Final Full Squad Minicamp Underway/Wagoner

[Anonymous]

Final Full Squad Minicamp Underway

by nickwagoner

June 13, 2012

http://blog.stlouisrams.com/2012/06/13/final-full-squad-minicamp-underway/

- The Rams kicked off their third and final minicamp of the offseason on Tuesday. The minicamp is mandatory for all players and is the final benchmark of the offseason program before the team returns for training camp in late July.

- Plenty of news and notes to get to from today so let’s dive right into it.

- First, as reported in this space last week, C Scott Wells is dealing with an injury issue. Coach Jeff Fisher acknowledged on Tuesday that Wells had a knee scope a few weeks back. Wells has other important things to tend to that Fisher did not want to reveal without Wells’ permission. It’s nothing bad, of course, but out of respect for Wells and his wife, it’s best to just know that while Wells did have a knee scope that Fisher said would have kept him out of this week’s minicamp and the OTAs, he also has an excused absence for more pressing issues.

- And again, Wells is expected to be present and fully healthy in time for training camp.

- TE Michael Hoomanawanui again worked on the sidelines during Tuesday’s practice. He is expected to return to action in training camp. TE Lance Kendricks left practice early with some sort of issue. It appeared to be a hand or wrist but didn’t seem serious.

- CB Cortland Finnegan was held out again because of an apparent hand/wrist issue.

- On to the happenings on the field:

- It’s very clear that Fisher feels good about what’s been installed. In fact, almost if not all of the offense and defense has been installed and Fisher and the Rams seem to be working on a little bit of everything. They wasted no time diving into team drills Tuesday afternoon and had a number of long team periods.

- Likewise, I’ve mentioned it before but it remains as clear as ever, Fisher doesn’t hesitate to match his first units against each other. It makes for some great competition and both sides really get into it. Don’t believe me? On one pass down the middle, QB Sam Bradford threaded the needle between two defenders to Kendricks but MLB James Laurinaitis who had dropped deep in coverage got a hand in the way at the last second and S Darian Stewart came over the top to force an incompletion. The entire defense was fired up and whoopin’ and hollerin’ after the play.

- I don’t know if I take him for granted but it certainly merits mentioning here that WR Danny Amendola has done nothing but be consistently excellent throughout this camp. He catches everything but he actually looks a bit quicker and he’s bulked up some, presumably to help take some of the pounding he gets from going across the middle.

- Brian Quick and Greg Salas had some nice moments during one on one passing drills. Salas made a one-handed grab on a fade route to the sideline over Janoris Jenkins and Quick ran some nice deep dig routes for catches.

- WR Danario Alexander has been back in action for a week or so and is back to showing some of his usual tricks. He made a nice touchdown grab in red zone drills, tapping his toes inside the back of the end zone for six on a ball that was up and away in a place only he could catch it.

- Fisher was asked Tuesday about stopping the run and made it a point to acknowledge that defensive run techniques have been a point of emphasis throughout this offseason, particularly with the defensive line. Fisher said that although it’s hard to gauge because his team hasn’t been wearing pads, he’s been pleased with the progressn and understanding his team has of run fits and techniques in the new scheme.

- RB Steven Jackson talked to the media today and had some interesting takes on a number of topics. I’ll have a story on Steven’s state of the union tomorrow but here’s a little something to quench your thirst. I asked Steven if there were any young players returning from last year’s team that caught his eye and seem to have improved. While acknowledging that no pads have been worn yet, here’s what he had to say:

“That’s more of a question I could answer in August or September but I am very excited, who I am looking forward to watching this year is Robert Quinn,” Jackson said. “I think he’s a natural pass rusher. I think working on the opposite side of Chris Long and the coaching he’s receiving right now, I am really looking forward to him having a breakout season. If there’s anybody I would tell our fans to look out for it would be Robert.”

- Coincidentally, I also planned to write about Quinn this week and had a good chat with him today as well. He said he’s actually dropped 5 pounds in an effort to get a little quicker off the edge and though he knows that will draw questions about his ability to stop the run consistently, he believes that improved technique from DL coach Mike Waufle will help him with that.

- CB Bradley Fletcher said he is ahead of schedule in terms of his rehabilitation but he also said that he isn’t quite where he wants to be. In fact, Fletcher said he’s starting to feel as close to healthy as he had all offseason but he’s not quite there yet. I’ll have more on Fletcher this week as well but he knows this is a big year for him and he’s going to be in the middle of a very heated competition outside.

