New Bills Dc Jim Schwartz Speaks

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

RFIP

Guest
Heard him on the radio yesterday and he said a couple thins that caught my attention. He said that when he took over an 0-16 team "there was an awful lot of work to be done, we weren't very good....it's a looooooooooooooong way back from 0-16 <chuckle> and we finally were to the place where we had the players in place to start rolling..."

He was then asked about how to build a roster; "you build your team to win your division, it is really that simple because that's the only way to guarantee making the playoffs..."

Both issue, I thought relevant with the Rams/Fisher.

Also, as I said before, it is both a curse and a blessing for us to be in the NFC west because if you can climb that mount the journey to the promised land is a much closer trip.

Scheduling quirk: Yep, as fate would have it, the Bills play the NFC North next season...and yes, their game vs Detroit is IN Detroit.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
I disagree ,building your team to win your division as popular a platitude as it may be means you are constantly reactive and never really are fully into your own vision .
BTW he IS out of a job.
You can't ignore some things about your division that is true, but we won our division last year in head to head convincingly and still didn't make the playoffs turned that record upside down this year and were about as close to the playoffs.
You play 16 games 6 in division 10 out ,it's completely possible to lose every division game win all your games outside the division and still win it. When they weight in division games which will be never ,then this little bit of conventional wisdom holds more water , but IMO the best way to make the playoffs is to build a team as strong in all phases as you can and adapt your system to best utilize the strengths of your players, be dogmatic where you must and innovative where you can see the opportunity.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
21,604
From the way Fisher talks I would guess that he is always looking at how to be his division rivals first.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
I disagree ,building your team to win your division as popular a platitude as it may be means you are constantly reactive and never really are fully into your own vision .
BTW he IS out of a job.
You can't ignore some things about your division that is true, but we won our division last year in head to head convincingly and still didn't make the playoffs turned that record upside down this year and were about as close to the playoffs.
You play 16 games 6 in division 10 out ,it's completely possible to lose every division game win all your games outside the division and still win it. When they weight in division games which will be never ,then this little bit of conventional wisdom holds more water , but IMO the best way to make the playoffs is to build a team as strong in all phases as you can and adapt your system to best utilize the strengths of your players, be dogmatic where you must and innovative where you can see the opportunity.

Then we turn around and do the opposite this year. Next year we dominate everyone. :D
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Then we turn around and do the opposite this year. Next year we dominate everyone. :D

Ya think Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey were drafted in response to Richard Sherman ? I don't, I think they were drafted to play a style offense we want to play,Seattle be damned.

If you want to BE the leader,IMO you lead, and this reactive stuff ain't leading,I could be wrong about HOW the best way to do things is ,but I am completely SURE that I KNOW ,what I think:bigup:
 

RFIP

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
A) He's NOT out of a job and B) He said "win your division" not win "games" in your division.

I disagree ,building your team to win your division as popular a platitude as it may be means you are constantly reactive and never really are fully into your own vision .
BTW he IS out of a job.
You can't ignore some things about your division that is true, but we won our division last year in head to head convincingly and still didn't make the playoffs turned that record upside down this year and were about as close to the playoffs.
You play 16 games 6 in division 10 out ,it's completely possible to lose every division game win all your games outside the division and still win it. When they weight in division games which will be never ,then this little bit of conventional wisdom holds more water , but IMO the best way to make the playoffs is to build a team as strong in all phases as you can and adapt your system to best utilize the strengths of your players, be dogmatic where you must and innovative where you can see the opportunity.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
A) He's NOT out of a job and B) He said "win your division" not win "games" in your division.
SCUSE ME, he was JUST FIRED in spite of implementing that philosophy,my bad .
Please enlighten me HOW you attend to building a team bent on winning your division if beating the teams within it isn't what you do. If the two factors have a commonality worth mentioning I'd really like to know what it would be if not to beat those teams.
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
Do you remember the Eagles adding to the secondary like mad. It wasn't to win the division and Andy Reid flat out said that. He was focused on stopping the high flying Rams figuring that he would be seeing them a lot in the playoffs in coming years. That didn't happen but the Eagles defense was dominant for the next few years. If they had a better QB they might have gone to the SB more than once.

So yeah you have to keep the division rivals in mind but you have to consider the top dog or two in the conference as well, because once you get out of your division you likely face those guys.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
I think becoming pre -occupied with winning your division is shooting low FWIW being unique within a division seems a better plan since the similarity of game planning benefit would not be there for your opponents.I think Reid aimed at the ultimate goal and I agree.
Being the best of the West four years ago was sure to get you taken very lightly.

In the final analysis I defer to Lombardi's axiom that if you block and tackle better you're gonna win and every coach has a view of what it takes to win OUTSIDE that ,some work , some just sound good,who's to say ?
 

RFIP

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
We'll I am not a Schwartz guy, just stating his views. I do agree with him however about building ones team to beat your rivals.

SCUSE ME, he was JUST FIRED in spite of implementing that philosophy,my bad .
Please enlighten me HOW you attend to building a team bent on winning your division if beating the teams within it isn't what you do. If the two factors have a commonality worth mentioning I'd really like to know what it would be if not to beat those teams.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
Ya think Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey were drafted in response to Richard Sherman ? I don't, I think they were drafted to play a style offense we want to play,Seattle be damned.

