Official Roster Cuts Thread

[albefree69]

nighttrain clarified his position:

For all of you who aren't worried about the O-line because you are putting your trust in the FO you should keep something in mind. Just because the Rams are going with what they have doesn't mean that Snisher is happy about it. We had a lot of holes to fill and they're working on all of them as fast as they can. That doesn't mean that in some areas we're not deficient.

not just trust in the FO ALBE, but what Coach Lou was able to do with last season's crew.

I get that and FO to me includes Lou. What is it you think Lou was able to accomplish last year? I can't remember exactly who we acquired after the injuries started but let's talk about the ones I remember.

Lou was being counted on to salvage Jason Smith. How'd that go?

Lou was being counted on to salvage Hunter. How'd that go?

Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?

Most think Shelly will be cut.

Rams didn't think enough of Turner to keep him. Not necessarily Lou's fault but it's his line and I think
had he lobbied really hard to keep him he'd be on the team. He didn't lobby hard because he wasn't that good despite the "coaching up" by Lou.

Williams is at most a marginal success that some think should be replaced by Barnes.

Barnes is looking OK to some observers.

The Rams O-line was one of the three weakest groups on the Rams team. To say that it improved in the second half of the season when our starters got healthy is a "DUH" statement to me.

I'm not bashing Lou or Snisher. I'm just saying that we have no clue how happy they are with our O-line. They might be planning to expend huge amounts of capital on it next year just like they did this year with the signing of Long and using a 4th round pick on Jones. I think they are far from finished in this area especially now that many of our other holes have been addressed.

 

[CoachO]

For all of you who aren't worried about the O-line because you are putting your trust in the FO you should keep something in mind. Just because the Rams are going with what they have doesn't mean that Snisher is happy about it. We had a lot of holes to fill and they're working on all of them as fast as they can. That doesn't mean that in some areas we're not deficient.

In the roughly 20 months this regime has been in place, they have added no less than SEVEN out of the TEN on the 53 man roster at this point.

In the process, they have managed to bring in, and/or REPLACE the likes of Jason Smith, Jason Brown, Jacob Bell, Barry Richardson, Wayne Hunter, Robert Turner, Quinn Ojinnaka, Rok Watkins. This doesn't include the number of young players they have had thru two training camps, and practice squads.

I get a kick out of people when they say they haven't addressed the Offensive Line. I realize that in most cases, when someone says this, it pertains to the lack of HIGH DRAFT PICKS devoted to the unit.

IMO, this is the one unit that success isn't in the INDIVIDUAL talent, but in the sum of the parts. Go back to the Offensive lines of the GSOT. Aside from Orlando Pace, name one other guy on that unit throughout that 3 or 4 year stretch that was a HIGH draft pick.

Adam Timmerman - 7th Round
Tom Nutten - 7th Round
Mike Gruttadauria - UDFA
Fred Miller - 5th Round
Andy McCollum - UDFA
John St. Clair - 3rd Round
Ryan Tucker - 4th Round

Now look at the makeup of THIS unit:

Jake Long - 1st OVERALL pick (same as Pace)
Chris Williams - 1st Round (14th overall)
Scott Wells - 7th Round
Harvey Dahl - UDFA
Rodger Saffold - 2nd Round
Joe Barksdale - 3rd Round
Shelley Smith - 6th Round
Brandon Washington - 6th Round
Tim Barnes - UDFA
Barrett Jones - 4th Round

When you compare, I think this organization has done plenty to address this unit. While it still may not appear to be enough for some, IMO, that is as much residual effect of past regimes, and past "failures". Too often, we tend to think that if they don't use draft picks to address this, then they just aren't trying. Take THIS regime for instance. Because Barrett Jones and Rok Watkins were DRAFTED, people tend to over value these guys. How many people have said that Jones is gonna be "the steal of the draft"? or.. "He should be the starting LG THIS YEAR"!

And when we sign someone like Joe Barksdale who didn't become a Pro-Bowl player in Oakland, all we hear is how we are collecting castoffs, and "other team's garbage".

I will be the first to admit, the biggest issue is for THIS group, or any for that matter, is to stay healthy. When you go back to my point of the GSOT O-Line, they had turnover in really only TWO positions in that 3 year run. They replaced Gruttaduaria with McCollum, and they has 3 different RTs. For the most part, they remained HEALTHY.

I for one, think the "parts" are in place. IF they stay healthy, this could and should be the best Offensive Line they have assembled SINCE the GSOT days.

 

[albefree69]

CoachO rejoining the discussion:
In the roughly 20 months this regime has been in place, they have added no less than SEVEN out of the TEN on the 53 man roster at this point.

That just means they saw the same huge problem with the O-line that I did.

