Softli not digging the offensive line's vibe right now

[Anonymous]

I won't pile on, but I am concerned.

I'm not piling on either. But yeah at this point I'm concerned too.

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Saffold missed most of OTAs getting back into medically cleared playing shape. Ojinakka was the LOT through most of that. I think people sometimes forget that.

The OL has barely played together yet.

And as for Smith a lot of reports have him playing better than he has for a while.

Another reminder about 2010.

Not only were they fine then--they actually started out rocky. Smith had been hurt in OTAs and was unable to practice for a while. He started practicing a week before the first preseason game. That game they also played Fraley. It was against Minnesotta and the whole OL was shakey. Bradford got bounced around. In Ramsland there was rioting over it--fan panic went to defcon 1. Then the Patz preseason game came along in a couple of weeks, and they were fine. They were fine all season after that.

In 2012, all this OL has to do is be like that 2010 OL, and that's the worst case scenario.

Well after seeing the scrimmage and a few practices lets put it this way. Smith lets long has his way with him. but he always gets a gets a piece of him and slows him down a little. Saffold wiffs several times on Quinn and Sims giving them a clean kill shot on Bradford.
Saffold has improved before being held back. Smith has regressed Since the pads came on.

Just cause they played a certain way 2 years ago doesn't mean they can play that way now.

There is 4 weeks before the first game so as they digest the new system and improve their foot work and positioning. Saffold will return to his level I'm sure.

Smith regresses any more and he will get cut.
This is a process and it will take weeks for the players to reach their max Q. But any previous season has no bearing on this season.

Others say different about Smith. (I don't buy that he's regressing, btw--it sounds more like he's struggling with being consistent playing in a new system with new technique. That's not regression and it is curable, especially in the given time frame: a month) The people who say he's actually okay are also people going to practices.

Meanwhile it doesn't matter because we already know Smith can be part of a decently effective OL cause he already has been (2010 again).

Like I said, in 2010, they did not field their actual OL until the 2nd preseason game, and Smith wasn't even practicing until 2 weeks before that (he had the injury in OTAs that effectively made Saffold the LOT). They weren't together in preseason game 1, they were better in preseason game 2, and then in game 3 against the Patz EVERYONE knew they would be fine--and they were. That means they came together as a cohesive unit in 3 weeks.

As I keep saying 2010 is very instructive. Same tackles, and the players around them that year were not as good as this year. And they held up okay then.

 

[Yamahopper]

Comparing years isn't going to help the Rams. There is no comparison. This group is this group. Smith playing better than before doesn't make me warm and fuzzy, for he had a LOT of room to improve. His improving doesn't mean he's good all of a sudden. His reported improvement is him being compared to himself, in a practice situation, it doesn't mean anything until we see it on the field. Other reports have Smith losing reps to Richardson, who certainly is no stall-worth at tackle, which doesn't mean that he or Smith won't "get it", they are still young.

But with their play and Saffold's injury, which I think yamahopper was referring to, I'm concerned.

The offensive line should be greater than their sum of parts, so the players don't really matter if they can't gel and be a cohesive group on the field. It's not a plug and play situation.

I'm not saying the sky is falling. I am saying that I am concerned. There are a lot of questions about this unit, more than any other unit on the field.

Agree 100%.

I"ve been to about 20 training camps. I have seen bad looking lines turn good by the first game. And good camp lines be brutal.
I would have never guessed Saffold would have gave up 11 sacks last year as well as he played in camp.

The will improve, they have the physical talent and the coaching. It's just putting it together.

 

[Yamahopper]

I won't pile on, but I am concerned.

I'm not piling on either. But yeah at this point I'm concerned too.

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Saffold missed most of OTAs getting back into medically cleared playing shape. Ojinakka was the LOT through most of that. I think people sometimes forget that.

The OL has barely played together yet.

And as for Smith a lot of reports have him playing better than he has for a while.

Another reminder about 2010.

Not only were they fine then--they actually started out rocky. Smith had been hurt in OTAs and was unable to practice for a while. He started practicing a week before the first preseason game. That game they also played Fraley. It was against Minnesotta and the whole OL was shakey. Bradford got bounced around. In Ramsland there was rioting over it--fan panic went to defcon 1. Then the Patz preseason game came along in a couple of weeks, and they were fine. They were fine all season after that.

In 2012, all this OL has to do is be like that 2010 OL, and that's the worst case scenario.

