Brian Schottenheimer Is Not the Problem

[-X-]

Well as someone who looks at things objectively, I'd say nine years is well above the time needed to do so. As for Tavon, I said on this forum after the draft Stedman would be the better receiver and TA would need to be utilized properly to be effective (which I feel he isn't). Either way, I give players three years so we will see next year....maybe he isnt an NFL receiver, but I think being stuck with this style of offense was a terrible fit for his game and dont understand the Rams reasoning for drafting him. As an aside, I find it incredibly ironic that I read posts from some of the same posters here pointing out Quick needed three years and in the same place bashing Austin relentlessly.

Fair enough. And for the record, I haven't given up on Austin. I just don't know what his niche is yet, and I don't think the coaches do either. Greg Cosell recently said in an interview that he thinks Tavon needs to focus on being a receiver and not a gadget player. I'm pretty sure he meant that the coaches need to focus on that, but I'm not entirely sure. The rationale being, he's gonna get pigeon-holed as a gadget player (HB, PR, KR, X, Y, Z) and won't be afforded the time and resources needed to hone his craft as a receiver only. It's happened to a lot of players over the years who had incredible speed and athleticism. I tend to agree with him in that they need to stick him on the outside and let him work on a specific set of routes that utilize his speed and cutting ability. And of course let him return punts, but that's about it as far as extra stuff goes.

 

[LACHAMP46]

Whew!!! Too funny!!

So who do we hold accountable? Who is responsible? We're seeing the same mistakes being made, game after game.

Sounds like players.....

Sorry for forgetting names but rams need to double dip early on the oline

1. G/T from Norte Dame
2. Cameron Erving Florida state

wonder about Erving, just a bit...the combine & allstar game will be huge for him...what is this doing in my Schotty thread? I like Stanley a whole bunch...monster, let him a G-Rob battle it out for LT, loser goes to RT.

And that's also my point - there are coaches out there producing that don't have ideal circumstances yet are achieving better results.

And it's also not just about the QB , but about utilizing the talent too.

Bilicheck felt the same way, then they drafted Brady...and Bledsloe got hurt at just the right time...So who are these coaches producing without adequate QB play? Name ONE????

for example, last year's Cleveland browns. 3 different QB's still didn't matter in Turner's offense

perhaps the Browns have better talent at the skill positions & the O-LINE

Yet the Jets have made more use out of Percy Harvin in a short time...the Cardinals with John Brown...etc.. it goes on and on.

Perhaps Harvin & Brown are better than Austin....esp. at receiver....

You want to be a good coordinator? Have good players.

Just wanted to restate the obvious.....

I find it incredibly ironic that I read posts from some of the same posters here pointing out Quick needed three years and in the same place bashing Austin relentlessly.

With me, I'm cool with Austin, but I also don't expect him to be some sort of dominant wr, that makes tough catches, tough yards after the catch...I expected big things at wr for Quick because I had seen flashes...I only see flashes for Tavon as a returner/runner....Not as a receiver....3 years is the benchmark...So next year will be huge in my eyes for Tavon & Bailey....Stead has show flashes, but not like Quick either...I'd rather have a DGB type, waiting in the wings...

 

[RamzFanz]

Fair enough. And for the record, I haven't given up on Austin. I just don't know what his niche is yet, and I don't think the coaches do either. Greg Cosell recently said in an interview that he thinks Tavon needs to focus on being a receiver and not a gadget player. I'm pretty sure he meant that the coaches need to focus on that, but I'm not entirely sure. The rationale being, he's gonna get pigeon-holed as a gadget player (HB, PR, KR, X, Y, Z) and won't be afforded the time and resources needed to hone his craft as a receiver only. It's happened to a lot of players over the years who had incredible speed and athleticism. I tend to agree with him in that they need to stick him on the outside and let him work on a specific set of routes that utilize his speed and cutting ability. And of course let him return punts, but that's about it as far as extra stuff goes.

Almost every time they send him outside good things happen. Last game they threw it to him on the outside once for a PI call. A good acting job by TA I might add. A little dramatic, but effective.

Unfortunately, as one might expect, we never saw it again. The tides come in and the tides go out, you can't explain that.

 

[-X-]

Almost every time they send him outside good things happen. Last game they threw it to him on the outside once for a PI call. A good acting job by TA I might add. A little dramatic, but effective.

Unfortunately, as one might expect, we never saw it again. The tides come in and the tides go out, you can't explain that.

Yeah, but unfortunately, by the time he gets past the corner (who almost always gives a cushion), he's out of the range of Hill's and Davis' arm.

 

[RamzFanz]

Yeah, but unfortunately, by the time he gets past the corner (who almost always gives a cushion), he's out of the range of Hill's and Davis' arm.

And Hill or Davis is running for their lives. True dat.

Can't WAIT to see Braford behind a real line.

 

[-X-]

And Hill or Davis is running for their lives. True dat.