In the process, they have managed to bring in, and/or REPLACE the likes of Jason Smith, Jason Brown, Jacob Bell, Barry Richardson, Wayne Hunter, Robert Turner, Quinn Ojinnaka, Rok Watkins. This doesn't include the number of young players they have had thru two training camps, and practice squads.

Are you going to count ROK twice? Once for bringing him in and once for cutting him? :lol: Again, see the reply I made above.

I get a kick out of people when they say they haven't addressed the Offensive Line. I realize that in most cases, when someone says this, it pertains to the lack of HIGH DRAFT PICKS devoted to the unit.

Does this statement I made put me in that group? "They might be planning to expend huge amounts of capital on it next year just like they did this year with the signing of Long and using a 4th round pick on Jones.

IMO, this is the one unit that success isn't in the INDIVIDUAL talent, but in the sum of the parts. Go back to the Offensive lines of the GSOT. Aside from Orlando Pace, name one other guy on that unit throughout that 3 or 4 year stretch that was a HIGH draft pick.

Adam Timmerman - 7th Round
Tom Nutten - 7th Round
Mike Gruttadauria - UDFA
Fred Miller - 5th Round
Andy McCollum - UDFA
John St. Clair - 3rd Round
Ryan Tucker - 4th Round

Now look at the makeup of THIS unit:

Jake Long - 1st OVERALL pick (same as Pace)
Chris Williams - 1st Round (14th overall)
Scott Wells - 7th Round
Harvey Dahl - UDFA
Rodger Saffold - 2nd Round
Joe Barksdale - 3rd Round
Shelley Smith - 6th Round
Brandon Washington - 6th Round
Tim Barnes - UDFA
Barrett Jones - 4th Round

When you compare, I think this organization has done plenty to address this unit. While it still may not appear to be enough for some, IMO, that is as much residual effect of past regimes, and past "failures". Too often, we tend to think that if they don't use draft picks to address this, then they just aren't trying. Take THIS regimes for instance. Because Barrett Jones and Rok Watkins were DRAFTED, people tend to over value these guys.

For someone who accused Coach Venturi of "old school" thinking I would just refer you to this year's draft. How many O-line players were drafted early? Showing me where the members of our 1999 O-line were drafted (many of them drafted many years before 1999) is an example of old school thinking IMO. Rarely were O-line player (except LOTs) drafted high in any draft. Nothing wrong with old school thinking as I've said before. :lol:

As for using high round draft picks to solve our O-line issues, history proves that this is the best way to do it. The stats for successfully picking quality O-line players later in the draft are slightly better than the other positions because of the "old school" think I referred to above. You may think that you don't need to use high draft picks in this area but the rest of the NFL (and me) disagree with this approach. Make a similar list of the Whiners O-line and how does that look?

And when we sign someone like Joe Barksdale who didn't become a Pro-Bowl player in Oakland, all we hear is how we are collecting castoffs, and "other team's garbage".

I forgot to mention Barksdale in my post above. He has been the only success I've seen Lou make so far and even that success has to be qualified by saying he is merely a decent back up and only at RT.

I will be the first to admit, the biggest issue is for THIS group, or any for that matter, is to stay healthy. When you go back to my point of the GSOT O-Line, they had turnover in really only TWO positions in that 3 year run. They replaced Gruttaduaria with McCollum, and they has 3 different RTs. For the most part, they remained HEALTHY.

I agree with this but I'll take it a step farther. The reason it's "the biggest issue is for THIS group" is because we have almost no depth. Since I'm talking about the depth of the group let me just add that having players who can step in to play at multiple positions is great. Of course that only holds true If they could actually play at a high level at those multiple positions. I don't see that. Jones has and can play every position but at what level is he playing any of them? Dahl or Williams at RT? How has that looked? Barnes? He's a center who has had how many snaps at guard?

I for one, think the "parts" are in place. IF they stay healthy, this could and should be the best Offensive Line they have assembled SINCE the GSOT days.

I for one hope you're right. :ww:

That wasn't easy. :lol:

 

[BonifayRam]

That's in the flexibility of the Oline roster. Besides, Saffold is the only one of the 4 with extensive health issues, and by my count he's had his fluke incident already.

Extensive health issues vs recent health issues...of course we all have different ways at looking at things in my case I would like to address what you outline if you will permit me ...

Rams have a 32 yr old starting center Scott Wells who in less than ONE year had three different surgeries on the same leg & foot (twice on the same knee & broken bones in the foot) he went through 3 rehabbing events. Wells missed the two mini camps, the entire training camp and 3 preseason games & appeared in one quarter of play in the last preseason. he followed up from that before injury event with starting one quarter of play & broke/fractured a couple of bones in the middle of his foot. During his first practice back from that broken foot rehabbing event he then injured the same knee that he had surgery on once again. to his credit he played with the pain and the cartilage damage. His play as one would suspect was not Scott Wells like. He had his third surgery on that knee earlier this year & underwent his third rehabbing event. In my mind that's an example of extensive but that just me.

