IF the Rams win this week, and get to 7 wins......

[RamzFanz]

I'm being a coach hugger, because I understand WHY they do some of the things they have done? So because 75% of the FANS say its so, it MUST be so?

The FACTS are, Richardson was the most experienced RB on the roster, and the only one who had enough comfort in the system, (in the coaches eyes) to be able to run the offense. And to say they kept running him up the middle, well, I don't know what games you were watching the first month of the season, because they weren't handing the ball off to ANYONE. That was the bigger issue, over who and how they were when they chose to do it.

And for the record, I didn't agree with their approach that first month of the season. I stated before the preseason was over, that I didn't see this team being successful being an "up tempo, spread concept" throw it 40 times a game kind of team. So that sort of pokes a hole in your "coach hugger" accusation.

My point to this whole exchange, is that you seem to think they should have had it all figured out WEEK ONE, and anything short of that is somehow unforgivable. When I take the approach, that with a team with them many "new" and inexperienced players, especially in the skill positions, it was just the natural progression of how things had to unfold.... on both sides of the ball, for players AND coaches to find what works for EVERYONE, not just the #1 draft pick.

I remember you were anti-spread. I don't know that the spread scheme was the issue as much as it wasn't up tempo, they weren't getting TA the ball in the open field, and they were running DR up the middle. When they got behind and went to up tempo, they were much more successful.

Arizona was a come from behind using up tempo. They almost won against Atlanta once they went up tempo. They almost won against Seattle once they went up tempo.

 

[CoachO]

I remember you were anti-spread. I don't know that the spread scheme was the issue as much as it wasn't up tempo, they weren't getting TA the ball in the open field, and they were running DR up the middle. When they got behind and went to up tempo, they were much more successful.

Arizona was a come from behind using up tempo. They almost won against Atlanta once they went up tempo. They almost won against Seattle once they went up tempo.

You do realize that there is so much more that goes into that then just going up tempo?

Teams get a lead, and in most cases, they tend to play to protect that lead. You saw that very thing last week in the second half with the Rams approach vs. New Orleans.

Do you really think that an up tempo scheme, with all the inexperienced players on this offense was a good idea? Do you know what goes into running an "up tempo" offense? how the plays get called? And there is a huge difference in running a "two minute" offense, from an every down "up tempo no huddle offense".

Teams practice situational offense, in that they have a scripted set of plays in a two minute scheme and they have a different set of plays in a four minute offense. When you look at the play sheet the every OC refers to on the sideline, its not only broken down by down and distance plays, but they also have their "2 minute block" and "4 minute block".

The communication needed when you try to play up tempo throughout the game is vital. And with so many young WRs and RBs, all it takes is one MISCOMMUNICATION of which play is being called, and it all blows up in your face.

Now, does that mean that it cant be, or wont be part of the offense as they grow in both experience and understanding of the system? No. I do agree that they have the components to make it work. But to have expected it, especially early in the season with THIS young roster, was more of a wet dream for many in here, than reality as the coaching staff saw it.

Instead, they tried to apply all the "spread concepts" WITHOUT the up tempo concepts, and it failed miserably. The other thing I will agree with you on, regarding Richardson, they tried to utilize a power running game, out of the spread, using a 197 lb RB who is not capable of breaking tackles.

The problem with Richardson as I see it, his running style is that of a power RB. His biggest asset is his burst thru the hole. But like I said, he simply isn't big enough to break tackles and he doesn't make many people miss. But WEEK ONE, he was their best option.

 

[RamzFanz]

You do realize the success they had vs. Indianapolis was more about what Indy was doing in terms of coverage, than anything the Rams suddenly figured out about getting him "in space"? THE Colts to take the running game away, and in doing so, they chose to play man coverage almost exclusively. That's easy pickings with players like Austin. Even Givens was able to exploit that coverage on crossing routes. But you seem to think its as simple as saying we are going to get Austin the ball in space, regardless of what opponents do to take that away from them. So when you say that he "play exactly like college", while that may be the case, the opportunities are few and far between as compared to "in college". And how exactly, other than the 98 yard return in the Indy game,(that again, was more about what Indy didn't do to cover that kick) has Austin been "lights out" returning punts? Is he a threat back there, absolutely. But lets not make him to be something more has been just yet.

As far as Richardson, what exactly has he done to make anyone believe that he's "very good at what he does"? He burst on the scene last year in the first few games as a guy to spell an aging veteran. When he became more exposed, his production vanished. Richardson, of all the RBs on the roster is the most limited in overall ability. He has a great burst TO the hole, but does not break tackles, and does not make people miss. Do you honestly think its a coincidence that he has been inactive for that past 8 games? He has NOT been on any injury reports in that time, he does not play ANY special teams. So when its all said and done, he's the odd man out.