Well after seeing the scrimmage and a few practices lets put it this way. Smith lets long has his way with him. but he always gets a gets a piece of him and slows him down a little. Saffold wiffs several times on Quinn and Sims giving them a clean kill shot on Bradford.
Saffold has improved before being held back. Smith has regressed Since the pads came on.

Just cause they played a certain way 2 years ago doesn't mean they can play that way now.

There is 4 weeks before the first game so as they digest the new system and improve their foot work and positioning. Saffold will return to his level I'm sure.

Smith regresses any more and he will get cut.
This is a process and it will take weeks for the players to reach their max Q. But any previous season has no bearing on this season.

Others say different about Smith. (I don't buy that he's regressing, btw--it sounds more like he's struggling with being consistent playing in a new system with new technique. That's not regression and it is curable, especially in the given time frame: a month) The people who say he's actually okay are also people going to practices.

Meanwhile it doesn't matter because we already know Smith can be part of a decently effective OL cause he already has been (2010 again).

Like I said, in 2010, they did not field their actual OL until the 2nd preseason game, and Smith wasn't even practicing until 2 weeks before that (he had the injury in OTAs that effectively made Saffold the LOT). They weren't together in preseason game 1, they were better in preseason game 2, and then in game 3 against the Patz EVERYONE knew they would be fine--and they were. That means they came together as a cohesive unit in 3 weeks.

As I keep saying 2010 is very instructive. Same tackles, and the players around them that year were not as good as this year. And they held up okay then.

Gee I must have missed you at practice.....What color shirt were you wearing.

 

[Anonymous]

I won't pile on, but I am concerned.

I'm not piling on either. But yeah at this point I'm concerned too.

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Saffold missed most of OTAs getting back into medically cleared playing shape. Ojinakka was the LOT through most of that. I think people sometimes forget that.

The OL has barely played together yet.

And as for Smith a lot of reports have him playing better than he has for a while.

Another reminder about 2010.

Not only were they fine then--they actually started out rocky. Smith had been hurt in OTAs and was unable to practice for a while. He started practicing a week before the first preseason game. That game they also played Fraley. It was against Minnesotta and the whole OL was shakey. Bradford got bounced around. In Ramsland there was rioting over it--fan panic went to defcon 1. Then the Patz preseason game came along in a couple of weeks, and they were fine. They were fine all season after that.

In 2012, all this OL has to do is be like that 2010 OL, and that's the worst case scenario.

Well after seeing the scrimmage and a few practices lets put it this way. Smith lets long has his way with him. but he always gets a gets a piece of him and slows him down a little. Saffold wiffs several times on Quinn and Sims giving them a clean kill shot on Bradford.
Saffold has improved before being held back. Smith has regressed Since the pads came on.

Just cause they played a certain way 2 years ago doesn't mean they can play that way now.

There is 4 weeks before the first game so as they digest the new system and improve their foot work and positioning. Saffold will return to his level I'm sure.

Smith regresses any more and he will get cut.
This is a process and it will take weeks for the players to reach their max Q. But any previous season has no bearing on this season.

Others say different about Smith. (I don't buy that he's regressing, btw--it sounds more like he's struggling with being consistent playing in a new system with new technique. That's not regression and it is curable, especially in the given time frame: a month) The people who say he's actually okay are also people going to practices.

Meanwhile it doesn't matter because we already know Smith can be part of a decently effective OL cause he already has been (2010 again).

Like I said, in 2010, they did not field their actual OL until the 2nd preseason game, and Smith wasn't even practicing until 2 weeks before that (he had the injury in OTAs that effectively made Saffold the LOT). They weren't together in preseason game 1, they were better in preseason game 2, and then in game 3 against the Patz EVERYONE knew they would be fine--and they were. That means they came together as a cohesive unit in 3 weeks.

As I keep saying 2010 is very instructive. Same tackles, and the players around them that year were not as good as this year. And they held up okay then.

Gee I must have missed you at practice.....What color shirt were you wearing.

I'm the guy reading everyone else who has been at practice too.

Like I said: The people who say he's actually okay are also people going to practices. I read all of them. Naturally you're going to see things how you see them, but from my POV, there's actually widely varying accounts. I can't take that info--that there's widely varying accounts--and say "okay Yama says he's the one that's right so that settles that." Cause see the others are saying THEY'RE right.

What that means is that I just recollect that Smith was fine in 2010 after a shakey start in the preseason. (And that's without going against the 1s every practice and that's with Long still developing.) I don't see anything (other than possible injury) that suggests a more experienced Smith can't AT LEAST do again what he already did in 2010.