- I also got a chance to catch up with T Rodger Saffold (who yet again, I will be writing about later this week). I mentioned a while back that Saffold looked noticeably bigger. In talking to him today, not only was that clear but he made it known that he’s put on about 10-12 pounds of pure muscle, most of which appears to be in his upper body. He just plain looks big and strong. I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that. As for the added weight, Saffold made it clear that this offense requires bigger, stronger, meaner and that means in the run game as well. So to be more physical, he felt it necessary to bulk up. I’m not kidding when I say Saffold looks much stronger. He said he’s at about 325 pounds now. Again, more on Saffold later this week.

- That’s going to do it for today. Be sure to stay tuned all week for more updates and coverage from this minicamp. The Rams are back at it tomorrow afternoon. As always, take all observations from the practice field with a grain of salt in knowing these guys aren’t in pads and going full blast just yet. Also, as always, thanks for reading.

 

[Anonymous]

I hate to bring up old discussions.

So, I will bring up an old discussion. :mrgreen:

Last season (and not on this board) I was discussing Saffold with someone who said he had doubts about the guy. I kept saying that 2 things were hurting Saffold in 2011: first, like everyone else, he was overwhelmed and out of sync in the new offense (sans off-season learning), and second he just had very correctable technqiue issues against the bull rush, the kind of thing you fix in the off-season.

Well it's early and he ain't done nothin yet but here's Saffold on that:

I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that.

There. I did it. A full-fledged "return to the old debate for vindication" post.

I want my bounty money now.

 

[DR RAM]

I hate to bring up old discussions.

So, I will bring up an old discussion. :mrgreen:

Last season (and not on this board) I was discussing Saffold with someone who said he had doubts about the guy. I kept saying that 2 things were hurting Saffold in 2011: first, like everyone else, he was overwhelmed and out of sync in the new offense (sans off-season learning), and second he just had very correctable technqiue issues against the bull rush, the kind of thing you fix in the off-season.

Well it's early and he ain't done nothin yet but here's Saffold on that:

I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that.

There. I did it. A full-fledged "return to the old debate for vindication" post.

I want my bounty money now.

Poor angles, confusion, poor anchor, and standing up too high. The last two were partly caused by first two. But, there are a couple other things. Saffold isn't very heavy, and has very average arm length. He literally got lifted up off the ground and driven back on more than a couple occasions last season. He needs to be better with his hands.

I think he will be OK, but I don't think the problem in whole is an easy fix.

I'm very happy that he put on good weight, it will help in in all facets of the game.

 

[Anonymous]

I hate to bring up old discussions.

So, I will bring up an old discussion. :mrgreen:

Last season (and not on this board) I was discussing Saffold with someone who said he had doubts about the guy. I kept saying that 2 things were hurting Saffold in 2011: first, like everyone else, he was overwhelmed and out of sync in the new offense (sans off-season learning), and second he just had very correctable technqiue issues against the bull rush, the kind of thing you fix in the off-season.

Well it's early and he ain't done nothin yet but here's Saffold on that:

I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that.

There. I did it. A full-fledged "return to the old debate for vindication" post.

I want my bounty money now.

Poor angles, confusion, poor anchor, and standing up too high. The last two were partly caused by first two. But, there are a couple other things. Saffold isn't very heavy, and has very average arm length. He literally got lifted up off the ground and driven back on more than a couple occasions last season. He needs to be better with his hands.

I think he will be OK, but I don't think the problem in whole is an easy fix.

I'm very happy that he put on good weight, it will help in in all facets of the game.

I do.

Partly it will be scheme and the entire offensive approach, partly it will be experience, partly it will be the off-season and just getting reps, partly it will be the increased upper body strength, partly it will be one or 2 technique things (but Boudreau always does that).

I think the main culprit was just being out of sync on a line that did not get the reps it needed to execute a new scheme. I really never believed it was just him at all.

My prediction (barring injury): he will be like 2010 but much better.

 

[DR RAM]

I hate to bring up old discussions.

So, I will bring up an old discussion. :mrgreen:

Last season (and not on this board) I was discussing Saffold with someone who said he had doubts about the guy. I kept saying that 2 things were hurting Saffold in 2011: first, like everyone else, he was overwhelmed and out of sync in the new offense (sans off-season learning), and second he just had very correctable technqiue issues against the bull rush, the kind of thing you fix in the off-season.