Looks like you changed your mind:

Was a little surprised by the lack of stretch plays in the running game. They seemed determined to run it between the tackles, and while they did a lot of that throughout camp, they also made a point of getting to the edge. Something they really didn't do much Sunday.

 

[RamzFanz]

You do realize that there is so much more that goes into that then just going up tempo?

Teams get a lead, and in most cases, they tend to play to protect that lead. You saw that very thing last week in the second half with the Rams approach vs. New Orleans.

Do you really think that an up tempo scheme, with all the inexperienced players on this offense was a good idea? Do you know what goes into running an "up tempo" offense? how the plays get called? And there is a huge difference in running a "two minute" offense, from an every down "up tempo no huddle offense".

Teams practice situational offense, in that they have a scripted set of plays in a two minute scheme and they have a different set of plays in a four minute offense. When you look at the play sheet the every OC refers to on the sideline, its not only broken down by down and distance plays, but they also have their "2 minute block" and "4 minute block".

The communication needed when you try to play up tempo throughout the game is vital. And with so many young WRs and RBs, all it takes is one MISCOMMUNICATION of which play is being called, and it all blows up in your face.

Now, does that mean that it cant be, or wont be part of the offense as they grow in both experience and understanding of the system? No. I do agree that they have the components to make it work. But to have expected it, especially early in the season with THIS young roster, was more of a wet dream for many in here, than reality as the coaching staff saw it.

Instead, they tried to apply all the "spread concepts" WITHOUT the up tempo concepts, and it failed miserably. The other thing I will agree with you on, regarding Richardson, they tried to utilize a power running game, out of the spread, using a 197 lb RB who is not capable of breaking tackles.

The problem with Richardson as I see it, his running style is that of a power RB. His biggest asset is his burst thru the hole. But like I said, he simply isn't big enough to break tackles and he doesn't make many people miss. But WEEK ONE, he was their best option.

You state the obvious quite a bit. Just because I don't, doesn't mean I'm not aware, just that it's a given.

If they had tried up tempo more, they would have lost less. JMHO. Yes, it's complicated and courageous.

Not running it didn't work so...

 

[CoachO]

Looks like you changed your mind:

I didn't change my mind. I have always said what I thought they should do. But I am not in the meeting rooms. So when I post something in here after the fact, its more a case of me trying to understand WHY they do something, as opposed to trying to say they are wrong in what they are doing.

I don't agree with the lack of use of Pead. But I'm not privy to what goes on behind the scenes. I thought he showed in training camp he was the most athletic RB on the roster. But again, I don't know WHAT they base their decisions on, but I at least try to understand WHY they do make some of the decisions they make.

When I made that previous comment, it was based on what I had witnessed in camp, and making an assumption based on them going to more of the spread concepts, it only made sense that they would change the approach in the running game. They didn't, so here we are.

 

[CoachO]

You state the obvious quite a bit. Just because I don't, doesn't mean I'm not aware, just that it's a given.

If they had tried up tempo more, they would have lost less. JMHO. Yes, it's complicated and courageous.

Not running it didn't work so...

None of what they tried in the first month worked. and again, IMO, trying to force an up tempo scheme at a bunch of inexperienced WRs and RBs would have been a recipe for disaster. You obviously think more highly of what rookies are able to do in WEEK one of their first season than I do. and apparently, the Rams coaches do.

 

[RamzFanz]

None of what they tried in the first month worked. and again, IMO, trying to force an up tempo scheme at a bunch of inexperienced WRs and RBs would have been a recipe for disaster. You obviously think more highly of what rookies are able to do in WEEK one of their first season than I do. and apparently, the Rams coaches do.

What rookies? Bradford? Richardson? Quick? Givens? Pettis? Cook? Kendricks? The O line?

You lost me. Tavon? One guy?

 

[CoachO]

What rookies? Bradford? Richardson? Quick? Givens? Pettis? Cook? Kendricks? The O line?

You lost me. Tavon? One guy?

For all intents Richardson and Quick were rookies. Richardson may have had the most experience of all the RBs, but he was hardly a seasoned veteran, and was now trust into the "starter" role.

Givens? oh yeah, he has an entire HALF a season coming into this year being "the guy". If you want to split hairs, then yes you are right. There were no less than SIX (seven if you count Saffold starting at a new position) new starters on offense when they rolled into week one. But hey, you're right, lets just be the Denver Broncos and run a no huddle, fast break offense.

This is way past the point of being ridiculous. It s not to the point that you are just looking to argue with anything I say. I m done taking up space in this thread that really has gone way off topic.