 

[JdashSTL]

Im not all that concerned because I think Fisher/Schotty will be committed to running the ball, and overall, they will have a plan in place (running the ball, quick passes, extra blockers to help the OL, similarities to our 2010 offense, etc) to protect him if the line is a bit shaky. Positive thoughts. :mrgreen:

 

[-X-]

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Read him again. To Yama, after having observed practices, Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field. And that's consistent with a lot of reports out there. I've read too many reports of Saffold getting handled by Quinn and Sims, and pounding the turf in frustration. His footwork has been inconsistent as well.

Smith, according to all the reports I (also) read, has cleaned up his technique a little, is still a good run-blocker, but STILL can get handled in pass pro. Now again, this is against Long, and that's no easy task, but a good offensive tackle will hold his own as often as he loses the battle. That's not the case right now.

I agree with Yama that 2010 means very little when it comes to this year. Scheme in 2010 was what kept the O-line as a whole looking somewhat efficient. That, and health. That said, I wouldn't use that as a barometer for future success. The offensive line in 2010 didn't rank all that high. 26th, in fact.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2010

I know everyone has their opinions about this, and there is no shortage of accounts about what's happening out there, but we should avoid trying to tell people they're wrong about what they see. If one guy says Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field, then why would you tell him that's inaccurate without having seen what he sees? Echoing what other people say in contrast isn't a rebuttal. We should instead glean that kind of information and find out more about what he sees. His account is consistent with a lot of media types out there too (Softli, Sando), so we should let him express that and not try to discount it.

JMO.

 

[-X-]

Here's a different strategy.

Walk-on civilians and buckets.

 

[Yamahopper]

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Read him again. To Yama, after having observed practices, Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field. And that's consistent with a lot of reports out there. I've read too many reports of Saffold getting handled by Quinn and Sims, and pounding the turf in frustration. His footwork has been inconsistent as well.

Smith, according to all the reports I (also) read, has cleaned up his technique a little, is still a good run-blocker, but STILL can get handled in pass pro. Now again, this is against Long, and that's no easy task, but a good offensive tackle will hold his own as often as he loses the battle. That's not the case right now.

I agree with Yama that 2010 means very little when it comes to this year. Scheme in 2010 was what kept the O-line as a whole looking somewhat efficient. That, and health. That said, I wouldn't use that as a barometer for future success. The offensive line in 2010 didn't rank all that high. 26th, in fact.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2010

I know everyone has their opinions about this, and there is no shortage of accounts about what's happening out there, but we should avoid trying to tell people they're wrong about what they see. If one guy says Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field, then why would you tell him that's inaccurate without having seen what he sees? Echoing what other people say in contrast isn't a rebuttal. We should instead glean that kind of information and find out more about what he sees. His account is consistent with a lot of media types out there too (Softli, Sando), so we should let him express that and not try to discount it.

JMO.

I can flip this around and it would be 100% correct from me and others. Quinn and Long can't handle Smith and Saffold at times in the run game. That's not a knock on Quinn and Long, it's just how it is.When S&S lock on they can take them to the bus. But to me that's not a concern.

Some of the issues is the wide nine look and just dealing with the speed off the edge. This is not from a lack of effort. It's a process that will take most of the season. These guys get coached constantly. Some aspects seem new to the players and there is a adaption time.
This can be fixed. But yes it is concerning esp. on Saffold's part since how well he played his first year. If reports said Bradford was throwing picks and missing his targets that would be just as concerning cause that's not him.

2 things I said I want clarify. Smith has regressed....Yes, but not from prev. years but from his first couple practices. I thought his footwork and quickness was much improved. He is not worse than past seasons. He was decent then so he's still decent.
Could he get cut? ...Why not, if they keep 3 T's and he's not in the top 3 yeah he could go.

I never am comfortable reporting much from camp. Rams park is minutes from my work, I make most of them. This is all subjective. When I read other reports of the same practice I was at sometimes I agree others it's like WTF that's not what I saw. Much like watching a real game.

But if you know what good football should look like then that's how you should compare what you see to that. Jim Hanifan told me that after a practice years ago when I said hi to him and asked how things looked.

 

[-X-]

I can flip this around and it would be 100% correct from me and others. Quinn and Long can't handle Smith and Saffold at times in the run game. That's not a knock on Quinn and Long, it's just how it is.When S&S lock on they can take them to the bus. But to me that's not a concern.