Well it's early and he ain't done nothin yet but here's Saffold on that:

I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that.

There. I did it. A full-fledged "return to the old debate for vindication" post.

I want my bounty money now.

Poor angles, confusion, poor anchor, and standing up too high. The last two were partly caused by first two. But, there are a couple other things. Saffold isn't very heavy, and has very average arm length. He literally got lifted up off the ground and driven back on more than a couple occasions last season. He needs to be better with his hands.

I think he will be OK, but I don't think the problem in whole is an easy fix.

I'm very happy that he put on good weight, it will help in in all facets of the game.

I do.

Partly it will be scheme and the entire offensive approach, partly it will be experience, partly it will be the off-season and just getting reps, partly it will be the increased upper body strength, partly it will be one or 2 technique things (but Boudreau always does that).

I think the main culprit was just being out of sync on a line that did not get the reps it needed to execute a new scheme. I really never believed it was just him at all.

My prediction (barring injury): he will be like 2010 but much better.

All of this: [hil]Partly it will be scheme and the entire offensive approach, partly it will be experience, partly it will be the off-season and just getting reps, partly it will be the increased upper body strength, partly it will be one or 2 technique things[/hil] = easy. The zn brain is sometimes confusing. :mrgreen:

 

[Anonymous]

I hate to bring up old discussions.

So, I will bring up an old discussion. :mrgreen:

Last season (and not on this board) I was discussing Saffold with someone who said he had doubts about the guy. I kept saying that 2 things were hurting Saffold in 2011: first, like everyone else, he was overwhelmed and out of sync in the new offense (sans off-season learning), and second he just had very correctable technqiue issues against the bull rush, the kind of thing you fix in the off-season.

Well it's early and he ain't done nothin yet but here's Saffold on that:

I asked Saffold if the impetus for putting on the muscle was to help in any certain area, particularly against the bull rush, something he openly acknowledged was an issue last year.

Saffold said that he sat down with new OL coach Paul Boudreau his first day in the building with him and Boudreau showed him a technique issue he had against that particular rush. It was as simple as that.

There. I did it. A full-fledged "return to the old debate for vindication" post.

I want my bounty money now.

Poor angles, confusion, poor anchor, and standing up too high. The last two were partly caused by first two. But, there are a couple other things. Saffold isn't very heavy, and has very average arm length. He literally got lifted up off the ground and driven back on more than a couple occasions last season. He needs to be better with his hands.

I think he will be OK, but I don't think the problem in whole is an easy fix.

I'm very happy that he put on good weight, it will help in in all facets of the game.

I do.

Partly it will be scheme and the entire offensive approach, partly it will be experience, partly it will be the off-season and just getting reps, partly it will be the increased upper body strength, partly it will be one or 2 technique things (but Boudreau always does that).

I think the main culprit was just being out of sync on a line that did not get the reps it needed to execute a new scheme. I really never believed it was just him at all.

My prediction (barring injury): he will be like 2010 but much better.

All of this: [hil]Partly it will be scheme and the entire offensive approach, partly it will be experience, partly it will be the off-season and just getting reps, partly it will be the increased upper body strength, partly it will be one or 2 technique things[/hil] = easy. The zn brain is sometimes confusing. :mrgreen:

It's easy cause it's already set up. The scheme is designed and will be what it is. Saffold doesn't have to do anything and just benefits from it. More experienced now? Done. Practicing in the new scheme? A done deal. It will happen. Technique? Boudreau the fixer. All Saffold has to besides show up and go through the reps is internalize the technique issue Boudreau referred to. He doesn't have to do anything except show up and follow the program.

 

[-X-]

I was on the fence about Loney and wasn't down with scapegoating him before. I mean, he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme. But this is two linemen now who essentially said, "I was just doing it wrong."

 

[Anonymous]

I was on the fence about Loney and wasn't down with scapegoating him before. I mean, he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme. But this is two linemen now who essentially said, "I was just doing it wrong."

I have lots of questions about this myself. They are being stripped down and retaught NEW technique and a new system. If it were as simple as "the last guy (Loney) was really bad" then why wouldn't anyone else in the league notice? Yet Tampa hired him.

Beside, if you are right about THIS--"he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme"--then why wouldn't that apply to TWO young tackles.

