Forget the running game, this is a pass blocking O line

[leoram]

I've finally recovered long enough to think football again. I unapologetically drink the Kool-Aid every offseason but the last ten years have taken their toll. The last two games were eerily reminiscent of the hopelessness that grips this team when there is that point of the game when everyone KNOWS the outcome way too early.

My faith in the young talent is threatened by game plans that make no sense to me. I get that the Falcons, Cowboys, and 9'ers were all in must win mode loaded with superior vets, but I haven't seen poorer defensive play calls since Haslett was here. Although I'm tempted to give Schotty a pass because the O-line was thoroughly outclassed two weeks in a row and the young skill position players are making the number of mistakes you'd expect, the schemes are so predictable that even I can usually guess where the ball is going by the time the ball is snapped.

The fire from this team last year was evident in players like Finnegan, H. Dahl, Dunbar, Jackson, Long, and Laurinaitis. This year, Finny and Harvey are getting beaten too often to brawl, Dunbar is just getting back without the juice, Jackson is in Atlanta, and the tattooed white boys are suffering through the S,O.S. There is ZERO physical presence on offense! I'm a 48 y o lifelong fan and this is the softest O in the history of the team. On defense, McCleod, Quinn, Jenks, and Alec inspire me. But what happened to Brockers? Langford actually looks better than last year. If we can get these players in the right positions to make plays, there might develop a team personality but not if they have to suffer numerous 3 and outs by the offense.

Bottom line, the only way I see a winning record this year is by selling out as a spread passing team because that's all this line can do. If that's all they practice, maybe there will be fewer errors. Maybe the kids will learn faster. Hopefully Sam survives. But every time they line up in 12 personnel and try to run up the gut, well, let's just say our opponents chuckle while I resist the urge to throw my TV out the window.

Thanks for letting me rant. I'll still sit in eager anticipation Sunday drinking my Kool-Aid, it's just so early in the season for me to be spiking it with vodka to kill the pain

 

[ChrisW]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

A pass blocking line? That just gave up 11 sacks in the last 2 games, okay.

 

[kurtfaulk]

But every time they line up in 12 personnel and try to run up the gut, well, let's just say our opponents chuckle while I resist the urge to throw my TV out the window.

this was my exact thought when they gave it to austin on the first offensive snap against the cowboys. you could almost sense the glee in the cowboys dlinemen as they crushed him. drich, pead, austin. why do the rams think they can run it up the gut?

.

 

[V3]

A pass blocking line? That just gave up 11 sacks in the last 2 games, okay.

I think he's saying that this line is better at pass blocking than run blocking. Just look at the first two games. They were pretty solid in pass protection but they still sucked at run blocking.

 

[RaminExile]

I thought Air Coryell was supposed to make the defence defend the whole field - not just 5 yards from scrimmage.

 

[ChrisW]

I thought Air Coryell was supposed to make the defence defend the whole field - not just 5 yards from scrimmage.

It is, which is why it seems that Schotty has gone to a more traditional west coast offense when we started not getting any rushing yards at all.

 

[Stranger]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

 

[RaminExile]

I thought Air Coryell was supposed to make the defence defend the whole field - not just 5 yards from scrimmage.

It is, which is why it seems that Schotty has gone to a more traditional west coast offense when we started not getting any rushing yards at all.

I think you're right actually. Goddamn West Coast offense certainly looks like what we're watching and I have been wondering why he haven't even thrown at Givens deep like we kept seeing last year.

We need the running game to work. End of story.

 

[ChrisW]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

SJax's salary was never going to fly. Out of mutual respect they let him get the most he could on the open market and try to move to a contender. Also, having a big back isn't a necessity of a power running game. You just need the blocking to be successful between the tackles. You can Slam 4 yard runs all day and get first downs. The RB also needs to be a threat out of the backfield. This is most likely why we drafted Pead with a 2nd rounder. Coming out of the draft, he had everything you'd want in an Air Coryell offense. It just hasn't panned out.

Another thing to note about the Air Coryell. The QB doesn't have to be the best athlete in the world. He just needs to be smart. We supposedly have a gifted and intelligent athlete at QB in SB8. This is the reason I'm pushing for ALL O-line improvement this offseason on the O. The pieces are there, we just need shore up the front, and this offense should fly.