Some of the issues is the wide nine look and just dealing with the speed off the edge. This is not from a lack of effort. It's a process that will take most of the season. These guys get coached constantly. Some aspects seem new to the players and there is a adaption time.
This can be fixed. But yes it is concerning esp. on Saffold's part since how well he played his first year. If reports said Bradford was throwing picks and missing his targets that would be just as concerning cause that's not him.

2 things I said I want clarify. Smith has regressed....Yes, but not from prev. years but from his first couple practices. I thought his footwork and quickness was much improved. He is not worse than past seasons. He was decent then so he's still decent.
Could he get cut? ...Why not, if they keep 3 T's and he's not in the top 3 yeah he could go.

I never am comfortable reporting much from camp. Rams park is minutes from my work, I make most of them. This is all subjective. When I read other reports of the same practice I was at sometimes I agree others it's like WTF that's not what I saw. Much like watching a real game.

But if you know what good football should look like then that's how you should compare what you see to that. Jim Hanifan told me that after a practice years ago when I said hi to him and asked how things looked.

Cool, thanks.

It *is* encouraging that the run blocking is looking good. Like lots of people have said, that's kinda gonna be key to establishing protections for Bradford. You obviously want a defense playing the guessing game on any given down as opposed to having them planting cleats and pinning ears back. I like the addition of 2 speed backs as well. Smash it down your throat with Jax or bounce it to the outside with Pead or Richardson, and then play-fake it for a 40 yard bomb.

Tell me, did you see them working on screens much? And if so, did they look good in that capacity?

 

[Anonymous]

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Read him again. To Yama, after having observed practices, Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field. And that's consistent with a lot of reports out there. I've read too many reports of Saffold getting handled by Quinn and Sims, and pounding the turf in frustration. His footwork has been inconsistent as well.

Smith, according to all the reports I (also) read, has cleaned up his technique a little, is still a good run-blocker, but STILL can get handled in pass pro. Now again, this is against Long, and that's no easy task, but a good offensive tackle will hold his own as often as he loses the battle. That's not the case right now.

I agree with Yama that 2010 means very little when it comes to this year. Scheme in 2010 was what kept the O-line as a whole looking somewhat efficient. That, and health. That said, I wouldn't use that as a barometer for future success. The offensive line in 2010 didn't rank all that high. 26th, in fact.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2010

I know everyone has their opinions about this, and there is no shortage of accounts about what's happening out there, but we should avoid trying to tell people they're wrong about what they see. If one guy says Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field, then why would you tell him that's inaccurate without having seen what he sees? Echoing what other people say in contrast isn't a rebuttal. We should instead glean that kind of information and find out more about what he sees. His account is consistent with a lot of media types out there too (Softli, Sando), so we should let him express that and not try to discount it.

JMO.

I know what he said. (And other people who have observed practices have said different things. Not everyone who watches practice is as concerned about those guys.)

To me, one difference right now is simply that Saffold wasn't practicing until very recently. He's not as in sync as the others.

Saffold's still the better tackle. I'm just counting all the factors.

Echoing what other people say wasn't a rebuttal, it is simply pointing out that from my perspective, the witnesses are all saying different things---therefore, I don't have the luxury of simply deciding which one is "right." It also means that people see things differently, and given that, no one report can ever be taken as gospel.

On what basis would anyone reading ALL the reports choose. Because the writer insists he's right? Well but they ALL do.

So to me one witness insisting on what they saw is still one witness among others, many of whom are seeing DIFFERENT things or not judging things the same way.

In that scenario what a guy like me does is use logic to try and calculate some odds.

Odds tell me the 2 OTs won't be any different, basically, than they were in 2010. Unless something has changed. In 2011 many things changed. No off-season, Saffold reported out of shape. None of that is true in 2012. They had an off-season. Saffold reported in shape.

 

[Yamahopper]

I can flip this around and it would be 100% correct from me and others. Quinn and Long can't handle Smith and Saffold at times in the run game. That's not a knock on Quinn and Long, it's just how it is.When S&S lock on they can take them to the bus. But to me that's not a concern.

Some of the issues is the wide nine look and just dealing with the speed off the edge. This is not from a lack of effort. It's a process that will take most of the season. These guys get coached constantly. Some aspects seem new to the players and there is a adaption time.
This can be fixed. But yes it is concerning esp. on Saffold's part since how well he played his first year. If reports said Bradford was throwing picks and missing his targets that would be just as concerning cause that's not him.

2 things I said I want clarify. Smith has regressed....Yes, but not from prev. years but from his first couple practices. I thought his footwork and quickness was much improved. He is not worse than past seasons. He was decent then so he's still decent.
Could he get cut? ...Why not, if they keep 3 T's and he's not in the top 3 yeah he could go.

I never am comfortable reporting much from camp. Rams park is minutes from my work, I make most of them. This is all subjective. When I read other reports of the same practice I was at sometimes I agree others it's like WTF that's not what I saw. Much like watching a real game.

But if you know what good football should look like then that's how you should compare what you see to that. Jim Hanifan told me that after a practice years ago when I said hi to him and asked how things looked.

Cool, thanks.

It *is* encouraging that the run blocking is looking good. Like lots of people have said, that's kinda gonna be key to establishing protections for Bradford. You obviously want a defense playing the guessing game on any given down as opposed to having them planting cleats and pinning ears back. I like the addition of 2 speed backs as well. Smash it down your throat with Jax or bounce it to the outside with Pead or Richardson, and then play-fake it for a 40 yard bomb.

Tell me, did you see them working on screens much? And if so, did they look good in that capacity?

They do run screens every practice, they look good. Oline seems to be getting out in front better than the past couple. The D blows them up sometimes , but i think they know the O's play calls. lol.

I will say this....Pead wow just wow. He has trouble with his hands and drops some but when he grabs it he has a real shot of taking it to the house. Best shot by any Rams in years.
Open field. Pead= Hakim.
He's also got some work in the slot. Not sure what that means. This part of camp is vanilla. the sprinkles on
top come later in the closed sections.

Here's my general camp observations.

Rams look better at this point since maybe 03.
Not a knock at all but this camp looks really well run.
the D can stop the run, gap discipline and bigger bodies.
Bradford looks happy. Jax looks quicker.
Lots of dink and dunk but that's okay, got to learn to walk before you can run.
How far the passing game will go is up to the TE play. Seems to be a key element. Lots of packages for WR's.

This will be a pretty decent team from the get go just cause they can play some defense and run the ball.
But if the health of the team holds this will be a very good team the second half the year.

 

[Anonymous]

Some of the issues is the wide nine look and just dealing with the speed off the edge.

Here's the difference.

Chances are that never, during the season, will the Rams 2 OTs be isolated one on one against 2 top DEs in a wide 9 look.

Why not.

Fisher offenses use a 6th lineman in the form of a blocking TE. They also build in other support. There are other ways they can draw up the protections so you don't end up with 2 OTs each going naked against 2 DEs in a wide 9.

The defense will not always know when the Rams are going to pass or run. The Rams offense is designed to make them worry about the run.

They are apparently going to emphasize a quick throw ball control passing game as their base. Not every pass of course but apparently, that's their base.

So the reason I was not as concerned as most when reading about the 2 OTs losing some in that situation is that situation is artificial in a lot of ways.

 

[-X-]

Thanks for your observations, Yama.

Open field. Pead= Hakim.

... and I've seen that stated more than once. Which is kinda awesome.

 

[Yamahopper]

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Read him again. To Yama, after having observed practices, Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field. And that's consistent with a lot of reports out there. I've read too many reports of Saffold getting handled by Quinn and Sims, and pounding the turf in frustration. His footwork has been inconsistent as well.

Smith, according to all the reports I (also) read, has cleaned up his technique a little, is still a good run-blocker, but STILL can get handled in pass pro. Now again, this is against Long, and that's no easy task, but a good offensive tackle will hold his own as often as he loses the battle. That's not the case right now.

I agree with Yama that 2010 means very little when it comes to this year. Scheme in 2010 was what kept the O-line as a whole looking somewhat efficient. That, and health. That said, I wouldn't use that as a barometer for future success. The offensive line in 2010 didn't rank all that high. 26th, in fact.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2010

I know everyone has their opinions about this, and there is no shortage of accounts about what's happening out there, but we should avoid trying to tell people they're wrong about what they see. If one guy says Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field, then why would you tell him that's inaccurate without having seen what he sees? Echoing what other people say in contrast isn't a rebuttal. We should instead glean that kind of information and find out more about what he sees. His account is consistent with a lot of media types out there too (Softli, Sando), so we should let him express that and not try to discount it.

JMO.

I know what he said. (And other people who have observed practices have said different things. Not everyone who watches practice is as concerned about those guys.)

To me, one difference right now is simply that Saffold wasn't practicing until very recently. He's not as in sync as the others.

Saffold's still the better tackle. I'm just counting all the factors.

Echoing what other people say wasn't a rebuttal, it is simply pointing out that from my perspective, the witnesses are all saying different things---therefore, I don't have the luxury of simply deciding which one is "right." It also means that people see things differently, and given that, no one report can ever be taken as gospel.

On what basis would anyone reading ALL the reports choose. Because the writer insists he's right? Well but they ALL do.

So to me one witness insisting on what they saw is still one witness among others, many of whom are seeing DIFFERENT things or not judging things the same way.

In that scenario what a guy like me does is use logic to try and calculate some odds.

Odds tell me the 2 OTs won't be any different, basically, than they were in 2010. Unless something has changed. In 2011 many things changed. No off-season, Saffold reported out of shape. None of that is true in 2012. They had an off-season. Saffold reported in shape.

All I can say is LT's can not wiff. Ever. When you wiff you go to the bottom of the list and the QB goes on IR.
Smith at times has looked very good. At times he has looked like the best T. Other times not so much. Saffold. Yes did miss some time. He does look good then like Smith not so much. Saffold gave up 11 sacks last year, and projected out to around 17 for a full season.Many of those he just got beat by the other guy. Scheme was not a issue. So he bears watching. The Oline does miore than pass pro. Please keep that in mind.
This is a process that will take most of the season.

Each year in the NFL you have to earn it. The past is done and gone. The waiver wire is the road of good intentions.


And I didn't mean to be a smart arse earlier in the the thread. Sorry.

 

[Anonymous]

Scheme was not a issue. So he bears watching. The Oline does miore than pass pro. Please keep that in mind.
This is a process that will take most of the season.

Each year in the NFL you have to earn it. The past is done and gone. The waiver wire is the road of good intentions.


And I didn't mean to be a smart arse earlier in the the thread. Sorry.

All due respect, okay? But we just see this entire thing differently.

This is how I see it. Scheme was always an issue last year. From the get go. McD tended not to plug in help, he tended to have a higher percentage of longer drops by the qb, and he often had elaborate protection schemes that did not make the most of the OL he did have. I don't recall a whole lot of screens last year, for example. He tended not to account for the inexperience of his personnel, and this compounded problems because the more mistakes they made the worse situations it put them in. So you would get a drop, a sack, a false start, and then the thing was impossible.

They installed it all in a rush, and as you said, it takes time to adapt to new techniques and new approaches, and they never had that time last year. So you had an entire line that was out of sync and overcompensating for it--ie. pressing. Both Snead and Devaney said that about the 2010 OL (referring of course to before the injuries). Snead got it from film and Devaney was there, straight up saying they were not comfortable.

At the individual level, Brown was out of shape and tanking. Saffold reported out of shape and was never up to speed feeling comfortable in the offense.

I have read a lot of reports about line play last year and many of them do not correspond to what I was seeing. What I was seeing was not individual failures undermining plays. I saw an entire offense that struggled being on the same page.

For example, Saffold was pressing and out of sync so he false starts. That puts the team in deeper down and distance, with more odds against him. Do you count the individual block when they finally run the 2nd and extra long play that came from the false start? Or wouldn't it have been better to have a more confident OL that knew the system better at a more instinctive level and so never got itself in those situations?

When people talk about earning it, they are talking about the players's individual effort. So for example, from the point of view of a player, it doesn't matter who is injured, you still have to play your best. But from the point of view of someone ANALYZING, yes injuries hamper a team and it's not excuses. So yes Saffold has to put in as much effort as 2010. But from the point of view of analysis from the outside, IF these 2 tackles can pull off 2010, they can do it again. So in a way when we address that, we're just talking about different things.

If this team can do 2010, they can do 2010 again with the same OTs...IF nothing else has changed for the worse (which it DID in 2011).

I am not talking about history repeating. I am talking about a basic, logical level of expectation. If they are capable of one 2010 they are capable of another 2010. UNLESS SOMETHING HAS CHANGED.

 

[ramsince62]

Not to sound like a wet blanket, but whatever happened in 2010 is completely irrelevant. It's history and as such, it has no place in 2012....However, for the sake of discussion, I don't see 2010 as that great a bench mark to begin with, other than it was better than 2009, see what I mean?

I think many tend to over look the following, the 2010 team didn't beat anyone with a winning record and the schedule was REALLY soft period. :nono:

Now let's play some football.............................

 

[-X-]

If this team can do 2010, they can do 2010 again with the same OTs...IF nothing else has changed for the worse (which it DID in 2011).

I am not talking about history repeating. I am talking about a basic, logical level of expectation. If they are capable of one 2010 they are capable of another 2010. UNLESS SOMETHING HAS CHANGED.

This is a good discussion.

But see, here's where I see a logical fallacy. You're referring to *they* being the same or better than 2010, but *they* refers to an entire unit in 2010. That unit was in a different system than they are in now, so I don't think you can compare the two units. (A) because there's only two guys carried over from that year, and (B) it's an entirely different coaching staff & scheme.

If you're saying that both tackles can be as good as they were in 2010, then okay. But, how good were they being part of an offensive line that ranked in the bottom of the league? I agree that they're more experienced and subsequently could be better individual players, but as you know, that's only 2/5ths of the line; and as the topic suggests, it's anything but a perceived strength.

Hopefully Boudreau can put it all together, and hopefully they all stay healthy. That's what we all want. At this point there are people with concerns, and others who have more faith that this scheme will produce a better overall unit. I can see that side of it too because of Fisher's statements about "protection" extending beyond just having a better offensive line.

 

[Anonymous]

If this team can do 2010, they can do 2010 again with the same OTs...IF nothing else has changed for the worse (which it DID in 2011).

I am not talking about history repeating. I am talking about a basic, logical level of expectation. If they are capable of one 2010 they are capable of another 2010. UNLESS SOMETHING HAS CHANGED.

This is a good discussion.

But see, here's where I see a logical fallacy. You're referring to *they* being the same or better than 2010, but *they* refers to an entire unit in 2010. That unit was in a different system than they are in now, so I don't think you can compare the two units. (A) because there's only two guys carried over from that year, and (B) it's an entirely different coaching staff & scheme.

If you're saying that both tackles can be as good as they were in 2010, then okay. But, how good were they being part of an offensive line that ranked in the bottom of the league? I agree that they're more experienced and subsequently could be better individual players, but as you know, that's only 2/5ths of the line; and as the topic suggests, it's anything but a perceived strength.

Hopefully Boudreau can put it all together, and hopefully they all stay healthy. That's what we all want. At this point there are people with concerns, and others who have more faith that this scheme will produce a better overall unit. I can see that side of it too because of Fisher's statements about "protection" extending beyond just having a better offensive line.

All I *am* saying is that the 2 tackles can be as good as 2010. Executing an offense like that.

Now, however? Everything else AROUND THEM is BETTER.

Remember what 2010 means. 2010 means a ball control passing game with an emphasis on qb protection. And yes they can do that again.

But this time the qb is a vet, there are more and better and healthier WRs, the RB is healthy and he has helpmates, and they TEs are better.

Different staff and scheme don't mean much in this respect--one reason we may see 2010 again is that THESE GUYS recognize that the players can DO THAT. In other words, like in 2010 itself, what's happening now is that pragmatic coaches who build around what the players CAN do are deliberately doing THAT again. Th present coaches got the idea from watching film of 2010, in fact. And we know Brian S can design and execute a ball control passing game--he has already done it.

But, again, this will be 2010...but BETTER.

 

[DR RAM]

The concerning thing is Smith at times is the best tackle on the field.

But he isn't. Saffold is.

Read him again. To Yama, after having observed practices, Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field. And that's consistent with a lot of reports out there. I've read too many reports of Saffold getting handled by Quinn and Sims, and pounding the turf in frustration. His footwork has been inconsistent as well.

Smith, according to all the reports I (also) read, has cleaned up his technique a little, is still a good run-blocker, but STILL can get handled in pass pro. Now again, this is against Long, and that's no easy task, but a good offensive tackle will hold his own as often as he loses the battle. That's not the case right now.

I agree with Yama that 2010 means very little when it comes to this year. Scheme in 2010 was what kept the O-line as a whole looking somewhat efficient. That, and health. That said, I wouldn't use that as a barometer for future success. The offensive line in 2010 didn't rank all that high. 26th, in fact.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2010

I know everyone has their opinions about this, and there is no shortage of accounts about what's happening out there, but we should avoid trying to tell people they're wrong about what they see. If one guy says Smith is [at times] the best tackle on the field, then why would you tell him that's inaccurate without having seen what he sees? Echoing what other people say in contrast isn't a rebuttal. We should instead glean that kind of information and find out more about what he sees. His account is consistent with a lot of media types out there too (Softli, Sando), so we should let him express that and not try to discount it.

JMO.

I know what he said. (And other people who have observed practices have said different things. Not everyone who watches practice is as concerned about those guys.)

To me, one difference right now is simply that Saffold wasn't practicing until very recently. He's not as in sync as the others.