Saffold admitted he was out of shape last year on top of it. (Which is part of learning from experience--report in shape.)

I wonder what the linemen were saying in the 2008 Atlanta off-season.

 

[-X-]

I was on the fence about Loney and wasn't down with scapegoating him before. I mean, he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme. But this is two linemen now who essentially said, "I was just doing it wrong."

I don't think that's it's that simple though. They are being stripped down and retaught NEW technique and a new system. If it were as simple as "the last guy (Loney) was really bad" then why wouldn't anyone else in the league notice? Yet Tampa hired him.

Beside, if you are right about THIS--"he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme"--then why wouldn't that apply to TWO young tackles.

Saffold admitted he was out of shape last year on top of it. (Which is part of learning from experience--report in shape.)

I wonder what the linemen were saying in the 2008 Atlanta off-season.

That's why I'm on the fence about it. But I'm not totally on board with the stripping down and re-teaching thing. I mean, how many techniques are there to defend against a bull-rush? I'm no offensive linemen, but I don't think there's a *list* of things to do against that. If, according to Safford, it was "as simple as that", then why didn't he get taught "that simple thing" last year?

I don't think Loney is a horrible coach or anything, but you have to admit. There are levels of talent when it comes to coaching too. All offensive line coaches aren't every bit as good as the other. And here comes my fence-straddling again, but Boudreau didn't work miracles in 2007 when the Rams' offensive line fell apart then either. Though, Jackson did have his best year ever running the ball in 2006.

 

[Anonymous]

I was on the fence about Loney and wasn't down with scapegoating him before. I mean, he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme. But this is two linemen now who essentially said, "I was just doing it wrong."

I don't think that's it's that simple though. They are being stripped down and retaught NEW technique and a new system. If it were as simple as "the last guy (Loney) was really bad" then why wouldn't anyone else in the league notice? Yet Tampa hired him.

Beside, if you are right about THIS--"he was also on the list of ... well, everybody ... who didn't have an offseason to prepare for the change in scheme"--then why wouldn't that apply to TWO young tackles.

Saffold admitted he was out of shape last year on top of it. (Which is part of learning from experience--report in shape.)

I wonder what the linemen were saying in the 2008 Atlanta off-season.

That's why I'm on the fence about it. But I'm not totally on board with the stripping down and re-teaching thing. I mean, how many techniques are there to defend against a bull-rush? I'm no offensive linemen, but I don't think there's a *list* of things to do against that. If, according to Safford, it was "as simple as that", then why didn't he get taught "that simple thing" last year?

I don't think Loney is a horrible coach or anything, but you have to admit. There are levels of talent when it comes to coaching too. All offensive line coaches aren't every bit as good as the other. And here comes my fence-straddling again, but Boudreau didn't work miracles in 2007 when the Rams' offensive line fell apart then either. Though, Jackson did have his best year ever running the ball in 2006.

All I know is, Boudreau is one of the consistently best.

No one could have worked miracles in 2007. They lost 10 guys for extended periods, 6 for the season. No one can do anything with that.

2006 is an interesting story. For most of the year the line was in turmoil. Pace out, Incognito at center, and they lost Timmerman. But the OL stabilized in the last 6-7 games. At that point it became a set, coherent unit. Part of it was moving RI back to guard, playing Romberg (who had been with Boudreau before), and starting Setterstrom. THAT is when Jackson took off. Sacks went down, redzone efficiency went up, Jackson had the best series of consecutive games in his career.

For Jackson, the final 6 games included 151 carries for 717 yards (4.7 avg.) and 3 TDs. Extrapolated across an entire season, that would be 1900 yards.

For Bulger, the final 6 games included 2.3 sacks per game, v. 3.5 for the first 10 games. It also included 11 TDs v. 13 for the first 10 games. Across 16 games that would have meant 30 TDs on the year and 37 sacks instead of the 49 they did get.

Also no coincidence--in those final 6 games Olson took over the playcalling from Linehan. Linehan, IMO, never had a feel for how to use the guys they had. He kept trying to get them to be something else. Olson was more pragmatic and used the strengths he had on the roster.

Anyway Boudreau was a huge part of that.