 

[CGI_Ram]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

 

[-X-]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

 

[CGI_Ram]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

Ahh... well said, X. Yes. SJ and the decision isn't as cut and dry as you've pointed out.

I guess it could be argued the decision to go Austin, over Lacy, was perhaps another indicator to prioritize the passing game. Same with signing Cook and drafting Bailey high.

But point taken.

 

[ChrisW]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

Ahh... well said, X. Yes. SJ and the decision isn't as cut and dry as you've pointed out.

I guess it could be argued the decision to go Austin, over Lacy, was perhaps another indicator to prioritize the passing game. Same with signing Cook and drafting Bailey high.

But point taken.

It's not about priority being on the running game. It's about starting a running game to open up deep attacks, while utilizing the whole field. The offense Schotty employs is the same one Martz ran, just a different variation.

 

[Stranger]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

SJ would NOT have wanted to leave had Fisher not wanted to remove him from his feature-back position. So, the question then become, WHY did Fisher want to eliminate a feature back position? WHY was this necessary to implement his scheme, which I'm not really certain now what was intended? If in fact, we wanted an Air Coryell type approach, then didn't we require a strong RB who could keep players in the box, as SJ had proven to accomplish over 9seasons. Please help me understand all of this, cause all I see is a disconnect.

 

[-X-]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

SJ would NOT have wanted to leave had Fisher not wanted to remove him from his feature-back position. So, the question then become, WHY did Fisher want to eliminate a feature back position? WHY was this necessary to implement his scheme, which I'm not really certain now what was intended? If in fact, we wanted an Air Coryell type approach, then didn't we require a strong RB who could keep players in the box, as SJ had proven to accomplish over 9seasons. Please help me understand all of this, cause all I see is a disconnect.

And yet. When Richardson and Jackson were splitting carries last year, nobody had an issue with Richardson being the better of the two in terms of Y/A. Look, I don't have all the answers here either. I do know that Fisher has traditionally used a one-two punch, and Jackson wasn't interested in being this team's version of Lendale White. The worst I can say here is that they miscalculated on how effective the run game would be without Jackson, but it doesn't appear they miscalculated on his durability or his desire to be in a scheme that they wanted to employ (because he left, and he's injured). Were we supposed to just hold off on implementing a new offense until Steven Jackson decided it was time for him to move on? Doesn't seem feasible to me. And all this talking in absolutes 4 games into the season seems premature.

 

[Stranger]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

What was the justification for letting SJ walk?

Nothing jives. We let our power runner leave, brought in non-blocking speed, and were told that we were going to turn leadership over to Bradford to pass to all of this new found talent. Now, we're being told we need a run game, and that we have to run-first to be successful. Either we shouldn't have left SJ go and gone to a RB-by-committee approach, or we were sold a bill-of-goods when told (in the offseason) about the scheme we were planning to run, or we were deceived and the coaches really thought that this crop of unproven-RB's would fit-the-bill. Did I miss something?

You've made a pretty good case there, Stranger.

I am nervous about this run-first mantra coming out of STL. It could be all talk, who knows. But it doesn't seem like this team is built to run-up the middle and dominate in the run.

To your point; judging by moves made this offseason - this is passing team.

I look forward to "clarity on the field"! :hehe:

I think what's getting lost in all of this is that Jackson wanted to go to a team that wanted to utilize him as the feature back and not have him split carries in the twilight of his career. We can keep saying that "we let him go", but that's simply not the case. I suppose the Rams could have forced him to honor his contract and MADE him become a part-time back here, but who's to say that Jackson wouldn't have held out in that case? We had to move on from Jackson either this year or next. All we did was speed up the process of finding a replacement. And we still don't know (4 games in) that it won't be a success this year.

SJ would NOT have wanted to leave had Fisher not wanted to remove him from his feature-back position. So, the question then become, WHY did Fisher want to eliminate a feature back position? WHY was this necessary to implement his scheme, which I'm not really certain now what was intended? If in fact, we wanted an Air Coryell type approach, then didn't we require a strong RB who could keep players in the box, as SJ had proven to accomplish over 9seasons. Please help me understand all of this, cause all I see is a disconnect.

And yet. When Richardson and Jackson were splitting carries last year, nobody had an issue with Richardson being the better of the two in terms of Y/A. Look, I don't have all the answers here either. I do know that Fisher has traditionally used a one-two punch, and Jackson wasn't interested in being this team's version of Lendale White. The worst I can say here is that they miscalculated on how effective the run game would be without Jackson, but it doesn't appear they miscalculated on his durability or his desire to be in a scheme that they wanted to employ (because he left, and he's injured). Were we supposed to just hold off on implementing a new offense until Steven Jackson decided it was time for him to move on? Doesn't seem feasible to me. And all this talking in absolutes 4 games into the season seems premature.

I realize you don't have all the answers, and I wasn't really trying to put you on the spot. I was just trying to point out that we hear these things, like RB-by-committee, from the Rams organization and have just accepted them. I'm trying to go back and question the initial premise, and to see if all of these moves were indeed consistent with the schemes being play.

My goal is to understand: (1) whether there were mere miscalculations, where these miscalculations lie, the scale of these miscalculations, OR (2) whether we were just flat-out deceived. It's clear that they didn't put the right player-pieces in place to run the scheme that we were told they were planning to run.

I want to get to the bottom of this. And no one else is replaying all the off-season moves made to see if they add-up and actually support the stated strategic goals. So, either the stated strategic goals were bogus or the player moves did not support them. If it's the latter, then I simply don't see how such an egregious strategic error can be repaired by the same people who made the miscalculations in the first place.

 

[ChrisW]

I realize you don't have all the answers, and I wasn't really trying to put you on the spot. I was just trying to point out that we hear these things, like RB-by-committee, from the Rams organization and have just accepted them. I'm trying to go back and question the initial premise, and to see if all of these moves were indeed consistent with the schemes being play.

My goal is to understand: (1) whether there were mere miscalculations, where these miscalculations lie, the scale of these miscalculations, OR (2) whether we were just flat-out deceived. It's clear that they didn't put the right player-pieces in place to run the scheme that we were told they were planning to run.

I want to get to the bottom of this. And no one else is replaying all the off-season moves made to see if they add-up and actually support the stated strategic goals. So, either the stated strategic goals were bogus or the player moves did not support them. If it's the latter, then I simply don't see how such an egregious strategic error can be repaired by the same people who made the miscalculations in the first place.

So in Air Coryel, you can look to the Chargers for a good example. They have a good RB in Matthews, which allows them to set everything up to attack with the pass. Matthews also has the ability to catch out of the backfield.

Another big part of the AC is to have an athletic pass catching TE, which of course they have one of the best in Gates.

You also need two fast outside WRs to strike deep at any point in the game.

They also have a smart QB in Rivers.

It's also stated that you're better off with Mauler guards and pass blocking Tackles. So there lies our problem with trying to run the ball. We don't have good enough guards to pull off any kind of consistent running between the tackles.

It seems the only real problem we have is our guard play. I'm confident that Pead and Richardson could get the job done with help from the run blocking.

I'm staying on the O-line bandwagon for this coming offseason.

 

[leoram]

A pass blocking line? That just gave up 11 sacks in the last 2 games, okay.

I did say it is a pass blocking O-Line.

I didn't say it was a good pass blocking line.

But it would be the WORST run blocking line in Ram history.

My point is that they may as we'll sell out in passing formations and run out of it like college spread offenses do. I'm not saying it is ideal or will be all that effective. But I'm certain that trying to run out of a power I is a guaranteed fail.

 

[Rambitious1]

You can't just say spread passing offense, and then have your wish granted. You have to look at Schotty and his history.

He employs the Air Coryell offense and was taught by Cam Cameron. The biggest gripe in New York was the difficulty he had applying this scheme due to (mostly) Mark Sanchez having trouble with the verbiage of the play book. I'm pretty sure toward the end he had to ditch most of his scheme and move to more traditional West Coast Offense.

What seems to me this year is just by the sheer amount of short plays that we run, is that the same thing is happening here. We might have abandoned the Air Coryell (Which gave us those beautiful deep passes to Givens) and might have implemented more and more Traditional West Coast stuff.

I don't think this is due to Bradford, though. For the AC to be effective you need to have a power running game that sets up deep strikes down field, which in turn opens up more running. We have ZERO running game, and maybe this is the adjustment for that. But, it's not working either. In fact, it's worse.

Makes sense.