Part of a coaches job is to put players in a position to succeed. I've watched every Rams game since the new regime, and I question whether Schotty knows how to utilize his talent.
I don't. I question his utilization of Tavon but the guy can utilize talent. He's proven as much. Now, I do question if he can utilize Tavon. It's frustrating. But there might just be reasons we don't know about hindering Tavon.
Kind of like with Quick. It seems like the light bulb has gone on for Quick. It might not have come on for Tavon yet. We don't know. We're not in the meeting rooms. But I am frustrated with his utilization of Tavon.
Sam has improved yes, but is that truly the product of Schotty? Could it be because he has the luxury of having a QB coach that wasn't provided to him under the Spags regime?
Seems like a convenient way of circumventing giving Schotty credit. I'm sure Cignetti has had a hand in it but Schotty's origins are from being a QB Coach. I'm sure he's had a rather large hand in it too.
Keep in mind if we're going to go that route and credit the QB Coach, it's worth remembering that Schotty was the QB Coach for San Diego when Drew Brees and Philip Rivers were developed.
We should also note that a lot of the offensive production that we saw during Rams blowouts (which subsequently lead to the jump in ppg), was in large part a product of the defensive play. The defense was spectacular in putting the offense in great positions to succeed...and at times scoring themselves.
We ended with the same ranking in overall PPG, score percentage(% of offensive drives resulting in a score), and average points scored per drive in 2013. Basically, our offensive output per drive matched up to our overall PPG ranking so the defensive and special teams scores in the end didn't change things relative to the rest of the teams in the NFL.
Additionally, we ranked 10th in least turnovers on offense in 2013 and 10th in most turnovers forced on defense. So we actually were equally good(in terms of rank) at both not turning the ball over AND forcing turnovers.
So, in the end, I don't think the defense can really be used to take away from the strides the offense made.
I'm not entirely blaming Schotty for the mess that is our offense, but I would be naive to think that he is not part of the problem. There is very little creativity to what we're doing, and I fully believe that we aren't maximizing our offensive players abilities. This offense is not void of talent.
Offense doesn't have to be void of talent. When you're starting backup QBs, you already have one arm tied behind your back. Add in the OL not executing on Sunday and things are going to be a disaster.
Does Schotty not accept blame? No. He has blame to accept. But blame doesn't mean anything to me. It's just looking for a target after a bad performance where there was plenty of blame to go around. Don't know a guy who doesn't deserve blame on offense from Sunday except for the man with Quick on his jersey.
As far as creativity goes, it's overrated. Maximizing players abilities is a phrase that doesn't mean much to me. Yes, I want an OC that does that but it's an easy thing to claim when the offense isn't playing well. And most people really can't elaborate beyond the phrase or generalities(more deep passes, less check-downs, screens, etc.).
I don't know many fan-bases that like their OC. He seems like the most convenient scapegoat. When things aren't going well, people just assume it's the play-calling and play design. When the reality often is more tied in with player executing their assignments. Is that part of the OC's job? Yes. But it's also the players' jobs. One of the OCs that I think highly of, Greg Roman, is hated by 49er fans.
As I said, OCs just aren't popular. Whereas, DCs are generally less hated. Why? Because it's easier to tell on defense which guy failed to execute an assignment and is to blame. And defensive schemes are more complicated so most fans can't offer up opinions for how they believe it should be fixed.
Although, there are plenty of unpopular DCs too.
When I get a chance to review the game, hopefully, I'll be able to post a few plays and elaborate on how failed plays may seem to lack creativity or poorly designed based on the end results but when looked at for what they're supposed to be, the opposite is actually true and the play's failure is based on a failed assignment or two when it was setting up to be a major gain.