 

[Faceplant]

Excellent conversation. I have to admit, I have been wary of the OL and whether or not we have the right talent in place to be able to have consistent success (I still am wary), but I am encouraged by what I have heard from coaches and players thus far. I think JSmooth is the biggest ??? right now. If he can get and STAY healthy (avoid further concussions essentially), I will be curious to see what Boudreau can do with him as far as his pass blocking technique. If he can not make it back, we have a real issue on the right side, whether it be at tackle, or guard (if Dahl moves outside). GOing to be a really interesting camp this year. Can't wait.

 

[Anonymous]

Excellent conversation. I have to admit, I have been wary of the OL and whether or not we have the right talent in place to be able to have consistent success (I still am wary), but I am encouraged by what I have heard from coaches and players thus far. I think JSmooth is the biggest ??? right now. If he can get and STAY healthy (avoid further concussions essentially), I will be curious to see what Boudreau can do with him as far as his pass blocking technique. If he can not make it back, we have a real issue on the right side, whether it be at tackle, or guard (if Dahl moves outside). GOing to be a really interesting camp this year. Can't wait.

I;m not worried about right tackle and I think Dahl should (and will) stay where he is. This is a coach who made a great Falcons OL in 2008 that included 2 unknown UDFAs (Dahl and Clabo) and a lifetime ROT playing LOT (Todd Weiner).

Bear in mind that Boudreau was the one who told the Rams "I can do something with what I have." In fact they cancelled a pretty important free agency visit from a tackle (I think it was Winston?) based on Boudreau concluding that.

I dunno but I like Boudreau's chances.

 

[Angry Ram]

Loney was the coach in 2010, and no one seemed to care. They were all healthy, and Dahl wasn't even here. The only thing that was needed was RG, so Dahl was signed.

No cares about the coaches during the good times. They are front and center during the bad times.

 

[Anonymous]

Loney was the coach in 2010, and no one seemed to care. They were all healthy, and Dahl wasn't even here. The only thing that was needed was RG, so Dahl was signed.

No cares about the coaches during the good times. They are front and center during the bad times.

Yeah they were efficient in 2010, minus a couple of moments there, so I always figured that the lack of coherence we saw early in 2011 mostly came from lockout stuff, like not being in the best shape and not getting enough reps in a difficult new system--which led to stress and pressing and confidence issues.

Having said that, it's part of Fisher's good luck that Boudreau was available in 2012.

 

[DR RAM]

Loney was teaching a new scheme that he didn't buy into himself. That was Spags fault for keeping him, IMO. I know nobody wants to hear this, but MCD was set up to fail when he wasn't able to hire his coaches around him to teach his system, even though there was a huge crunch for time. All the more reason he should have had his guys.

Regarding Boureau vs. Loney, vs. every other OL coach in the league. They all coach differently, right way, wrong way, every time there is a change there will be a different way...the coaches way. Now, some coaches ways are better, but they better have the type of players that fit their scheme.

 

[RamFan503]

Loney was teaching a new scheme that he didn't buy into himself. That was Spags fault for keeping him, IMO. I know nobody wants to hear this, but MCD was set up to fail when he wasn't able to hire his coaches around him to teach his system, even though there was a huge crunch for time. All the more reason he should have had his guys.

Regarding Boureau vs. Loney, vs. every other OL coach in the league. They all coach differently, right way, wrong way, every time there is a change there will be a different way...the coaches way. Now, some coaches ways are better, but they better have the type of players that fit their scheme.

It's one of the things I really wondered about. I wasn't much of a Loney fan to begin with but I was confused as to why they would keep him with the hiring of McD. It seemed odd to me.

Oh well... moving on. I think much of our problems last year WERE scheme related and there was way too much thinking along the line and on the offensive side as a whole. I'm hoping that what we see is an offense and line that is able to just go out and play.

 

[Anonymous]

Loney was teaching a new scheme that he didn't buy into himself. That was Spags fault for keeping him, IMO. I know nobody wants to hear this, but MCD was set up to fail when he wasn't able to hire his coaches around him to teach his system, even though there was a huge crunch for time. All the more reason he should have had his guys.

Regarding Boureau vs. Loney, vs. every other OL coach in the league. They all coach differently, right way, wrong way, every time there is a change there will be a different way...the coaches way. Now, some coaches ways are better, but they better have the type of players that fit their scheme.

