CIA

[Wonderboy]

I've been reading a lot of comments about the play calling and I think it's pretty much a consensus that we all think it should be vastly improved. The biggest problem I have is the predictability of the Rams offense early in games. Obviously the Rams are going to be predictable after they're down 3 scores in each of the last three games. That goes without saying. However, in so many football games a team's best possession of the game is the first one because it's "scripted," meaning the coach has pre-planned out the mix of play-action, different route combinations, different plays out of old formations, specific plays out of new personnel groups to work a predicted mismatch, new plays designed just for that defense, etc. And that brings us to our 2013 St. Louis Rams, the MPSOT (Most Predictable Show On Turf). And they're brutal in the first quarter. It is a very bad sign that defenses already have our offense "figured out" this early in the season and can stop everything we do without seeming to have to try that hard.

It was stunning to be in the dome last night. For those of you that weren't, remember how many sideline throws were undercut and almost picked off? When your routes are all the same in the same situations, the best receivers on earth can't "get separation." I am now fully on the bandwagon that this is a coaching (Brian Schottenheimer only) issue. There were no screen plays called early (or late for that matter) to keep the defensive line on their toes and slow down the pass rush when the run game wasn't working, although I would contend that a few screen plays in the first quarter would open up the run game as well. Forget about finding "creative" ways to get Tavon the ball, just don't be predictable and he'll get open and then make plays on his own!

So back to the title of this post (which wasn't intended to be a rant but is starting to lean that way, forgive me and let me see if I can pull it back ON course). When I played BASEBALL in college (not football), we had 70 guys in the team. I played NAIA ball at a small school so there was no such thing as film or scouting reports (unless we had faced a guy before). But we were relentless in game. Every single player that wasn't playing had multiple responsibilities during a game. A bunch of guys were assigned to stealing signs. It didn't always work but if we got a sign that was huge. However we also had a contingency of guys that were nothing but CIA. They always wore sunglasses and spent their time (I was often one my freshman year when I wasn't playing) watching the other dugout to see if THEY were stealing OUR signs. That way if we ever suspected they had something or were close we would change out signs up. The point is this as it relates to the Rams; in all of the time spent scouting the opposition and watching film, is anyone on the Rams staff (outside of Scho(i?)tty) scouting the Rams for their tendencies? I don't think it's possible that they are doing this and it's confounding to me. If they were scouting themselves, they would see how incredibly predictable they are and could make a massive improvement in offense just by improving play calling. I wish I had a way to convey this to the Rams because I'm convinced they would be massively better just by scouting themselves.

Sorry for the length of that explanation but I'm curious to hear what you guys think of this. Am I way off base and is this done already? I think it's not because if so the guy who does that should be canned NOW.

 

[-X-]

Very interesting post, and an interesting question. I would assume so, but I have no idea obviously.

You should ask Demoff that question if I can get him over here again. Or better yet, hit up one of the guys who does the chats. And if THAT fails, you can actually write Fisher yourself and ask him. John Robinson and Rich Brooks used to write me back, but I haven't tried to contact any other head coaches since then.

 

[Wonderboy]

Very interesting post, and an interesting question. I would assume so, but I have no idea obviously.

You should ask Demoff that question if I can get him over here again. Or better yet, hit up one of the guys who does the chats. And if THAT fails, you can actually write Fisher yourself and ask him. John Robinson and Rich Brooks used to write me back, but I haven't tried to contact any other head coaches since then.

Thanks I'll try to bring that up if I ever have the opportunity although I'm not sure when that would be. But yes, I've always been intrigued by coaching offensive football. I always thought the first thing I would do if I was an offensive coordinator is scout myself before I even scouted the opponent. Because I know they are trying to figure out my tendencies so I want to know my tendencies so I can break them and give my players every advantage possible by calling plays in spots that are not expected by the opponent. It keeps them on their heels and gives my guys the best chance to win! If as Schotty does scout himself he is worse at that than calling plays.

 

[-X-]

Well, since you bring it up, who would you put on it? Meaning, who would you want to scout you if you were B Schott? McGinnis? Or maybe one of the defensive coaches?

 

[Wonderboy]

I would want it to be a defensive guy. Scout me like I am the opponent and then tell me my tendencies and how you would defend me on various down and distances and in various formations and with various personnel groupings. Then I would build my game plan on that. Isn't calling plays about being one step ahead of the other guys? It would sure be nice for the Rams to stop being two steps behind!

By the way I'm thinking mostly about offense but this is a two way street. Could Rams offensive coaches scout the Rams defense and figure out how they would attack it and help them create a plan?

Surely this must be done, right? RIGHT? But if so the Rams might be the worst in the league at it because it is not working.

 

[-X-]

Yeah, I would think that we do that. At a minimum some of the more cerebral players like Laurinaitis would speak up if he noticed a trend or vulnerability.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Call into the Jeff Fisher show and ask them about it, sounds like a good idea.


We used to do that in the Army a lot when we did training exercises. My First Sergeant would always have me break out before the rest of our unit got out to where we were going and tell me to gather as much as I could without watching them setup or know what was happening. Everyone would remove rank and he'd scramble up who was in charge, squad leaders etc, and I had to try to figure everything out.

I was able to figure out who was in charge really quickly, and where things were. I was able to figure out the challenge and password when I would sneak up closer, I was able to figure out patrol routes and weak points in the defense, just general tendencies. After a few hours I'd come back and report my findings, after a few times they changed things up enough and it got a lot harder. One of my techniques to figure out who was in charge was to see who was doing what. A big indicator is to see who was pointing, people who are in charge always point to where they want want done. As a result when we did War Games, unit vs unit things, our company was always one of, any many times the best company out there, because we prepared for it. And when we were deployed we used the same tactics to make life harder for the enemy.



I think that would be a pretty smart idea, because obviously defenses know what we're doing. I'm not sure if they're just playing the pass every time because they know we have no run game, or if we're tipping things or what. Something needs to change though.

 

[EastRam]

Normally all teams usually scout themselves.

Dunno if they do it with outside coachs or use in house. In the Rams case looks to me they should use outside coachs to scout. :?!: