Schottey out as OC

[Alaskan Ram]

Yeah, it's not even about money if you take what Les Snead had to say about it. It's apparently "the best move for him and his family."
Which begs the question, what was so disadvantageous about staying here? Hmmmm?

I'm UNCERTAIN how to answer that.

 

[Mackeyser]

Here's what I think...

Fisher's looking for a pretty "radical" change. Just like he wanted on D. They were good and had talent, but needed to make a breakthrough in order to compete on that next level. Walton wasn't going to be that guy. He was fired. I dunno if he was given any chance to look for other work.

However, Schotty has certainly earned Fisher's respect. And Schotty HAS to know the state of the offense and the players. He has to know what Fisher wants and if he is even capable of delivering it (or even if he thinks what Fisher wants can be attained at all).

So, I dunno if Schotty was asked to leave or left because of ambition or because he saw the state of the Rams offense and saw an irreconcilable gap between the expectations of Coach Fisher and what the O can be expected to deliver, even in a best case scenario.

I really don't know that.

What I do know is that Coach Fisher has his eye on substantial improvement on the offensive side of the ball. He got that on the Defensive side of the ball in the later half of the season with the hiring of Coach Williams.

So... whomever he hires, be it a promotion or outside hire will be embracing a fairly aggressive offensive strategy. That doesn't mean it won't still be run oriented... it will just be aggressive. I think we will begin to see that soon. Our first bit of info will be the OC hiring. That's important. Also, do we keep Cignetti? If he's promoted, whom do we bring in as QB coach? That's also important, especially if we draft a QB because we need to stick with teaching. Too few programs teach...to their detriment.

While teams tend to keep this stuff fairly close to the vest, by March 1st, we'll see by who's staying how this is shaping up.

However, there's something ELSE that we have to understand HERE AND NOW...

We're almost certainly looking at yet another slow start followed by a better finish... however, if our D is playing well and our O comes on at the end of the season... well, we'll see. But new offenses tend to start slow.

So, the ONE thing I think this does is push back expectations for us by a year... because other than Martz with our stacked team, very few OCs come into a team and light the league on fire.

That said, this young team is set up to do very well for a very long time and the FO is young and poised to keep feeding this team talent for a long time...

This was about the only reason I wanted Schotty to stay. I thought the continuity on O would have allowed us to see the playoffs, but not much else and maybe 10 wins would be our cap even with our talent under his system. Might that have played into Fisher's bigger vision? I dunno.

But new offenses don't tend to fare well early in their first seasons... so I won't be calling for anyone's head in the first half of the season, even if they look like the Bad News Bears...

That said, I'll be really interested to see WHO Coach Fisher thinks represents substantial improvement on the offensive side of the ball.

 

[RamFan503]

I think what might be getting lost here is that Fish actually WANTS to open it up more and shift to a more downfield attack. I'm thinking something like Urban Meyer's style where you have a strong running game and you open it up downfield. Fisher talked about changing things up and I'm just thinking that this is how he wants to work it.

 

[MrMotes]

I think what might be getting lost here is that Fish actually WANTS to open it up more and shift to a more downfield attack. I'm thinking something like Urban Meyer's style where you have a strong running game and you open it up downfield. Fisher talked about changing things up and I'm just thinking that this is how he wants to work it.

When the Jets parted ways with BS Ryan went the opposite direction, was determined to be more of a smash mouth running team.

I kind of figure Jeff Fisher will do the same but we'll see...

 

[MrMotes]

Like I said. I'm not trashing him, so I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean.
But if we're to judge Schotty on offensive ranks and wins/losses, then Martz didn't cut it in SF, DET or CHI.

Just an example of getting good results without necessarily having the horses...

 

[-X-]

If Bradford was a good qb with X years of experience running the west coast offense, shouldn't he now be able to lead an offense as long as the new coordinate respects west coast themes the way other good QBs do? Has he reached that level of mastery of the professional game that one would expect him to reach after so many years? Manning has had multiple OC s. Doesn't seem to matter who works with Brady. Rodgers is calling 40% of his own plays.

I'm not trying to be argumentative or rude. I'm trying to understand what is realistic in terms of Bradford. In terms of our expectations.

On the finite time line that is the career of an nfl player there has to be a point where a distinction is made between unlucky and systemic.

I'm not saying we've hit that inflection point.

I am saying that if he were a good qb we as an organization should be able to put in a new west coast OC and have success.

Thoughts? (Forgive my stream of consciousness. I'm just concerned.)

I agree with you. As long as the concepts remain the same, Bradford should be able to execute the offense. My issue isn't with his ability to pick a new offense up. It's with this entire offense being able to pick it up and execute it well. If we had a bunch of young vets, I probably wouldn't be as concerned. Like, if we had Holt and Bruce, a new offense wouldn't be a big deal. But we have guys (receivers) who never even saw a playbook before, and they just figured THIS one out. So, yeah. I do hope the offense isn't something 180 degrees removed from what we're doing now. The alternative would be to move on from Bradford and tailor an offense to not only fit the new QB, but to minimize the transition for the receivers.

 

[-X-]

Just an example of getting good results without necessarily having the horses...

So it's individual performances that are the measure of a good OC, and not wins/losses/offensive rankings?
Well, that's news to me. So if Quick stayed healthy and posted 1000 yards, and ONE qb stayed healthy and posted 4000 of his own, Schotty would be good?

 

[-X-]

I think what might be getting lost here is that Fish actually WANTS to open it up more and shift to a more downfield attack. I'm thinking something like Urban Meyer's style where you have a strong running game and you open it up downfield. Fisher talked about changing things up and I'm just thinking that this is how he wants to work it.

That's what they do now. Or try to. But when you lose your WR1 and QB1, and have to switch between QB2-QB3 to make it work, while you have ROG and C who are playing poorly with veteran LT out and rookie LT in, how is that supposed to look? Can't really rely on Rookie RB1 and Sophomore RBs 2&3 to carry an offense enough to open up that downfield passing game with that O-line I just spoke about.

If we get an OC who can do that (with the same personnel), then I'll go punch Schotty in the face myself.

 

[RamFan503]

When the Jets parted ways with BS Ryan went the opposite direction, was determined to be more of a smash mouth running team.

I kind of figure Jeff Fisher will do the same but we'll see...

The reason I don't think that is the case is that our two big receivers and fast TE (if Quick heals) are pretty difficult to cover downfield and I'm going to guess Fish wants to use TA and Sted more for their quicks. You don't do that by clogging up the middle of the field with little stop routes, poorly designed (or executed) screens, and running TA across the face of a zone.

Maybe I'm wrong but I also got the feeling Fish was pretty pissed after the final offensive play in SD. I realize he said all the right things but I think Fish is tired of a sluggish, helter skelter offense. I would look for someone to instill an identity to our offense and my guess is that we will punish up front and then stab teams with big plays. But when we get on the goal line on first down, I doubt we are going to see an empty backfield.

 

[Boffo97]

So it's individual performances that are the measure of a good OC, and not wins/losses/offensive rankings?
Well, that's news to me. So if Quick stayed healthy and posted 1000 yards, and ONE qb stayed healthy and posted 4000 of his own, Schotty would be good?

Take a drink.

 

[MrMotes]

So it's individual performances that are the measure of a good OC, and not wins/losses/offensive rankings?
Well, that's news to me. So if Quick stayed healthy and posted 1000 yards, and ONE qb stayed healthy and posted 4000 of his own, Schotty would be good?

It's true. If Schotty's offensive numbers were better, my opinion of him would be higher.

Generally i put wins and losses on the HC and how well the units play on the coordinators. I mean we went 6-10, did Schotty, Fassel and GW really have the same year? Our defense and special teams are doing good things and sending players to the pro bowl. Our offense , not so much.

Here's hoping the new guy helps the offense kick it up a notch or two...

 

[LesBaker]

View: https://twitter.com/MylesASimmons/status/552920832721186816

Mkay, Snead is spinning it nicely.

 

[den-the-coach]

Here's hoping the new guy helps the offense kick it up a notch or two...

Agreed the Rams finished 28th in total offense with Brian Schottenheimer, they can finish 28th in total offense without him!

 

[Speeps]

Peace out Brian. I was always hot and cold on Schotty. But I do think after three years, his offense was largely ineffective. There will be plenty of "buts," lets be real here, before he got here, he wasnt revolutionizing the NFL. I think Fisher needs an aggressive OC to match the aggressive nature of this football team.

We need a strong running game, good play action, and someone who will use the talents of the team.

 

[RamFan503]

That's what they do now. Or try to. But when you lose your WR1 and QB1, and have to switch between QB2-QB3 to make it work, while you have ROG and C who are playing poorly with veteran LT out and rookie LT in, how is that supposed to look? Can't really rely on Rookie RB1 and Sophomore RBs 2&3 to carry an offense enough to open up that downfield passing game with that O-line I just spoke about.