I would like to go on to Jake Long..It would not be hard to find a mass amount of reading material from the drama queens of sport writers who authored up the stories on how bad the declining body of Jake was. Jake had had nagging hurts and then knee, back & then the surgeries to upper body tears to major arm muscles. Overall degrading in on field performance. Jake has yet to play a reg. Ram game for us. Right now we hear how well he is now compared to the last three yrs. Sound like a rough extensive 3 yrs to me but he only missed a half dozen complete game but another dozen or so games he was not able to finish too.. But IMO that's how were able to sign him.

No need to go into the injuries that Roger Saffold has undergone the last three seasons. He still is not 100% so that's extensive hands down. Harvey Dahl would not fit into my definition of extensive but he did end up on the IR late last season & did undergo surgery & a rehabbing event over 6 months till TC began when he was finally cleared. This is only his second injury & the 2nd time he went IR in 2009. He has not been as strong in his run blocking in TC & pre season but I am sure he will improve greatly in time. So those are the four starters. I consider OLG Chris Williams " Stop Gap". His play late last yr @ ORG was outstanding in past time basis in for Harvey but I have not seen any of that same play @ OLG. I am of the opinion that our more permanent OLG is on the OL roster now & he will come to the top by the end of the bye week.

CoachO & I do agree on this Boudreau has been working hard on the versatile mission. I have said it many times before & I said it in my earlier in this post that most of the Ram current OL'ers are extremely versatile!

Never before have I see so much desire during TC & pre season to get so many different Ol'ers playing in so many different posts. Kudos to the Ram coaches on this. I do consider this as a Boudreau Corrective Action Plan (BCAP) in preparation in case for injury epidemic like the Rams suffered last season. I consider it high doubtful that we keep 10 OL'ers but 9 would be smart IMO as an additional BCAP for this OL injury issues.

I guess I truly need to see a hard first seasonal game test run from this current OL starting cadre. I need to see if they can stay on the field the entire first game without injury before dropping that 10th OL'er to the streets.

 

[CoachO]

I will be the first to admit, the biggest issue is for THIS group, or any for that matter, is to stay healthy. When you go back to my point of the GSOT O-Line, they had turnover in really only TWO positions in that 3 year run. They replaced Gruttaduaria with McCollum, and they has 3 different RTs. For the most part, they remained HEALTHY.

I agree with this but I'll take it a step farther. The reason it's "the biggest issue is for THIS group" is because we have almost no depth. Since I'm talking about the depth of the group let me just add that having players who can step in to play at multiple positions is great. Of course that only holds true If they could actually play at a high level at those multiple positions. I don't see that. Jones has and can play every position but at what level is he playing any of them? Dahl or Williams at RT? How has that looked? Barnes? He's a center who has had how many snaps at guard?

I for one, think the "parts" are in place. IF they stay healthy, this could and should be the best Offensive Line they have assembled SINCE the GSOT days.

I for one hope you're right. :ww:

You continue to bring up the lack of depth, after just admitting that THIS group staying healthy is the biggest strength. You talk about "old school" and seem to be agreeing with my take on it, and YES, "old school" "new School", it doesn't matter. When you build an Offensive Line, its about putting the pieces in place, and getting them from "any means possible".

Find me a team who "has depth" like you seem to expect. The teams who are successful, are the teams who stay HEALTHY up front. You reference San Francisco as how you would put together an O-Line". Only because I am too lazy to look it up, tell me how much depth they have, and how well they would do if they were forced to play their 3rd & 4th OT.

You reference "old School" mentality, but you seem to be demonstrating a "fantasy football" mindset, when it comes to filling out the "depth" positions. Teams just aren't able to assemble 9 man units that have that kind of "talent".

Bottom line, for me, is simple. IF (yes I know, its a big IF), they stay healthy, this has the making of a better than average, bordering on VERY GOOD Offensive Line.

 

[fearsomefour]

"Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?"

Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here. He since moved on and was cut I believe. So, it worked out very well based on the risk/reward and the results while he was with the Rams.


"Rams have a 32 yr old starting center Scott Wells who in less than ONE year had three different surgeries on the same leg & foot (twice on the same knee & broken bones in the foot) he went through 3 rehabbing events"

That is the much larger concern than different "bad luck" injuries like Saffold has had....Wells is my number one injury concern going into this season.