Can't WAIT to see Braford behind a real line.

While it would be nice to have a line full of Pro Bowlers, it's not something that happens a lot in this league. Lines get banged up all the time, but the good teams have QBs that can mask those deficiencies through quick reads/releases and/or finding ways to maneuver around or out of the pocket. I'd like to have a beast line for once here, no doubt. But now I'm more wanting a QB who can semi-succeed in spite of an average line. Bradford used to check down all the time and caught hell for it; but in retrospect, that's not a bad thing. a 5 yard pass or a 5 yard run is still 5 yards.

 

[Lesson]

While Sanchez is still predisposed to turning the ball over which is on him, Chip Kelly has done far more with him.

His QBR is 18 points higher than it was in his time in NY, and his yards per game is up over 70 more than his time in NY. In 4 years he averaged 194 ypg under Schotty, and in Philly its at 265 ypg....percentage wise that is a huge difference.

What Sanchez has been asked to due in Philly is different than what he was asked to do in NY. I do think his true level performance lies somewhere between how he is performing now and how he performed in NY.

Also, note something about Schottenheimer. He's worked under 3 HCs now. All 3 are defensive minded coaches. His offense is styled towards whatever his employer wants. Under least 2 of the 3, they've had a pretty decent group of RBs at one point.

 

[WvuIN02]

Kind of a small sample size though, isn't it? I can pick 7 games Sanchez played in while in NY (in a row) that would boast the same achievements. Bottom line is, he isn't getting it done for Chip Kelly either.

Nine years isn't a small sample size. His career average for his offense vs the rest of the league is 22nd, that doesn't even give credence to an argument that he's even average, well below it in fact. How many more years does this guy get a pass before people call him what he is? To me this guys career has always screamed nepotism at its finest. At this point I think we just have to agree to disagree and move on.

 

[Alan]

-X- putting on the freeze:
Yeah, but unfortunately, by the time he gets past the corner (who almost always gives a cushion), he's out of the range of Hill's and Davis' arm.

That's pretty cold -X-.

 

[RamzFanz]

While it would be nice to have a line full of Pro Bowlers, it's not something that happens a lot in this league. Lines get banged up all the time, but the good teams have QBs that can mask those deficiencies through quick reads/releases and/or finding ways to maneuver around or out of the pocket. I'd like to have a beast line for once here, no doubt. But now I'm more wanting a QB who can semi-succeed in spite of an average line. Bradford used to check down all the time and caught hell for it; but in retrospect, that's not a bad thing. a 5 yard pass or a 5 yard run is still 5 yards.

Hill had two touchdown passes, Kendricks (23 yards) and Chris Givens (47 yards). Two TDs and got them in FG range twice for scores WITH that line. Only sacked twice against one of the top pass rushes in the NFL who were in the backfield all game. His passer rating was 110.2.

Imagine if he weren't being chased and mauled all game.

My point isn't that Hill is a great QB, he's not, it's just that with an average O line, even Hill would be killing teams.

 

[-X-]

Nine years isn't a small sample size. His career average for his offense vs the rest of the league is 22nd, that doesn't even give credence to an argument that he's even average, well below it in fact. How many more years does this guy get a pass before people call him what he is? To me this guys career has always screamed nepotism at its finest. At this point I think we just have to agree to disagree and move on.

....

Can we please stay on track people? Please?

You quoted Sanchez's stat line this year and I said *THAT* was a small sample size. Then I said I can pick 7 games in a row that he played in NY that showed similar achievements over that span. I didn't say anything about Schottenheimer's sample size, so re-read what I wrote in response to your reply. I don't know how many more years he gets before people call him what he is. Because I don't know what he is and neither do you.

 

[WvuIN02]

....

Can we please stay on track people? Please?

You quoted Sanchez's stat line this year and I said *THAT* was a small sample size. Then I said I can pick 7 games in a row that he played in NY that showed similar achievements over that span. I didn't say anything about Schottenheimer's sample size, so re-read what I wrote in response to your reply. I don't know how many more years he gets before people call him what he is. Because I don't know what he is and neither do you.

Well this discussion has taken all sorts of detours, I was trying to get it back to what it is, and that is the discussion about what Schotty has done.

Regardless X, the thing I like about this place is we can respectfully disagree and everything is cool (no name calling etc). The thing I think we can all agree on is the Rams need an answer at QB with either Bradford healthy or another option.

 

[-X-]

Hill had two touchdown passes, Kendricks (23 yards) and Chris Givens (47 yards). Two TDs and got them in FG range twice for scores WITH that line. Only sacked twice against one of the top pass rushes in the NFL who were in the backfield all game. His passer rating was 110.2.

Imagine if he weren't being chased and mauled all game.

My point isn't that Hill is a great QB, he's not, it's just that with an average O line, even Hill would be killing teams.

I wasn't even talking about Hill. I was talking about the offensive line and how it's not always achievable to have one stay solid and strong all season. Which led to a point about my preferring a QB who has a stronger arm and more mobility. That's not a slight of Hill and what he was able to do yesterday.

