Dead Horse Take of the Week

[Mackeyser]

I figure, so as to make it easier on the mods and to reduce the violations occurring on the dead horse population (there have been...um...complaints...ya know...what with the smell and all. Totally understandable), that I'd just post my typically oft-repeated posts into an aggregated "dead horse take of the week"

Some of these may be repeats from earlier.

Disclaimer: I'm a realist, but a realist who wants positive things to happen with the Rams. So in these takes, I hope that I include something positive. I see patterns which is what I base a lot of this on. It's by no means infallible. Flowers typically follow the fibonacci sequence with their petals, but...there are exceptions. I'm wrong more often than nature's exceptions. And mostly, I bring this up because I'm usually not wrong...and I really, REALLY love our Rams and I want the best for them. But yammerin' on about it especially during a down season...can get old.

So, I figure when I realize I got a take, I'll put it up. Prolly once a week. That oughta bout do it.

Without further ado:

We know the Rams offense stinks. The only times it is offensive is when it takes the field...yuk, yuk. Sorry... However, I don't think all is lost. We actually have some pretty nice pieces and could be actually very good very soon.

How?

If the Rams ran the Pittsburgh variant of the Earhardt Perkins offense.

Why?

Well, that offense has proven to be one of the most explosive in the league. We have the personnel to run in insofar as we have the QB in Goff, the RB who can receive in Gurley, and WRs in Britt and Austin that can create mismatches. Austin hasn't been used outside because Keenum didn't have the arm to hit him. Several times, Austin beat DBs deep when he was on the outside only to either have to slow up or not be thrown to because Keenum didn't have the arm to hit him.

Moreover, it's a dynamic offense that utilizes the entire field which will make it much, much more difficult to stack the box against Gurley.

If Matt Patricia or Todd Haley were to bring that offense to the Rams, I don't think it would take, but a few weeks for the Rams to be a top 15 offensive team. Moreover, with our defense not being on the field for 35+ minutes every game, we'd start to see them getting up on teams like has happened when this team had the slightest bit of offense.

They know they'd still have to work on improving the team...WR, OL, CB, DE, LB... but this team has plenty of pieces already ready to go.

The only reason I wouldn't say it'd be a top 10 offense is that it takes time for an EP offense to really take root. So the first year, the players would be really getting comfortable in the system. That said, it'd be good enough to win more than lose and maybe even make the playoffs.

Even better, it'd be laying the groundwork for an offensive juggernaut.

This current offense...isn't just awful...it's offal.

The good news is that a change could yield significant results and right quick, especially because the change suits the QB and RB....and frankly, most of the OL so well.

 

[Prime Time]

Flowers typically follow the fibonacci sequence with their petals, but...there are exceptions

Who knew Dennis Miller was posting on this site? :eek:

 

[-X-]

Disclaimer: I'm a realist

 

[RamFan503]

Interesting topic. I don't know a lot about the system. What part of the E-P are you referring to? The simplification of the play calls? I seem to remember the Rams talking last year about incorporating some elements but the play calls were still very complex. It never made much sense to me why they'd do that.

 

[Dagonet]

Even if one disagrees with Mack here, and I don't know enough to make that observation, it's good to see at least a positive post instead of just trashing. Talking about solutions is good Mr. Dennis Miller.

 

[Mackeyser]

The EP system is a very malleable system just like the Coryell system is (both the Joe Gibbs' Washington "Hogs" ground and pound offense and Coryell's "Air Coryell" in San Diego were variants of the Coryell system).

The EP above all requires a QB who can make quick decisions and go through his progressions and recognize the defense because the play will rely on sight adjustments (like: if the db plays cushion and inside, then run a short button hook. If the db is playing man, run skinny post)

We have a QB that is very good at that in Goff. Very good. It actually plays to his strengths.

Quick decisions.
Progressions.
Arm to deliver anywhere on the field.
Footwork to extend plays.

