Schottenheimer

[Dodgersrf]

I dont agree with this or the idea that he had less pull with FA aquisitions. How many former Eagles made there way to St Louis? And the four pillars deal?
I think Spags had a tough road to hoe, and it does get overlooked by his detractors (me being one of them), but the assertion that he had any less input than Fish? That dog wont hunt

That's a common solution in most organizations. Who wouldn't prefer players that already know the coaches system?

 

[MrMotes]

Sure, I think it has something to do with it. As did wanting to change to a 3-4. As did having to make a change to appease the masses. I'm not trying to put a good spin on what happened there, in as much as I'm trying to illustrate why it went that way.

I hear you. And i'm saying the predominant reason it went that way is the defense was horrible under Spags. (It improved radically the very next year.)

 

[dieterbrock]

That's a common solution in most organizations. Who wouldn't prefer players that already know the coaches system?

Of course it is, which is why Spags got his players just the same as Fisher. The idea that he had less control of personel decisions is flawed IMO

 

[-X-]

I hear you. And i'm saying the predominant reason it went that way is the defense was horrible under Spags. (It improved radically the very next year.)

And I was just telling you my thoughts as to *why* it was horrible under Spags.
He didn't forget how to coach a defense, IMO. He won a Super Bowl with his defensive strategy and scheme.

But. Chicken - egg - what's it matter now?

 

[MrMotes]

He chose St. Louis over Miami because of the pieces we had in place.

Maybe.

He also has total control here, a non-interfering owner, got to hire his own GM, more money and his agent's son is the COO.

And again Fisher gutted the roster, doesn't seem to me he thought much of it.

I know we disagree about a lot, but can we agree this team is much more talented than it was when Fisher got here? I'm not a huge Fisher fan but the improvement in the roster seems pretty inarguable to me...

 

[MrMotes]

But. Chicken - egg - what's it matter now?

I know, and if the season were going better we wouldn't be rehashing these old subjects...

 

[Angry Ram]

Not sure what you mean exactly
I was a big time Bradford supporter, but after countless OC and similar results, I was ready to move on
I was a Schottenhiemer supporter, but now after several seasons of simialr results to his other stop, I would be ok if they moved on from him
I believe you've got to give time, but in the same respect some times change is needed too

I'm not saying anything about your viewpoints about Sam Bradford.

I'm saying, under this OC good things have happened. Important players have had or were on their way to their best years.

Yet we still blame the OC. Again, based on history, a replacement won't magically change everything unless other issues get fixed as well.

 

[dieterbrock]

. Again, based on history, a replacement won't magically change everything unless other issues get fixed as well.

Doesnt need to be magic. Could be that a different OC would be able to make better use of our playmakers (Tavon/Cook etc) with a different scheme.
But I hear what you're saying. Considering how easy it is to have "other team's OC envy", I imagine that when Davis was tearing it up, there were fans of other teams admiring our OC for what he could do with a #3 QB

 

[mr.stlouis]

It's mid season and it's hard for me to grasp onto what coach we should hire and fire. It's not like he feels comfortable putting the game in Davis's hands. The worse thing about firing him is the hiccups in learning a new system. But hey, it's been a really bad year on offense for the Rams and a few huge decisions will have to be made. A new direction could be a good thing.

 

[LesBaker]

I'm not saying anything about your viewpoints about Sam Bradford.

I'm saying, under this OC good things have happened. Important players have had or were on their way to their best years.

Yet we still blame the OC. Again, based on history, a replacement won't magically change everything unless other issues get fixed as well.

That's fair, but it's also fair to say he has been part of the problem or is one of the issues on his own plenty of times.

 

[Boffo97]

Maybe.

He also has total control here, a non-interfering owner, got to hire his own GM, more money and his agent's son is the COO.

And again Fisher gutted the roster, doesn't seem to me he thought much of it.

I know we disagree about a lot, but can we agree this team is much more talented than it was when Fisher got here? I'm not a huge Fisher fan but the improvement in the roster seems pretty inarguable to me...

Fisher gutted the roster in terms of player percentage. The key players that were in place are still there except for Jackson (and possibly but seeming less and less likely just yet Bradford). Someday those players will be gone. Fisher still inherited a LOT more than Spags did.

Is the roster more talented? Sure. But if it wasn't, something would be very wrong given that megadeal that was only possible because of a rules change that took place after Spags has gone. And that talent has, so far, not resulted in increased wins. All in all, if Fisher was fired after this year, I would absolutely rank him as inferior to Spags in terms of what he did for the Rams.

But in the end, we all have a filter we see things through. Spags is all but certainly better than you think he is but worse than I think he is.

 

[Angry Ram]

That's fair, but it's also fair to say he has been part of the problem or is one of the issues on his own plenty of times.

IMO it's not fair to say he's a problem when no one knows for sure what the plays are (unless you are a mole on the Rams staff on posting it on here) or what the right procedures of the play are.

Sure, every OC can have bad play calls now and then. But I refuse to believe Schotty is as bad as some claim he is. Especially when I see is "oh Schotty sucks he needs to go now!!!!" Obviously I'm not referring you specifically on that.