 

[lockdnram21]

I am still not impressed with Schotty. Sure he has had some tough go with the bad Oline play but other than the Raiders game when has anything he done looked impressive with the Rams? Just for example remember how bad Arizonas Oline and offense in general were. Arians totally turned it all around in a short time. In comparison Schottenheimer does not impress.

But I wont focus on Schott this offseason because I doubt he will go anywhere. Niether will Fisher and crew. They will be allowed to play out their contracts I am sure. My guess is Kroenke sticks with Fisher even longer than his contract.

However if this team once again comes out of an offseason without legitimate upgrades at Center and ORG then I will be severely disappointed. Barksdale has not looked good either but then, who would look good playing alongside Joseph? Barksdale played much better with Saffold next to him. The offense still needs a major overhaul.

They need a true #1 WR. A guy like Cooper or White along with Britt and Quick would be formidable.
They need to get a better QB plan in place
They need to fix the Oline issues at ORG and Center.

With the Barron trade the Rams are lacking picks. So, it may be hard to accomplish all of this in the draft so they need to be players in free agency. One ORG and Center would work wonders before draft day. First round WR is now on my list unless Winston is there.

WR isnt the problem. There has been plenty of times Britt and Bailey should have scored if the QB would have got them the ball. Add Quick and Austin with a good qb that's plenty. I might take a shot on second or third rounder like Sammy Coates or Rashad Greene to take Givens spot. The main 3 needs is interior line and Qb and I would say Top flight cb. Between our top 3 none of them are #1 cb in my opinion

 

[-X-]

Well this discussion has taken all sorts of detours, I was trying to get it back to what it is, and that is the discussion about what Schotty has done.

Regardless X, the thing I like about this place is we can respectfully disagree and everything is cool (no name calling etc). The thing I think we can all agree on is the Rams need an answer at QB with either Bradford healthy or another option.

Works for me. And if you want another coordinator, use your considerable influence and see if Shannon Dawson wants to give it a whirl.
You can talk all kinds of shit about Kentucky if it helps.

 

[WvuIN02]

Lol, I'd love that....he is a very intelligent guy.

 

[RamzFanz]

I wasn't even talking about Hill. I was talking about the offensive line and how it's not always achievable to have one stay solid and strong all season. Which led to a point about my preferring a QB who has a stronger arm and more mobility. That's not a slight of Hill and what he was able to do yesterday.

Ah, yes.

Well, I don't think there's a QB on the team who avoids the sack better than Hill. Unfortunately, he can't pull it down and run and his arm is unimpressive.

I think if the Rams O line were actually average, this would be a whole different discussion.

As is though, Rams are not that far from having a solid line at least to start the season. 2-3 really good moves I would think. Are they out there to be had though?

By the way, Robinson laid out some defenders in the run game. I haven't seen that mentioned here, but he sprung TM more than once.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Speaking of over and over. He seems to some how start the season like he is lost, get on the hot seat. Halfway through the season figure something out that is highly supported by defense. Everybody starts saying he is only part of the problem. Everything is good, next year will be good. Next thing you know BAM!!!! Ground Hog Day!!!!

THIS ^^^ is my worst nightmare!

 

[moklerman]

Kind of a small sample size though, isn't it? I can pick 7 games Sanchez played in while in NY (in a row) that would boast the same achievements. Bottom line is, he isn't getting it done for Chip Kelly either.

Higher completion%, higher ypa, higher TD% and higher passer rating than Foles. Doesn't seem fair to say "Sanchez" isn't getting it done.

Compared to his days in NY? Sanchez is playing MUCH better. I agree that the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions, but at this point, I'd say Kelly's getting more out of him. A big part of the reason is how he's being used. The Eagles aren't trying to hide Sanchez in the offense, they're putting the game on his shoulders and he's playing the best he's ever played.

Sure, the Eagles have had struggles but their losses shouldn't fall on Sanchez IMO. He's playing better than Foles was this year and he's playing much better than he was in NY.

 

[-X-]

Higher completion%, higher ypa, higher TD% and higher passer rating than Foles. Doesn't seem fair to say "Sanchez" isn't getting it done.

Compared to his days in NY? Sanchez is playing MUCH better. I agree that the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions, but at this point, I'd say Kelly's getting more out of him. A big part of the reason is how he's being used. The Eagles aren't trying to hide Sanchez in the offense, they're putting the game on his shoulders and he's playing the best he's ever played.

Sure, the Eagles have had struggles but their losses shouldn't fall on Sanchez IMO. He's playing better than Foles was this year and he's playing much better than he was in NY.

I didn't say the Eagles' losses should fall on Sanchez, I didn't say *he* isn't getting it done, and I didn't compare him to Foles.

I'm sure glad I could be people's platform for saying what they wanna say regardless of the points I'm making.