As for the Centers with the GSOT era (about) I remember Ram fans getting pissed we let Brostic go in favor of some undersized unknown guy (Mike G) in a move that was pure cost cutting. Then, we brought in a used up vet in McCollum to replace Mike G when he moved on. Replaced Brostic with Mike G was considered a downgrade and then replacing Mike G with McCollum was considered a downgrade. Both played great football while in St. Louis. Maybe it is scheme mixed with coaching.
So far I would give our Oline coach a great grade. Using players like Hunter, Turner or Richardson I think make the point. They were cast offs when they came to St. Louis (who was desperate to find players) performed well here and moved on. The fact that both Hunter and Richardson had been given up on before getting to St. Louis (and havent landed somewhere else since) speaks to this point. Turner couldnt crack a starting lineup in a meaningful way got to St. Louis and turned that into a nice contract....again, speaks to the growth in his game that happened here. The coaches are not miracle workers, getting players that work in the system is key. One thing is for sure, I think the Oline coach has gotten a lot out of some marginally talented players. I think CW is a big challenge for him. He was a high draft pick but has (in my opinion) some significant balance/technique issues. I also Barksdale is being groomed to replace Saffold after he takes big money to play LT in Oakland or some other toilet next year.

 

[albefree69]

CoachO added:
You continue to bring up the lack of depth, after just admitting that THIS group staying healthy is the biggest strength. You talk about "old school" and seem to be agreeing with my take on it, and YES, "old school" "new School", it doesn't matter. When you build an Offensive Line, its about putting the pieces in place, and getting them from "any means possible".

Find me a team who "has depth" like you seem to expect. The teams who are successful, are the teams who stay HEALTHY up front. You reference San Francisco as how you would put together an O-Line". Only because I am too lazy to look it up, tell me how much depth they have, and how well they would do if they were forced to play their 3rd & 4th OT.

You reference "old School" mentality, but you seem to be demonstrating a "fantasy football" mindset, when it comes to filling out the "depth" positions. Teams just aren't able to assemble 9 man units that have that kind of "talent".

Bottom line, for me, is simple. IF (yes I know, its a big IF), they stay healthy, this has the making of a better than average, bordering on VERY GOOD Offensive Line.

I never said that this group remaining healthy is the biggest strength. i'm not sure where you got that.

I don't agree with your old school take on O-line drafting strategy. I do agree that it's one way to do it that has been proven to be successful in the past when everyone was of the same mind. When everyone thinks you can wait until the later rounds to draft guards and centers then you can do that too because the good ones will still be there. That's what I either said or meant to say. :bg:

I totally agree with that. You do need to get players "any way possible". The signing of Long is a good example and I'm very happy we did that. But here's the thing, there are always negative reasons why players are available in FA. Those negative reasons consist of cost, injury history, off the field issues, attitude problems, declining skills or just old age. The only "good" reasons are bad fit in their system and an overabundance of quality players at that position (for the team that released the player). There have been several recent studies that point out that FA seldom solves a teams problems and looking back at the history of the Rams FA acquisitions puts a period on that. Some successes but mostly disappointments.

As for finding a team with that kind of depth, I need merely point you to the Rams D-line as a fantastic example. How did we get that fantastic D-line? Did we use a "fantasy football" misndset? :lol: Three 1st round starters, a hit (Hayes) and a disappointment (Langford) in FA and and some great lower level drafting. I can only dream about having the same quality of low level drafting on the O-line. What successes have we had there? I can't think off any off the top of my head.

As for your bottom line, I agree with that. It's that big if I'm worried about. Especially considering our history.

 

[BonifayRam]

"Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?"

Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here. He since moved on and was cut I believe. So, it worked out very well based on the risk/reward and the results while he was with the Rams.

Yes, it did work out very well for us in 2012 with Barry Richardson @ ORT. Barry remained healthy the entire yr that says much to me. Barry IMO had his best yr as a pro because of Boudreau instruction. Positives for Barry are ..very good @ run blocking @ ORT & came at a very good low cost. The bad for Barry is he is Fair to poor @ pass blocking but he only plays one post. This last comment was the reason he is no longer here IMO.

"Rams have a 32 yr old starting center Scott Wells who in less than ONE year had three different surgeries on the same leg & foot (twice on the same knee & broken bones in the foot) he went through 3 rehabbing events" That is the much larger concern than different "bad luck" injuries like Saffold has had....Wells is my number one injury concern going into this season.

Yes me too I have no seen him play anything close to his old self that he was playing for the Packers. He came @ a very very high price and has not delivered as of yet. Lucky for us the Rams have more than quality depth behind Wells.


So far I would give our Oline coach a great grade. Using players like Hunter, Turner or Richardson I think make the point. They were cast offs when they came to St. Louis (who was desperate to find players) performed well here and moved on. The fact that both Hunter and Richardson had been given up on before getting to St. Louis (and havent landed somewhere else since) speaks to this point. Turner couldnt crack a starting lineup in a meaningful way got to St. Louis and turned that into a nice contract....again, speaks to the growth in his game that happened here. The coaches are not miracle workers, getting players that work in the system is key.