Saffold's still the better tackle. I'm just counting all the factors.

Echoing what other people say wasn't a rebuttal, it is simply pointing out that from my perspective, the witnesses are all saying different things---therefore, I don't have the luxury of simply deciding which one is "right." It also means that people see things differently, and given that, no one report can ever be taken as gospel.

On what basis would anyone reading ALL the reports choose. Because the writer insists he's right? Well but they ALL do.

So to me one witness insisting on what they saw is still one witness among others, many of whom are seeing DIFFERENT things or not judging things the same way.

In that scenario what a guy like me does is use logic to try and calculate some odds.

Odds tell me the 2 OTs won't be any different, basically, than they were in 2010. Unless something has changed. In 2011 many things changed. No off-season, Saffold reported out of shape. None of that is true in 2012. They had an off-season. Saffold reported in shape.

All I can say is LT's can not wiff. Ever. When you wiff you go to the bottom of the list and the QB goes on IR.
Smith at times has looked very good. At times he has looked like the best T. Other times not so much. Saffold. Yes did miss some time. He does look good then like Smith not so much. Saffold gave up 11 sacks last year, and projected out to around 17 for a full season.Many of those he just got beat by the other guy. Scheme was not a issue. So he bears watching. The Oline does miore than pass pro. Please keep that in mind.
This is a process that will take most of the season.

Each year in the NFL you have to earn it. The past is done and gone. The waiver wire is the road of good intentions.


And I didn't mean to be a smart arse earlier in the the thread. Sorry.

zn, you just can't seem to take some being concerned as what it is. We think and hope that they will improve, but there are some issues right now. That is OK. You can't beat people over the head until they are not concerned. I can't beat you over the head, until you are concerned.

Obviously, you think that Scott Wells will step in and be brilliant right away. He will mesh perfectly with Sam and every other lineman and tight end. The center to QB snaps will automatically be perfect.

And then whichever guard that wins the LG spot will know every in and out of Saffold and Wells.

And whoever wins the RT spot will work in perfect unison with the TE and Dahl at RT, unless Dahl is the RT, which means the questions are reversed.

Don't mistake people being concerned with people who are saying the Rams OL will suck.

Even this first preseason game won't tell us too much. I bet two or three lineman that start the game on Sunday will not be playing the same position by real game one.

 

[Anonymous]

zn, you just can't seem to take some being concerned as what it is. We think and hope that they will improve, but there are some issues right now. That is OK. You can't beat people over the head until they are not concerned. I can't beat you over the head, until you are concerned.

Obviously, you think that Scott Wells will step in and be brilliant right away. He will mesh perfectly with Sam and every other lineman and tight end. The center to QB snaps will automatically be perfect.

And then whichever guard that wins the LG spot will know every in and out of Saffold and Wells.

And whoever wins the RT spot will work in perfect unison with the TE and Dahl at RT, unless Dahl is the RT, which means the questions are reversed.

Don't mistake people being concerned with people who are saying the Rams OL will suck.

Even this first preseason game won't tell us too much. I bet two or three lineman that start the game on Sunday will not be playing the same position by real game one.

I dunno, doc. I keep seeing your version of me as very different from mine. First, I just disagree with the kinds of concerns people are expressing. That;s okay, right? To disagree? And I discuss it as long as others discuss it, that being what discussion is--why is one point of view being stated in relation to another point of view supposed to be beating anyone over the head? I state my piece, you guys state yours, I reply...it's conversation.

No it's not obvious that I think wells will step in and be brilliant right away but I am not worried about him getting up to speed and being effective. It has nothing to do with anything being perfect, I just think it's a less challenging task to be effective within this time frame than you do. Since none of us has a scientifically ratified chart of NFL line cohesion attainment, then one view is as good as another when it comes to this...it's contrasting pictures of the situation. Again, just conversation.

Same with guard. They will have enough to be effective. I'm not worried.

Again, you're using the word perfect. That has nothing to do with what I'm saying. I am saying they will have enough to be effective, and that;s fine. And why not. We can't check our predictions against the Oxford Fully Ratified Chart of Line Cohesion deadlines...so naturally this will produce different opinions.

I DIDN'T mistake people being concerned for people saying the OL would suck. What happened is that I don't share their level of concern and that difference makes for conversation.

IF any of the linemen who start on Sunday are not the same as week 1, then, that would not be the first time. That was true of 2010, too. But the only position I personally expect to be anywhere near up in the air is left guard.