Schottenheimer: "Tavon Austin Playing Much Faster"

[NJRamsFan]

I think we may have talked about this but it is amazing to me how some people think he isn't that great and wasn't worth the draft slot. He's clearly going to be a guy that changes how the defense responds pre-snap and post-snap every time he is on the field. Truthfully the only time I wouldn't have him on the field is third and inches or other obviousl run plays. Make the defense stress about him all freaking day even if he only gets 3 targets!!!

Couldn't agree more. Even on days where his stats aren't spectacular he will still give opposing coordinators headaches just having to account for him every snap. The thing I love most is he's always one missed tackle/broken tackle/good block away from scoring

 

[HitStick]

All I know is that if Schottenheimer can get Mark Sanchez to the AFC championship twice, he's good enough.

I know the Jets had a top D, but now the Rams should. Pound the rock and let Sam do his thing. We don't need him to be Martz.

 

[Ky Ram]

All I know is that if Schottenheimer can get Mark Sanchez to the AFC championship twice, he's good enough.

I know the Jets had a top D, but now the Rams should. Pound the rock and let Sam do his thing. We don't need him to be Martz.

Exactly- we just need to consistently do the things we do well week to week. No need for a lot of flash.
I would like to see more of Cook this year though

 

[Bluesy]

Well, given they see him everyday in meetings, and see how he is more comfortable with the system, I would say he is a pretty good person to comment on that. We seem to think that the ONLY thing that these guys are evaluated on are the "on field" stuff. That just simply isn't the case in most instances.

How is he interacting in the meeting rooms? Is he showing improvement in all the areas he struggled in previously? A lot more goes into an OC making a statement like that, especially when there isn't much to gain from making it (if it truly is just "coach speak).

I guess, but it still seems like a stretch considering the few things the players have been allowed to do. Good point on him not having to make a statement like that though. He could have just said he's doing great.

 

[ramsince62]

All we need out of his offense is another 3-4 pts per game. This doesn't have to be a video game offense to accomplish that. With "normal" progression from the 2nd-3rd yr players, which should equate to better execution, and a healthy O-Line, and an improved defense from Game ONE, that formula will be exactly what they need to succeed.

With all respect, I think it's closer to 7-10 points more per game and I agree that player progression and improvement to the lines (should) make this rather easily attainable.

 

[CoachO]

I guess, but it still seems like a stretch considering the few things the players have been allowed to do. Good point on him not having to make a statement like that though. He could have just said he's doing great.

The thing is, if there is one position that has a chance to excel in the OTAs as they are structured now, its the WRs. It's flag football, and they are the one group who can show the most improvement. Are they sure of what they are doing when they break the huddle? Are they making the sight adjustments at the LOS? Are they running the right routes, at the proper depths, being crisp in and out of breaks?

And again, is this just about what he is doing on the practice field, or is a part of it how he is grasping things in the meeting rooms? These guys are in a classroom environment, and are constantly being tested on scenarios for every play, against different coverages, etc. My guess is he hasn't always excelled in these situations..... much room for improvement.

 

[CoachO]

With all respect, I think it's closer to 7-10 points more per game and I agree that player progression and improvement to the lines (should) make this rather easily attainable.

Why do you feel they have do improve that dramatically? They averaged 21.8 PPG last year. With a backup QB and virtually no passing game for the 2nd half of the season.

By your numbers, you really think they need to get to 29 - 32 ppg to compete, with this defense?

 

[CGI_Ram]

Is this the psychological ploy known as "deflection"? He seemed to be playing fast enough, just not as open all the time, and making some huge drops....I thought he was coming along fine until the injury....It's hard to be 175 lbs in the pros and NOT get injured.

He started slow, no question.

He might be 175, but he does a nice job minimizing the hard hits. Some people (see RGme) always seem to get hit hard.

I'm not worried about injuries with Tavon more than the next guy.

 

[RamsAndEwe]

I don't think Schottenheimer needs to be a Pinball Wizard. For example, I know Tavon Austin and Brandford were much more effective when Bradford hit Tavon on slant routes versus curl patterns. You got to hit Tavon Austin in stride facing running toward the opponents goal line. Minimize throwing Tavon passes, when his back is to the defense. Tavon can't juke 'em if he's a deaf, dumb, and blind kid!

 

[CoachO]

I don't think Schottenheimer needs to be a Pinball Wizard. For example, I know Tavon Austin and Brandford were much more effective when Bradford hit Tavon on slant routes versus curl patterns. You got to hit Tavon Austin in stride facing running toward the opponents goal line. Minimize throwing Tavon passes, when his back is to the defense. Tavon can't juke 'em if he's a deaf, dumb, and blind kid!

That's all fine and good to say you want to throw to him in stride. But when teams play mostly zone against them, which was the case more often than not last year, its more about finding the holes in the zone, and settling in the soft spots. Hence he is going to be standing still more often then not.

The alternative is underneath crossing routes, where he has as many as 4 guys waiting to converge.

 

[LesBaker]

I don't think Schottenheimer needs to be a Pinball Wizard. For example, I know Tavon Austin and Brandford were much more effective when Bradford hit Tavon on slant routes versus curl patterns. You got to hit Tavon Austin in stride facing running toward the opponents goal line. Minimize throwing Tavon passes, when his back is to the defense. Tavon can't juke 'em if he's a deaf, dumb, and blind kid!

That was a fun vid.......thanks!

 

[LACHAMP46]

He started slow, no question.