I agree big time

One thing is for sure, I think the Oline coach has gotten a lot out of some marginally talented players. I think CW is a big challenge for him. He was a high draft pick but has (in my opinion) some significant balance/technique issues.

CW wanted to win a starting position here with the Rams. CW did not cost that much & like I said show'd he wanted to play here by his play @ ORG last yr. but he has yet to win the position outright @ OLG. I have seen better play from other Ram Ol'ers @ OLG post myself this pre season. CW is supposed to be the better run blocker but I not there. I see better pass protection from him @ OLG than run blocking. Now his run blocking is much better when playing ORT. In truth the current Ram OL have four OT's starting & an OC. Both OG's ...CW & Harvey are ex OT's moved inside by Boudreau. Both are close to 6-6 usual OT height. This current OL set up is better @ pass blocking than run blocking by far good for Sam & on purpose I am sure by designed by Boudreau.

I also Barksdale is being groomed to replace Saffold after he takes big money to play LT in Oakland or some other toilet next year.

I have move into a more positive mode on Barksdale this last month but he needs to improve on his pass blocking to be a complete top Swing reserve OT. Rams should look strongly @ possible drafting a future starting ORT in 2014 once Saffold bolts . But presently Rams have possibly 6 OL'ers ...Long, Saffold, Barksdale, Williams, Washington & also Harvey Dahl that lined up & played OT in a Ram uniform. Boudreau also have 6 Ol'ers who have played OG for us ...Smith, Barnes, Jones, Williams, Dahl & Washington. I would have a very hard time arguing that our depth is poor presently. The ill feeling I get @ LEFT OG is based on the turned in performance this pre season by CW & Smith... not where it should be to be effective.

 

[albefree69]

BonifayRam and fearsomefour joining in:

albefree posited:
"Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?"

Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here. He since moved on and was cut I believe. So, it worked out very well based on the risk/reward and the results while he was with the Rams.

Yes, it did work out very well for us in 2012 with Barry Richardson @ ORT. Barry remained healthy the entire yr that says much to me. Barry IMO had his best yr as a pro because of Boudreau instruction. Positives for Barry are ..very good @ run blocking @ ORT & came at a very good low cost. The bad for Barry is he is Fair to poor @ pass blocking but he only plays one post. This last comment was the reason he is no longer here IMO.

Sorry I can't give detailed responses to several posters at the same time in a thread because it's too hard for me to keep track but I do want to comment on this. We didn't bring him back at the end of the season so when both of you say he did well I'm just flummoxed. Obviously the Rams FO thought differently. Has he been picked up by another team? If he had any talent, and I mean any talent, you would think he would have been signed by one of the many teams who have suffered injuries this preseason at his position.

 

[-X-]

BonifayRam and fearsomefour joining in:

albefree posited:
"Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?"

Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here. He since moved on and was cut I believe. So, it worked out very well based on the risk/reward and the results while he was with the Rams.

Yes, it did work out very well for us in 2012 with Barry Richardson @ ORT. Barry remained healthy the entire yr that says much to me. Barry IMO had his best yr as a pro because of Boudreau instruction. Positives for Barry are ..very good @ run blocking @ ORT & came at a very good low cost. The bad for Barry is he is Fair to poor @ pass blocking but he only plays one post. This last comment was the reason he is no longer here IMO.

Sorry I can't give detailed responses to several posters at the same time in a thread because it's too hard for me to keep track but I do want to comment on this. We didn't bring him back at the end of the season so when both of you say he did well I'm just flummoxed. Obviously the Rams FO thought differently. Has he been picked up by another team? If he had any talent, and I mean any talent, you would think he would have been signed by one of the many teams who have suffered injuries this preseason at his position.

The idea isn't that Richardson is bad. It's that Boudreau made him serviceable during a time when the Rams' O-line needed bodies. He graded out about middle of the pack all last year and had a decent season with us all things considered. If he's not on a team, but had a decent season with us, then that's a reflection of coaching. Now that's not to say that I think Boudreau can walk on water, but I do think he can get the job done and is near the front of the pack amongst his peers.

And he wasn't brought in to save Jason Smith. He was brought in to coach the O-line. It was HE who made the determination that Jason Smith lacked the fire and aggressiveness he wanted out of O-linemen, and ultimately that's why Jason Smith isn't here anymore.

 

[albefree69]

X joining the fray:
The idea isn't that Richardson is bad. It's that Boudreau made him serviceable during a time when the Rams' O-line needed bodies. He graded out about middle of the pack all last year and had a decent season with us all things considered. If he's not on a team, but had a decent season with us, then that's a reflection of coaching. Now that's not to say that I think Boudreau can walk on water, but I do think he can get the job done and is near the front of the pack amongst his peers.