If you want to BE the leader,IMO you lead, and this reactive stuff ain't leading,I could be wrong about HOW the best way to do things is ,but I am completely SURE that I KNOW ,what I think:bigup:
Lol

No we didn't draft them specifcally to beat our rivals. We picked them because they're dang good football players. They're two reasons I don't think we go WR early, though I want Watkins. Like CGI, I think Snead is after as many blue chip picks as possible. He's willing to sacrifice our premium high picks to do so. I understand and support the decision but it's not what I would do.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
I disagree ,building your team to win your division as popular a platitude as it may be means you are constantly reactive and never really are fully into your own vision .
BTW he IS out of a job.
You can't ignore some things about your division that is true, but we won our division last year in head to head convincingly and still didn't make the playoffs turned that record upside down this year and were about as close to the playoffs.
You play 16 games 6 in division 10 out ,it's completely possible to lose every division game win all your games outside the division and still win it. When they weight in division games which will be never ,then this little bit of conventional wisdom holds more water , but IMO the best way to make the playoffs is to build a team as strong in all phases as you can and adapt your system to best utilize the strengths of your players, be dogmatic where you must and innovative where you can see the opportunity.
That's surprising, because Fisher also said you start by winning your division, and he also said that's how he's building the team. It showed immediately in 2012 too. And it has to be reactive to start. You absolutely have to start that way, because you can't win the division unless you win IN the division. It doesn't mean you accommodate the other team's strengths, it means you build to put them on their asses. One of the reasons we fell short this year is because they tried to be something they weren't right off the bat (a spread offense). Once they got back to basics, things started to get in line again.

Being out of a job doesn't disqualify Schwartz from being capable of coaching either. Fisher was out of a job too not long ago.

That said, your idea that you build a team to be strong in all three phases is true. That's really the only way to do it. But you have to, have to, have to, make sure your initial surge is predicated on being able to beat the teams in your division. Only because similar records don't result in both teams going to the playoffs. Only the team with the better head-to-head record advances. If that's a tie, then it's the team with better division record.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
And so none can accuse me of rubber stamping our coach,I in no way back from the idea that winning the conference is the goal considering the length of the window of success the time frame you have to giterdun,I will always say just coach and build to win regardless who the competition is and let the division record reflect the overall strength of your team.
It's a minor point ,but not one I'll yield :meh:
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
That's true X but that only gets you into the playoffs, not through them. I just did a quick look at the standings from this past year and there doesn't seem to be enough to say that beating teams in your division indicates anything. We should take a longer look, like 10-20 years to see if it's something that holds up over time or is invalid.

7 teams had .500 or better records in their division and didn't make the playoffs.
2 teams had a .500 or worse record in the division and made the playoffs.
A few of the teams that went 4-2, 5-1, 6-0 got bounced out of the playoffs by teams that hadn't fared as well in their division.

I think you have to match up with the best in the conference as much as dominate your division.

By the way his Lions last year posted a 4-2 record in the division, best in the division in fact.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
That's true X but that only gets you into the playoffs, not through them. I just did a quick look at the standings from this past year and there doesn't seem to be enough to say that beating teams in your division indicates anything. We should take a longer look, like 10-20 years to see if it's something that holds up over time or is invalid.

7 teams had .500 or better records in their division and didn't make the playoffs.
2 teams had a .500 or worse record in the division and made the playoffs.
A few of the teams that went 4-2, 5-1, 6-0 got bounced out of the playoffs by teams that hadn't fared as well in their division.

I think you have to match up with the best in the conference as much as dominate your division.

By the way his Lions last year posted a 4-2 record in the division, best in the division in fact.
I hear ya, but I'm only saying that in a tight division, beating the teams within the division is of pivotal importance when it comes down to tie-breakers. And you can't beat the teams in your division without gearing up to do that first, or overlooking that importance entirely. Of course in a perfect world, you build your team to compete in the division, conference, and outside the conference, but that's not a realistic short-term goal. And of course you'll have teams that buck the trend and beat everyone, but that's because they first started out with the intent of being division champs when that respective regime took over. That's every team's initial goal going into the season. Not to beat the cycle of out-of-conference teams that show up on their schedule every year. It starts in the division.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,074
Ya think Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey were drafted in response to Richard Sherman ? I don't, I think they were drafted to play a style offense we want to play,Seattle be damned.

If you want to BE the leader,IMO you lead, and this reactive stuff ain't leading,I could be wrong about HOW the best way to do things is ,but I am completely SURE that I KNOW ,what I think:bigup:
I dont think they were drafted in direct response to what anyone does in division....the Rams are two season (one when they were drafted) removed from averaging 12 points a game. Obviously getting explosive and getting some play makers was a key. However, if a team does not react to what teams like Seattle and SF do so well (run the ball) then winning the division will be tough. In this division, as the Cardinals can attest, having a good year is not enough. This is why I put a priority on upgrading the already solid group of DTs. Controlling the line of scrimmage is paramount vs. SF and Seattle....we have had a few hits in this regard, more misses. So, in that instance, yeah, I would take a course of action directly related to the teams in our division.