The EP is very flexible as we've seen in NE. They went very spread concept for a year. They went heavy with two TEs with Gronk and Hernandez and now Gronk and Bennett. So... the good news is that the offense can go with the best players it can get or it can adapt to whomever it has available in case of injury.

 

[-X-]

The EP above all requires a QB who can make quick decisions and go through his progressions and recognize the defense

That's the key. McDaniels tried to install that with Bradford, and it might have been successful if they had even a semblance of an off-season to work on it, but it's also predicated on using smart receivers. Everyone can attest to the fact that NE doesn't often employ freak athlete receivers to make their offense work. Just guys who know the ins and outs of the system and where they have to be at any given moment. If they do their job, and the QB does his, then separation is something that just happens organically. So in that respect, yes. It would be a good system to use here. But I'm not entirely sold on the idea that this particular group of receivers are as studios as you'd want in order to maximize its effectiveness.

 

[thirteen28]

I am totally with the OP on this. It's amazing how long the Patriots have had a good offense, and they have often times done it without great players at the skill positions - QB excepted. And as he said, it's very malleable to the personnel you have - it can be power running, mutliple TE's, wide open passing, whatever. Another thing I like is the simplified terminology - simpler than the Coryell numbering system, and much, much simpler than the ridiculously wordy playcalls of the West Coast system.

Edited to add: The Cowboys switched to this system in 2013, which is notably considering Garrett had always been a Coryell disciple. It's working out pretty good this year with a rookie QB under center. Talent helps, but Dak is still a rookie.

 

[bubbaramfan]

Watching the Rams offense, the thing that stands out to me is their inexperience. You can tell they haven't played together much. I see flashes of what could be, but they are having a hard time being consistant.

Where would the Rams be in the standing had there been no dropped balls or drive killing penalties? I believe they would be in the playoffs.

 

[Mackeyser]

That's the key. McDaniels tried to install that with Bradford, and it might have been successful if they had even a semblance of an off-season to work on it, but it's also predicated on using smart receivers. Everyone can attest to the fact that NE doesn't often employ freak athlete receivers to make their offense work. Just guys who know the ins and outs of the system and where they have to be at any given moment. If they do their job, and the QB does his, then separation is something that just happens organically. So in that respect, yes. It would be a good system to use here. But I'm not entirely sold on the idea that this particular group of receivers are as studios as you'd want in order to maximize its effectiveness.

Yeah. I've mentioned previously, for example, that I don't think Brian Quick would do well in as a receiver in an EP offense. I think he's got a learning disability or something and while he's a freak athlete, he's not someone who's going to be recognizing everything in the moment, making snap judgements and being on the spot. I think Britt would do very well. Same with Tavon, tho he might take a moment. Man, I miss Bailey...

So, yeah, not everyone we have would be ideal, but I think we have enough to see some success AND then see the kind of player who would be successful. THAT's key.

Moreover, we have a better front office than NE. That's important. NE does extremely well with what they have, but if you actually look with the umpteen picks they usually have, they don't actually draft all that well. We do... or we can. I think if we keep Snead and have an offensive minded coach or OC who knows what he's looking for, we'll be golden.

 

[-X-]

Man, I miss Bailey...

Bailey would be great in that offense.
So would Amendola and Brandon Lloyd.

Need that time machine somethin' bad.

 

[FRO]

That's the key. McDaniels tried to install that with Bradford, and it might have been successful if they had even a semblance of an off-season to work on it, but it's also predicated on using smart receivers. Everyone can attest to the fact that NE doesn't often employ freak athlete receivers to make their offense work. Just guys who know the ins and outs of the system and where they have to be at any given moment. If they do their job, and the QB does his, then separation is something that just happens organically. So in that respect, yes. It would be a good system to use here. But I'm not entirely sold on the idea that this particular group of receivers are as studios as you'd want in order to maximize its effectiveness.

Think the Patriots show that building a roster with smart players is a better idea than building with raw athletes.