And he wasn't brought in to save Jason Smith. He was brought in to coach the O-line. It was HE who made the determination that Jason Smith lacked the fire and aggressiveness he wanted out of O-linemen, and ultimately that's why Jason Smith isn't here anymore.

That might not be your idea but when the answer to my question "Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?" is: "Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here." then I feel the urge to respond like I did. Maybe you meant to put in a "not" somewhere in this "then that's a reflection of coaching" when discussing why he isn't on our, or anybody else's team but as I read it you think that's partially Lou's fault.

I know that Lou wasn't specifically brought in to save Jason Smith but it certainly was part of what the FO hoped he could do. It is also part of his job and it's what is said about what he was able to accomplish with Dahl and some other O-line players on his last team.

I think you're missing the context in which I said that. Nighttrain made this statement:"not just trust in the FO ALBE, but what Coach Lou was able to do with last season's crew." which I was and am continuing to address. The statement implies two things to me.

First, it's saying that I shouldn't worry so much about the O-line because of the great job Lou was able to do last year with the crappy pieces he was given. I disagree with that analysis although I do think he did a great job with what he had. But you can't get blood from a turnip. A beet, maybe. I think we used an offensive scheme that masked the deficiencies of our crappy O-line players. That O-line that posters are saying good things about produced a crappy offense. Yes, the lack of weapons on offense played a pig part in that but the O-line was just as much to blame IMO.

With the the first implication comes the second implication that Lou's superior skills will enable us to survive another rash of injuries like last years. I see no evidence to support that contention and gave a very brief analysis of each player that directly refuted that contention. fearsomefour looks at Lou and sees him turning a worthless player like Richardson into a serviceable player. I look at a scheme change as the masking agent. If Boudreau had actually coached Richardson up to the level of adequate he would still be on the team IMO. Or any team for that matter.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your blue stuff. What I disagree with is the notion that Boudreau can somehow keep our offense up to the level we need it to be to make the playoffs. Thus I continue to worry about it. But I'm a worrier so there's that. :bg:

 

[-X-]

X joining the fray:
The idea isn't that Richardson is bad. It's that Boudreau made him serviceable during a time when the Rams' O-line needed bodies. He graded out about middle of the pack all last year and had a decent season with us all things considered. If he's not on a team, but had a decent season with us, then that's a reflection of coaching. Now that's not to say that I think Boudreau can walk on water, but I do think he can get the job done and is near the front of the pack amongst his peers.

And he wasn't brought in to save Jason Smith. He was brought in to coach the O-line. It was HE who made the determination that Jason Smith lacked the fire and aggressiveness he wanted out of O-linemen, and ultimately that's why Jason Smith isn't here anymore.

That might not be your idea but when the answer to my question "Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?" is: "Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here." then I feel the urge to respond like I did. Maybe you meant to put in a "not" somewhere in this "then that's a reflection of coaching" when discussing why he isn't on our, or anybody else's team but as I read it you think that's partially Lou's fault.

I know that Lou wasn't specifically brought in to save Jason Smith but it certainly was part of what the FO hoped he could do. It is also part of his job and it's what is said about what he was able to accomplish with Dahl and some other O-line players on his last team.

I think you're missing the context in which I said that. Nighttrain made this statement:"not just trust in the FO ALBE, but what Coach Lou was able to do with last season's crew." which I was and am continuing to address. The statement implies two things to me.

First, it's saying that I shouldn't worry so much about the O-line because of the great job Lou was able to do last year with the crappy pieces he was given. I disagree with that analysis although I do think he did a great job with what he had. But you can't get blood from a turnip. A beet, maybe. I think we used an offensive scheme that masked the deficiencies of our crappy O-line players. That O-line that posters are saying good things about produced a crappy offense. Yes, the lack of weapons on offense played a pig part in that but the O-line was just as much to blame IMO.

With the the first implication comes the second implication that Lou's superior skills will enable us to survive another rash of injuries like last years. I see no evidence to support that contention and gave a very brief analysis of each player that directly refuted that contention. fearsomefour looks at Lou and sees him turning a worthless player like Richardson into a serviceable player. I look at a scheme change as the masking agent. If Boudreau had actually coached Richardson up to the level of adequate he would still be on the team IMO. Or any team for that matter.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your blue stuff. What I disagree with is the notion that Boudreau can somehow keep our offense up to the level we need it to be to make the playoffs. Thus I continue to worry about it. But I'm a worrier so there's that. :bg:

