nd///23rd
Pittsburgh 9th///3rd
New England 4th///2nd


I've said all along however, that with a top 5 defense and solid special teams, we don't need a top 10 offense. Rams just need to get out of the cellar and at least improve into the top 15. It's been so bad for awhile now.

And remember we're just trying to get into the freaking playoffs here, so those Super Bowl team rankings are the best of the best.


I think the major culprit has been the inability of the offense to play 4 qtrs, not 1 1/2...They had the highest positive point differencial in the league (at least for most of the year)...my thought is that kind of a team shouldn't finish 6-10...whether it's an inability to adjust, a lack of the "let's finish it killer instinct" or something else, this just has to change...

 

[-X-]

nes pas?

No thanks, I had a pretty big dinner.