How would you know that? How would you know what Loney thought? And since when do we blame head coaches for things like that? Even if you were right about Loney, the head coach is supposed to mindread the OL coach? Why don't we do what we all normally do under the same circumstances looking at any team we ever knew about in the last several decades--when something like that happens, blame the coordinator for pushing a young team into things it wasn't ready for yet and then either ask him to improve or ask for him to be replaced.

And of course no one COULD teach a new and complex system like that without an off-season. You just figure they had to catch on DURING the season, which in fact they were starting to do.

I agree that every new OL coach is going to teach technique differently. Boudreau does it radically. He likes to strip guys down and start over. Which is what is happening with these young tackles. Which also means it's not a matter of BAD or non-existent coaching v. coaching, it's Boudreau's approach v. a different one.

 

[DR RAM]

Loney was teaching a new scheme that he didn't buy into himself. That was Spags fault for keeping him, IMO. I know nobody wants to hear this, but MCD was set up to fail when he wasn't able to hire his coaches around him to teach his system, even though there was a huge crunch for time. All the more reason he should have had his guys.

Regarding Boureau vs. Loney, vs. every other OL coach in the league. They all coach differently, right way, wrong way, every time there is a change there will be a different way...the coaches way. Now, some coaches ways are better, but they better have the type of players that fit their scheme.

How would you know that? How would you know what Loney thought? And since when do we blame head coaches for things like that? Even if you were right about Loney, the head coach is supposed to mindread the OL coach? Why don't we do what we all normally do under the same circumstances looking at any team we ever knew about in the last several decades--when something like that happens, blame the coordinator for pushing a young team into things it wasn't ready for yet and then either ask him to improve or ask for him to be replaced.

And of course no one COULD teach a new and complex system like that without an off-season. You just figure they had to catch on DURING the season, which in fact they were starting to do.

I agree that every new OL coach is going to teach technique differently. Boudreau does it radically. He likes to strip guys down and start over. Which is what is happening with these young tackles. Which also means it's not a matter of BAD or non-existent coaching v. coaching, it's Boudreau's approach v. a different one.

Because I'm a mind reading genius. Loney was not teaching his system. Simple as that. Regarding Spags, not bagging on him, but his inflexibility and control issues in part cost him his job. I heard that he didn't allow McD to bring in his guys. I'm not harping on it, it was what it was. My point remains about the coaching.

I form my own opinions and write about them...my opinions, my thoughts, and my deductions are my own. Just like everyone else here.

 

[-X-]

Loney was the coach in 2010, and no one seemed to care. They were all healthy, and Dahl wasn't even here. The only thing that was needed was RG, so Dahl was signed.

No cares about the coaches during the good times. They are front and center during the bad times.

Think about the schemes Loney was supposed to coach. Shurmur's and McDaniels'. Loney is supposed to get coached by the offensive coordinator before he coaches the players. He has to learn the scheme himself and then incorporate that into his coaching of techniques, formations and plays. I don't think it was a good idea to hire McDaniels (in retrospect of course) with a potential lockout looming on the horizon. We all know Childress was available, but it didn't seem like he was even on the radar (which leads me to believe *somebody* fucked up). That would have been a better transition, IMO, and Loney probably would have gotten better results with a lateral move in offensive schemes.

McDaniels wasn't as interested in protecting the QB as Shurmur and (now) Schottenheimer are. That's evident by charting plays and looking back at the differences. PFF did that towards the end of 2011 and they came up with some interesting findings.

[textarea]12-12-2011 -- It's tempting to glean from this that the blame for St. Louis' offensive woes should be placed on injuries and personnel changes (e.g., signing Harvey Dahl to replace Adam Goldberg at starting right guard) along the offensive line. However, a deeper analysis suggests the change in offensive systems shoulders much of, if not most of, that blame.

Delving into Football Outsiders' game charting database, which contains detailed information about every offensive play of the past several seasons, one learns that the Rams' offense under McDaniels has used max protection only 7 percent of the time this season, as opposed to the 12 percent used by McDaniels' predecessor, Pat Shurmur.

Furthermore, the Rams' offense this season has lined up in a single-back formation approximately 79 percent of the time, which is 15 percent more often than it did last season. Yes, it's also true that the extra running back has been replaced by an extra tight end -- the Rams line up with two tight ends 14 percent more often this season than last -- but the extra tight end has been employed more typically as a receiver than a blocker.