Well, I've always been concerned about the depth of the offensive line, but only because the starters keep getting hurt. I, personally, think you're heaping too much responsibility on Boudreau for what amounts to just really bad luck and lack of resources brought about by needs virtually everywhere else. As such, I don't plan on getting into a big foray over your opinion on the matter. You're concerned, I'm concerned, but I don't see how he could have done much more than he's done up to this point. He can't work miracles (J. Smith), and he did about as much as anyone could ask with Richardson who was brought in to fill an immediate hole, and subsequently, did a fairly decent job. That's a reflection of coaching, and I didn't accidentally omit a "not" in any portion of my post. They've since upgraded his position. If he didn't get a job anywhere else, then maybe everyone else is set. I don't know the answer to that. Mikell is a good safety who just now got a job, so Richardson might also land somewhere else. The fact that he played for us as a starter, and played fairly well, means that the coaches got the most out of him.

Any team that loses multiple starters on the O-line is going to suffer the consequences. Maybe they're playing the odds with who we have in hopes that they don't get hurt again, but short of using ALL of our draft picks on offensive linemen, there's not much else they could do to mitigate that risk. Every team that has a successful year, usually rides the waves of good luck in the injury department, so...

We'll see.

I really don't want to commit much more time defending Boudreau or anyone else on this team from criticism. Whether they deserve it or not, it's just not how I want to dedicate my time as a fan. No offense to you ... it's just a downer for me. I'm kinda all in on this team and staff until they show me that they're negligent in their duties or play. Sorry.

 

[albefree69]

X ending his involvement:
I really don't want to commit much more time defending Boudreau or anyone else on this team from criticism. Whether they deserve it or not, it's just not how I want to dedicate my time as a fan. No offense to you ... it's just a downer for me. I'm kinda all in on this team and staff until they show me that they're negligent in their duties or play. Sorry.

I too am not interested in talking about the relative merits of any of our coaches. We've had that conversation already. I will bring the subject up if I feel it is pertinent to something else we both are interested in discussing. I came to this discussion about Boudreau as a result of another poster's post and it wasn't the main or even an important part of my original view about the status of our O-line. Of course I'm always willing to go off on a tangent. :bg:

 

[fearsomefour]

BonifayRam and fearsomefour joining in:

albefree posited:
"Lou was being counted on to salvage Richardson. How'd that go?"

Really, really well. Richardson had a terrible year the year before he got to St. Louis and graded out as the best all round lineman for the Rams the year he started here. He since moved on and was cut I believe. So, it worked out very well based on the risk/reward and the results while he was with the Rams.

Yes, it did work out very well for us in 2012 with Barry Richardson @ ORT. Barry remained healthy the entire yr that says much to me. Barry IMO had his best yr as a pro because of Boudreau instruction. Positives for Barry are ..very good @ run blocking @ ORT & came at a very good low cost. The bad for Barry is he is Fair to poor @ pass blocking but he only plays one post. This last comment was the reason he is no longer here IMO.

Sorry I can't give detailed responses to several posters at the same time in a thread because it's too hard for me to keep track but I do want to comment on this. We didn't bring him back at the end of the season so when both of you say he did well I'm just flummoxed. Obviously the Rams FO thought differently. Has he been picked up by another team? If he had any talent, and I mean any talent, you would think he would have been signed by one of the many teams who have suffered injuries this preseason at his position.

If what you are saying is true and Richardson is talentless it makes the job the staff did getting his level of play up to where it was last year all the more impressive. The truth is he is a marginal talent as a player who had a good year. Seeing as how he had a bad year before and could not stick in Tennessee this preseason leaves very few places credit can land for his good year in St. Louis.
The fact that the front office did not bring him back means they thought they could upgrade, which, given the signing of Long and moving of Saffold, they did. Based strickly on performance Richardson would have graded better than Barksdale (Im sure) but Barksdale is more of a priority to bring back because of his age and potential. They also may have thought the chances of him repeating his performance were slim. Either way, the fact he was not brought back says little about his performance the year before. He was very solid....and at times the only Ram lineman run blocking with passion....for the majority of the year.

 

[albefree69]

fearsomefour with other possibilities:
If what you are saying is true and Richardson is talentless it makes the job the staff did getting his level of play up to where it was last year all the more impressive. The truth is he is a marginal talent as a player who had a good year. Seeing as how he had a bad year before and could not stick in Tennessee this preseason leaves very few places credit can land for his good year in St. Louis.
The fact that the front office did not bring him back means they thought they could upgrade, which, given the signing of Long and moving of Saffold, they did. Based strickly on performance Richardson would have graded better than Barksdale (Im sure) but Barksdale is more of a priority to bring back because of his age and potential. They also may have thought the chances of him repeating his performance were slim. Either way, the fact he was not brought back says little about his performance the year before. He was very solid....and at times the only Ram lineman run blocking with passion....for the majority of the year.