 

[had]

would there still be people who claim this season is a "step backward" considering they lost their starting QB at the midway point of the season?

With all the expectations going into this season, which IMO, were unrealistic given the makeup of this ENTIRE roster, the overwhelming youth and inexperience of many of the skill positions.

Just wondering if people would see matching last year's win total would be enough to make people come to any conclusions, positive or negative?

For me, I have said since training camp this team is better than last years. But I wasn't sure it would translate into more wins.

If the Rams win this week.

And get to 7 wins.

Would people still claim this season is a step backwards.

The problem for me is this: If the Rams win this week and get to 7 wins (@ the 15th game).

I don't care about the "step backwards" argument. Is the team marginally better or worse than last year? Wow who gives a f*ck. The season is a fail.

I'm extremely bitter right now, and it might be coloring my opinions. I will admit that.

The problem with this team is that there's no f*cking telling what you'll get. Fisher doesn't know. No way. After the Cowboys debacle, Fisher said: "I didn't see that coming." I'll bet he didn't see the Colts game coming, either. Or the Bears. Or the Cardinals two weeks ago, when the f*cking season was on the line, however remote, and they stank it up and came up with a pile of sh*t. F*ck that sh*t.

There is no telling what this team is. You can't know. They're too erratic, undisciplined, unable to execute, lacking leadership. If you suck in one game, and the next you're killing it, what does that mean? That's the f*cking conversation that needs to happen.

I'm sorry, I'm super pissed off. It is my opinion that the Rams defense has the personnel to dominate. One week they do. The next? Ole! Ole! Ole! And f*ck that.

Fans can't change anything, and getting pissed off doesn't do any good, and being positive is its own reward, and f*ck a duck.

This team should have played much better than it did this year. Consistency. Is it a step backwards from last year? Whatever.

Now, by the way, we're set up for a one year audition for Bradford's future.

 

[Zaphod]

And it seems to me, they have run plenty of end arounds, with little success, lots of screen passes, which he seemed to excel at turning into big plays "in college", but as of yet, to have the same sort of success at this level. I get that Austin is going to be a big part of their plans, and yes, he has demonstrated all the big play ability, albeit spotty and inconsistent. But last time I checked, its not about one player, at the expense of the team.

That is true, they really tried pushing the end arounds especially at the beginning of the season, but I guess teams were looking for it and you have to give credit to the speed teams have on defense these days.

Still they saw more success as the wide receivers started blocking better, and I'll lump screens in there as well regarding blocking, so I guess really everyone had a bit to learn.

I'm with you, and I understand that a lot of the fans want a star to worship and brag about, but I think people tend to underestimate the diversity of the more successful teams.

 

[blackbart]

The only critical decision that will need to be made on Bradford is about extending his contract. He will be the starter on this team for the next 5 years if not more. The injury and delay in surgery do have me a little concerned about him not getting more reps with the WRs leading in to the season. I expect a similar slow start with the team coming together in October and building to the end of the season.

With then new CBA I'm ok with that schedule. They just don't get enough time to install things and be roaring out of the gate and it isn't how you start as much as how you finish. Be on a roll make the playoffs and then see what happens.

 

[Yamahopper]

You do realize that there is so much more that goes into that then just going up tempo?

Teams get a lead, and in most cases, they tend to play to protect that lead. You saw that very thing last week in the second half with the Rams approach vs. New Orleans.

Do you really think that an up tempo scheme, with all the inexperienced players on this offense was a good idea? Do you know what goes into running an "up tempo" offense? how the plays get called? And there is a huge difference in running a "two minute" offense, from an every down "up tempo no huddle offense".

Teams practice situational offense, in that they have a scripted set of plays in a two minute scheme and they have a different set of plays in a four minute offense. When you look at the play sheet the every OC refers to on the sideline, its not only broken down by down and distance plays, but they also have their "2 minute block" and "4 minute block".

The communication needed when you try to play up tempo throughout the game is vital. And with so many young WRs and RBs, all it takes is one MISCOMMUNICATION of which play is being called, and it all blows up in your face.

Now, does that mean that it cant be, or wont be part of the offense as they grow in both experience and understanding of the system? No. I do agree that they have the components to make it work. But to have expected it, especially early in the season with THIS young roster, was more of a wet dream for many in here, than reality as the coaching staff saw it.

Instead, they tried to apply all the "spread concepts" WITHOUT the up tempo concepts, and it failed miserably. The other thing I will agree with you on, regarding Richardson, they tried to utilize a power running game, out of the spread, using a 197 lb RB who is not capable of breaking tackles.