Essentially, without the benefit of a full offseason, McDaniels has asked five or six blockers to do the work that six or seven blockers did last year. It's no wonder then that St. Louis offensive linemen have already given up 16 blown-block sacks in 2011, when they gave up only 14 during all of 2010.[/textarea]
When something like 2011 happens, you can't pinpoint the blame. Lockout, stupid amount of injuries, escalation in offensive scheme, contrasting and conflicting offensive philosophies, assimilation of coaches into a system for which they're not ideally suited, more injuries, rough schedule, tons of new players, rookies starting, etc.

It was a cluster fuck. That's the only thing you can say. Now just learn from it, move on, don't duplicate the same things, and hope you don't get rocked with a shit load of injuries again. I'm cool with the staff we have on hand now. It's like a dream-team staff almost. That said, the MOST important thing is to try and maintain this staff, or pluck guys from the same tree as the staff inevitably changes over time.

 

[DR RAM]

Loney was the coach in 2010, and no one seemed to care. They were all healthy, and Dahl wasn't even here. The only thing that was needed was RG, so Dahl was signed.

No cares about the coaches during the good times. They are front and center during the bad times.

Think about the schemes Loney was supposed to coach. Shurmur's and McDaniels'. Loney is supposed to get coached by the offensive coordinator before he coaches the players. He has to learn the scheme himself and then incorporate that into his coaching of techniques, formations and plays. I don't think it was a good idea to hire McDaniels (in retrospect of course) with a potential lockout looming on the horizon. We all know Childress was available, but it didn't seem like he was even on the radar (which leads me to believe *somebody* fucked up). That would have been a better transition, IMO, and Loney probably would have gotten better results with a lateral move in offensive schemes.

McDaniels wasn't as interested in protecting the QB as Shurmur and (now) Schottenheimer are. That's evident by charting plays and looking back at the differences. PFF did that towards the end of 2011 and they came up with some interesting findings.

[textarea]12-12-2011 -- It's tempting to glean from this that the blame for St. Louis' offensive woes should be placed on injuries and personnel changes (e.g., signing Harvey Dahl to replace Adam Goldberg at starting right guard) along the offensive line. However, a deeper analysis suggests the change in offensive systems shoulders much of, if not most of, that blame.

Delving into Football Outsiders' game charting database, which contains detailed information about every offensive play of the past several seasons, one learns that the Rams' offense under McDaniels has used max protection only 7 percent of the time this season, as opposed to the 12 percent used by McDaniels' predecessor, Pat Shurmur.

Furthermore, the Rams' offense this season has lined up in a single-back formation approximately 79 percent of the time, which is 15 percent more often than it did last season. Yes, it's also true that the extra running back has been replaced by an extra tight end -- the Rams line up with two tight ends 14 percent more often this season than last -- but the extra tight end has been employed more typically as a receiver than a blocker.

Essentially, without the benefit of a full offseason, McDaniels has asked five or six blockers to do the work that six or seven blockers did last year. It's no wonder then that St. Louis offensive linemen have already given up 16 blown-block sacks in 2011, when they gave up only 14 during all of 2010.[/textarea]
When something like 2011 happens, you can't pinpoint the blame. Lockout, stupid amount of injuries, escalation in offensive scheme, contrasting and conflicting offensive philosophies, assimilation of coaches into a system for which they're not ideally suited, more injuries, rough schedule, tons of new players, rookies starting, etc.

It was a cluster fuck. That's the only thing you can say. Now just learn from it, move on, don't duplicate the same things, and hope you don't get rocked with a shit load of injuries again. I'm cool with the staff we have on hand now. It's like a dream-team staff almost. That said, the MOST important thing is to try and maintain this staff, or pluck guys from the same tree as the staff inevitably changes over time.

Yes, it was a total cluster fuck, and it was a million things that went wrong. That has been covered. The blame should be absorbed equally. Dumb luck needs to cease.
In retrospect, McD shouldn't have been hired, but I don't think it's fair to say he didn't want to protect the QB. Look at the protection in New England. It was better than Shurmer has ever done. We're talking about different things, about line coach, player talent, and injuries. Shurmer just knew his offensive line's limitations better, I think that is fair to say. But it, and the way Shurmer ran it was just a far different system. Of course in the offense he ran it would protect the QB, but can it score points??? Shurmer's inept offense last year made Holmgen hire an offensive coordinator this year in Cleveland. They looked just like we did, when he was here.

It's all in the past now.