If we get an OC who can do that (with the same personnel), then I'll go punch Schotty in the face myself.

I completely disagree here (talk about setting myself up ). I think we tried to get too cute all too often. We had games where we came out and passed virtually every down to start the game and I don't think one of them was a long pass. We have first and goal at the one and we go empty backfield. We have Tavon run up the gut. We have our big receivers run little stops that require them to get those big bodies moving again.

I'm not totally bagging on Schotty. I thought he did a good job in a lot of games. But I also don't think our personnel is so bad that our offense rarely if ever could dictate on their side of the ball.

 

[-X-]

It's true. If Schotty's offensive numbers were better, my opinion of him would be higher.

Generally i put wins and losses on the HC and how well the units play on the coordinators. I mean we went 6-10, did Schotty, Fassel and GW really have the same year? Our defense and special teams are doing good things and sending players to the pro bowl. Our offense , not so much.

Here's hoping the new guy helps the offense kick it up a notch or two...

Well then let me ask you this. In all honesty, do you think personnel has more than a little bearing on how well/what an OC can do on offense?
Because here's a pretty good parallel:

Mike Martz, with the 49ers, had to work with this very same Shaun Hill (then in his prime) and J.T. O'Sullivan.
His only good receiver was Isaac Bruce (who didn't post a 1000 yards).
The team won 7 games.
Neither QB did well.
He got fired.

Conversely:

Mike Martz, with the Rams, had to work with Kurt Warner.
His best receivers were Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt (and Marshall Faulk out of the backfield)
His team went to and won a Super Bowl.
The QB did quite well (and did well without him too)
He got a HC gig.

 

[RamFan503]

When the Jets parted ways with BS Ryan went the opposite direction, was determined to be more of a smash mouth running team.

I kind of figure Jeff Fisher will do the same but we'll see...

So you're saying we are taking Todd Gurley with our first pick?

 

[Mackeyser]

There is no way we're going to be MORE of a smash mouth team.

They had the best OL in the league, arguably, and had QB issues while we have OL issues which no one can argue sanely as well as at the very least QB instability.

However Fisher seeks his radical change, it can't be using the "Ryan plan" because we just don't have the OL for it... not even close.

In the 2 years they went to the AFC Championship game, they rushed as a team for over 2700 yards and just shy of 2400 yards. We rush this year for less than 1700 yards. We're nowhere close to being able to transition to that type of offense.

Only worse transition would be switching our D to a 3-4...

 

[-X-]

I completely disagree here (talk about setting myself up ). I think we tried to get too cute all too often. We had games where we came out and passed virtually every down to start the game and I don't think one of them was a long pass. We have first and goal at the one and we go empty backfield. We have Tavon run up the gut. We have our big receivers run little stops that require them to get those big bodies moving again.

I'm not totally bagging on Schotty. I thought he did a good job in a lot of games. But I also don't think our personnel is so bad that our offense rarely if ever could dictate on their side of the ball.

Yeah, I'm not even talking about Schotty right now. I'm talking about the scheme. When I say that's what we do now, I didn't say we did it successfully. There have been many, many times where a play was open downfield, but the QB didn't connect on the throw, and oftentimes didn't have time to make a throw. As it relates to big plays (pass plays over 25 yards) the Rams ranked 14th. And that's with Hill and Davis. Same thing with the run. Rams ranked 14th in the league on big plays (run plays 10 yards or longer). I don't know how you can say we got too cute if the popular consensus is that we were too predictable. All y'all are gonna have to come to a consensus about what the main criticism of the Schotty offense really is. Discuss is over a lemon-filled donut or two and get back to me.

 

[-X-]

It's not like the QB (unless he's a new one), O-line, WRs, TEs and RBs would be starting from scratch. So many of the things that a rookie wouldn't know like recognizing a blitz to name just one of many, will not have to be relearned by the players we have regardless of differences in any offensive terminology and plays right? I think half the battle is already won with all our vets. Am I wrong in thinking that?

No, you're not wrong. They'll have anywhere between 2 or 3 years of experience by then, and that will help a little. My primary concern is with the idea that they'll have to learn a new offense and execute it together, when learning the first one was difficult on its own. You've heard the phrase, "As soon as I stopped thinking and started playing, everything was easier." A new offense (especially one that deviates greatly from the one they know) will come with quite a bit of thinking to start out.