I don't agree at all that the fact that not bringing him back says little about his performance. I think it speaks volumes. But on the other hand, you posited some reasonable alternatives that could be right too. Still, I can't find a reasonable explanation for why they would not even go to camp with a player that they thought played as well as you thought. It makes no sense to me. If he didn't do well in camp it's easy to cut him then. No spare opening in that 90 man roster for one of last years best O-line players? :lol:
On the third hand, I can't see the play of the lineman very well unless it's in slow motion so I probably didn't get as good a look at him as you did. So there's that.

 

[fearsomefour]

Well it certainly says something about his performance in the light of other options....I will give you that. Having Barksdale who is 25 and not a free agent until 2015 or Richardson who signed for $715,000 (more than Barksdale) for one year in Tennessee....well, it would be an easy choice for me. I think the Rams thought, and rightfully so, with three deep at T the money they would have had to invest in either Richardson or Hunter would be better spent getting a couple of players to fill depth spots and hopefully find some talent.
Frankly, I was very surprised Richardson played as well as he did. Maybe he was protected with play calling and or assists in protection...either by RBs, TEs or play design, I do know I really like how he blocked the run. But, that is only half the game. His pass blocking has been a glaring weakness for his whole career.
I can see the point you are making. The good news (about this I am sure we will agree) our prospects for O line play are much higher this year than last....and that is great news indeed.

 

[albefree69]

If you're right and we need help during the season we might look to him. It's good to have something in the cupboard.

Yeah it is looking much better. :zomg: :bg:

 

[BonifayRam]

Well it certainly says something about his performance in the light of other options....I will give you that. Having Barksdale who is 25 and not a free agent until 2015 or Richardson who signed for $715,000 (more than Barksdale) for one year in Tennessee....well, it would be an easy choice for me. I think the Rams thought, and rightfully so, with three deep at T the money they would have had to invest in either Richardson or Hunter would be better spent getting a couple of players to fill depth spots and hopefully find some talent.
Frankly, I was very surprised Richardson played as well as he did. Maybe he was protected with play calling and or assists in protection...either by RBs, TEs or play design, I do know I really like how he blocked the run. But, that is only half the game. His pass blocking has been a glaring weakness for his whole career.
I can see the point you are making. The good news (about this I am sure we will agree) our prospects for O line play are much higher this year than last....and that is great news indeed.

Bottom line is Barksdale IS Boudreau's Swing OT for the Rams...sad to say that is something Barry Richardson could never be. Last yr the Rams carried Saffold, Richardson, Williams, Barksdale & Hunter as their FIVE (5) OT's. Hunter was the first reserve @ Left OT, Williams was first reserve @ Right OT Barksdale saw only action as the second Left OT. It was not till Harvey Dahl went out @ ORG that we saw Chris Williams move inside for the last two games. CW was signed after both OT's Saffold & Hunter went down to injury.

Today the Rams have five reserves...Barksdale swinging & Washington is not the 4th OT IMO. The others have not saw any action @ OT. Washington has played awful @ ORT & could not be considered for that ORT reserve post. However His play @ ORG was not as bad. But last week we saw him for the first time @ OLG & he looked sooo much better...so that half @ OLG may have been the only reason that caused them pause @ releasing up to this minute.

So without the high cost of Hunter & Richardson they have Barksdale to take both their spots. Smart move Rams down to 3 OT's on the master roster when they had five last year. That's improvement.

When you look @ our five reserves three of them have played three OL posts Barnes OC/OLG/ORG, Jones OC/ORG/OLG & Washington OLG/ORG/ORT. Two have only played two posts Barksdale plays OLT/ORT & Smith plays OLG/ORG. As I said above Barksdale is our most important swing OT but its Shelley Smith who is limited. Of the interior OL reserves Barnes & Barrett Jones are more valuable than Smith & Washington. Both Barnes & Jones can back up the same posts as those two Smith & BW. Looks to me one will soon be gone they may be able to trade Smith for a future draft pick.

Here a nugget last yr both Smith & Williams rotated @ ORG neither won over on the other..then this yr Boudreau does that same thing rotating both of them back & forth neither winning the job outright with both having issues but then we see Boudreau give Barnes a good long look @ OLG & then finally Washington & both seemed to have played much better that both Smith & Williams...go figure?

 

[Faceplant]

Of course I'm always willing to go off on a tangent. :bg:

That about sums it up.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[albefree69]

Faceplant appreciating the geometry of the situation:

albefree69 showing his versatility:
Of course I'm always willing to go off on a tangent. :bg:

That about sums it up.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

I probably should have said cotangent because I always manage to drag one or two posters with me. :ww:

Sent from the left side of my brain using all my fingers.