The problem with Richardson as I see it, his running style is that of a power RB. His biggest asset is his burst thru the hole. But like I said, he simply isn't big enough to break tackles and he doesn't make many people miss. But WEEK ONE, he was their best option.

Well Said!!!
And may I add they pissed away the preseason going Junior High Vanilla instead of getting meaningful game reps in the spread concept which could have given insight if the team was ready to attempt it in the regular season.

 

[CoachO]

Well Said!!!
And may I add they pissed away the preseason going Junior High Vanilla instead of getting meaningful game reps in the spread concept which could have given insight if the team was ready to attempt it in the regular season.

in hindsight, I don't disagree with that. I think the other miscalculation they made in the preseason, was the concerted effort they made in seemingly every preseason game, was to take their deep shots with Givens. All that did was serve notice, and starting with Arizona, made sure that teams took it away with Safeties over the top every week.

 

[CoachO]

If the Rams win this week.

And get to 7 wins.

Would people still claim this season is a step backwards.

The problem for me is this: If the Rams win this week and get to 7 wins (@ the 15th game).

I don't care about the "step backwards" argument. Is the team marginally better or worse than last year? Wow who gives a f*ck. The season is a fail.

I'm extremely bitter right now, and it might be coloring my opinions. I will admit that.

The problem with this team is that there's no f*cking telling what you'll get. Fisher doesn't know. No way. After the Cowboys debacle, Fisher said: "I didn't see that coming." I'll bet he didn't see the Colts game coming, either. Or the Bears. Or the Cardinals two weeks ago, when the f*cking season was on the line, however remote, and they stank it up and came up with a pile of sh*t. F*ck that sh*t.

There is no telling what this team is. You can't know. They're too erratic, undisciplined, unable to execute, lacking leadership. If you suck in one game, and the next you're killing it, what does that mean? That's the f*cking conversation that needs to happen.

I'm sorry, I'm super pissed off. It is my opinion that the Rams defense has the personnel to dominate. One week they do. The next? Ole! Ole! Ole! And f*ck that.

Fans can't change anything, and getting pissed off doesn't do any good, and being positive is its own reward, and f*ck a duck.

This team should have played much better than it did this year. Consistency. Is it a step backwards from last year? Whatever.

Now, by the way, we're set up for a one year audition for Bradford's future.

Everything you are "screaming about" in terms of the inconsistency, is exactly what you get from "the youngest team in the league". Anyone who continues to dismiss that as a real factor with THIS team is fooling themselves.

It factored into HOW they were coached, what they were exposed to in terms of scheme, and yes, how they performed week to week. There is no way to ignore the FACT that 29 of the 53 man roster were in their 1st or 2nd year. With that comes mistakes, inconsistent performance, and ultimately, frustration from watching every week.

 

[Yamahopper]

in hindsight, I don't disagree with that. I think the other miscalculation they made in the preseason, was the concerted effort they made in seemingly every preseason game, was to take their deep shots with Givens. All that did was serve notice, and starting with Arizona, made sure that teams took it away with Safeties over the top every week.

I can buy that. That just reinforced the idea that Givens is a one trick pony, a slower pony since he put on weight. He should have been used on the underneath stuff to establish that.
I'm not a big believer in all the cloak and dagger preseason deception. Other than a few trick plays the other teams know what you can do even before they see it on film. On a young team the reps would be a bigger help than secrecy.

 

[had]

Everything you are "screaming about" in terms of the inconsistency, is exactly what you get from "the youngest team in the league". Anyone who continues to dismiss that as a real factor with THIS team is fooling themselves.

It factored into HOW they were coached, what they were exposed to in terms of scheme, and yes, how they performed week to week. There is no way to ignore the FACT that 29 of the 53 man roster were in their 1st or 2nd year. With that comes mistakes, inconsistent performance, and ultimately, frustration from watching every week.

Youth is a real factor with the team's inconsistent performances. Fine. Yes.

Is it the only factor?

 

[Ram Quixote]

Youth is a real factor with the team's inconsistent performances. Fine. Yes.

Is it the only factor?

Absolutely not. But it is the prime factor. Walton's learning curve, Bradford's injury, the spread miscalculation.

And yet, each of these are also affected by the youth of the team. Very much like the penalty problems on STs.

 

[rhinobean]

I think you can credit them using Harkey as a fullback and multiple tight end sets for the emergence of the run game.

And having Saffold at guard!

 

[Lesson]

I think you can credit them using Harkey as a fullback and multiple tight end sets for the emergence of the run game.

I'd still like to see Harkey get a carry or two. I'm a big Harkey fan, but I want to see if he's only a blocking fullback/TE hybrid or can he carry the ball, too?