He might be 175, but he does a nice job minimizing the hard hits. Some people (see RGme) always seem to get hit hard.

I'm not worried about injuries with Tavon more than the next guy.

ummm, lots of guys were hyping, "Tavon never missed a game..." Well guess what, first season, he misses 3 games. He wasn't hit a lot, but the one time he was, high ankle sprain. 175 is not built for the slot...maybe 185, better 190....Welker & Cruz are solid guys...nice muscle. I'll feel better when Tavon spends a little more time in the gym, and gets some grown man muscles....Another guy I worry about is Zac Stacy...Hell, he was getting blasted some of those games...He won't last long either if that keeps up. And he benches 500 lbs...

 

[Mojo Ram]

I'm more concerned with Tavon being durable than i am Bradford.
If TA can avoid nagging injuries, getting crushed and his ankles rolled over into mush then i have no doubt he'll make a lot of big plays for us.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Great post! Thanks for sharing...

Maybe Tavon will be who we thought he was. Dennis Greene couldn't say it any better...

"HE IS WHO WE THOUGHT HE WERE" lol (not a direct quote, of course.)

 

[Amitar]

My biggest worry is Schottenheimer. We need more creativity out of our offensive coordinator. Great actors can't make great movies, if the script sucks.

Ditto, been saying it since the first Arizona game in 2012.

 

[Amitar]

We don't need him to be Martz.

Why not? Why settle for less then average?

 

[ramsince62]

Why do you feel they have do improve that dramatically? They averaged 21.8 PPG last year. With a backup QB and virtually no passing game for the 2nd half of the season.

By your numbers, you really think they need to get to 29 - 32 ppg to compete, with this defense?

Indeed they did average 21.8 ppg and finished 7-9. To answer your question specifically, I think that a seriously competitive team must score somewhere around 385 points a season (24 ppg). But to get 10 wins or better, I happen to believe that closer to 450 points a season seems about right. I did the work at least 3 months ago and posted my opinion that I thought (they) needed to score (average) "at least 7" more points per game in order to seriously compete for the post season. So now you want me to remember the methods I used back then? I can't remember what I had for breakfast!

Basically, I believe that I used the average points scored by division & playoff teams over a 10 or 20 year period (I don't recall which). I then compared the last 2 or 3 seasons (mean) against the longer periods. Based upon the metrics(I hate that term) of the longer period's (history) and the shorter period's (tend), I think I then used arrived at mean point or (range) that seemed to suit both.

I did not include defensive statistics, preferring instead to view the offense in isolation in order to arrive at what appeared as the "most likely" points per game necessary to (insure) success. Success being defined as the probability of winning 10 or more games. Obviously if this "D" is something akin to the 85 Bears, they'd only need to average around 14 ppg. As for me, I want to see them "leave no doubt".

 

[CoachO]

Indeed they did average 21.8 ppg and finished 7-9. To answer your question specifically, I think that a seriously competitive team must score somewhere around 385 points a season (24 ppg). But to get 10 wins or better, I happen to believe that closer to 450 points a season seems about right. I did the work at least 3 months ago and posted my opinion that I thought (they) needed to score (average) "at least 7" more points per game in order to seriously compete for the post season. So now you want me to remember the methods I used back then? I can't remember what I had for breakfast!

Basically, I believe that I used the average points scored by division & playoff teams over a 10 or 20 year period (I don't recall which). I then compared the last 2 or 3 seasons (mean) against the longer periods. Based upon the metrics(I hate that term) of the longer period's (history) and the shorter period's (tend), I think I then used arrived at mean point or (range) that seemed to suit both.

I did not include defensive statistics, preferring instead to view the offense in isolation in order to arrive at what appeared as the "most likely" points per game necessary to (insure) success. Success being defined as the probability of winning 10 or more games. Obviously if this "D" is something akin to the 85 Bears, they'd only need to average around 14 ppg. As for me, I want to see them "leave no doubt".

I understand your premise, but i think with this team, assuming the defense improves the way most anticipate, 24-26 ppg will be more than enough to get them there. Especially playing in the NFC West, where offenses aren't exactly high powered. I get that both Seattle and SF scored right around that same number last year, but given the improvements that we expect on both sides of the ball with this Rams team, I think you might be overestimating how much its gonna take.

But hey, if they somehow manage that, even better.

 

[ramsince62]

I understand your premise, but i think with this team, assuming the defense improves the way most anticipate, 24-26 ppg will be more than enough to get them there. Especially playing in the NFC West, where offenses aren't exactly high powered. I get that both Seattle and SF scored right around that same number last year, but given the improvements that we expect on both sides of the ball with this Rams team, I think you might be overestimating how much its gonna take.

But hey, if they somehow manage that, even better.

I considered the west, but there are 10 games outside of the division and some of those teams can score points. Like you, I expect great things from this defense. But they remain young, we know about the front 7, but there's still an experience issue and learning curve throughout. FWIW, my numbers suggest success in the playoff's, not just showing up.

 

[Bluesy]

Especially playing in the NFC West, where offenses aren't exactly high powered.

I think that might change this season, barring any random injuries in training camp again. It's good we have the defense we do cause we're gonna need it. I'm not saying everyone in our division is gonna turn into the broncos of the last couple years, but I can definitely see there being more points being scored due to offense.

The niners have about 27 WR's and 32 RB's, and it would be a bad idea to underestimate Seattle's offense as well. But hey, if they want to try and pass on us more I'm sure out d-line won't mind