CoachO, some remarks on the OL

PA Ram wrote:

New England.

Started 3 rookies first game of the season. They have been shuffling since.

You know, I have been following the New England example, and it’s misleading. That all reduces to Brady getting the ball out quick. That’s Brady. When he holds the ball longer the offense falls apart because the blocking isn’t there.

I have a whole thread on that. http://theramshuddle.com/topic/pff-on-how-patz-beat-miami-with-injured-ol/

For example, according to PFF Brady throws quick a higher percentage of the time than any other qb.

He is sacked 1.7% of the time on quick throws, and completes 70% of his quick passes.

In contrast, when they take longer to throw, he is sacked 14.9% of the time…which is just freaking bad…and completes 50% of his passes

And New England isn’t “other teams” plural. All the Patz example (singular) shows us is that if your line becomes a problem, it’s better to have Brady. Other than that, we already know from Rams history alone that when an OL gets damaged past a certain point, it falls off in effectiveness. (See Bulger, 2007-9, which is basically 3 successive years of extensive OL injuries).

New, young, inexperienced lines struggle.

Lines with multiple simultaneous injuries struggle. That’s all over the league, going back as far as you want.

Right now the Rams are dealing with both things.

And no it’s not true that other teams regularly start rookies (plural) AND plug in multiple injury replacements and do not struggle.

That’s a formula FOR struggling, and it’s invariable.

Unless, as I said, you have Brady.

.

Well, you probably will have a different example for any team I would name but the Packers(I know they have Aaaron Rodgers) have had a beat up line this year.

The Packers haven’t reached Rams levels of injuries. Any team can handle one or 2. That’s why you see me all the time talking about how qbs need a relatively healthy OL. The key, I always say, is multiple simultaneous injuries. A couple of different games there they were missing their center. No big, you can play with that. Last game they were missing a guard and a right tackle. It’s never Rams level in terms of multiple injuries. Against the Bengals, for example, the Rams had replacements at 3 positions, and 2 of the replacements were young inexperienced guards. In fact one reason they had to do that was because they had to move Reynolds to tackle, and they has to move Reynolds to tackle because they lost 3 guys at tackle–Havenstein, Williams, and Donnal.

Plus the Packers didn’t start out with a young inexperienced line.

There are no teams out there, PA, with Rams level multiple OL injuries AND a young inexperienced line to start with.

I have been paying close attention to this issue since 2007, when the Rams had 10 linemen injured, including 4 out for the season and 6 more missing multiple consecutive games, yet some fans were blaming Bulger for the offense sputtering. And when any team gets past the breaking point on OL injuries, it has an effect on the offense. We’ve known that for years from the Rams alone. I’ve been beating this drum since 2007.

When Green Bay gets to the point where they have Rams level injuries, it will be an issue I promise. And given that, they started out with a veteran line, not the very young and inexperienced line the Rams had.

Either way, this year the Packers offense is ranked 22nd so far, while last year they were ranked 6th. The problems in Green Bay, though, they say, come in the running game and from losing receivers.

wv wrote:

Does anyone have a list of the Rams OLinemen
who have been injured AND the weeks that
they went out ?

I think it would be interesting to see
WHEN the Line got to “bulgerization” level.
How many games were they healthy?

w
v

Okay, as a rule, I don’t count one or 2 replacements unless it’s both the center and the left tackle at the same time.

But that’s deceptive, because they started the season with a green GR at LOT, 2 rookies, and a first-time starter center.

The Rams played the same OL through week 4, when they lost Saffold. That’s no big deal because they just brought in Reynolds.

Against the Vikes they had to play Donnal at guard and move Reynolds to ROT. That’s because they lost both Havenstein and Williams at that point. But still, that’s just 2 changes, so it’s not critical in itself. You combine that with being so young and it’s not optimal, but a change at guard and ROT in itself is not critical mass type stuff.

In the Baltimore game, they lost Donnal, who was at ROT, and they were missing Brown, too. That’s when they had to move Reynolds to ROT and start Rhaney and Wichman at guard.

So then at that point, they had lost starters in Saffold, Brown, and Havenstein plus replacements in Williams and Donnal.

The low ebb OL was Robinson Rhaney Barnes Wichman Reynolds, with 3 injured ROTs (Havenstein, Wms, Donnal).

That’s at least better now (in injury terms) with Havenstein back, which also moves Reynolds back to guard.

What’s freaky about all this is this: starting in 2014 they added 8 linemen, including draft picks and a UDFA. Of those, only Donnal had a previous injury history. As of right now, 7 of those 8 have been injured for lengthy stretches.

wv wrote:

I do think losing Saffold was a big deal though. I just
think he meant a lot to the OLine

Could be. But he wasn’t playing especially well in 2015 for some reason.

.

wv wrote:

Ok, but he didnt “ignore” the OLine. He signed Jake Long,
Wells, etc. They didnt hold up.

InvaderRam wrote:

i really think this regime let it get to a point where it became a crisis.

I agree with WV. They didn’t ignore the OL before 2014. They just went about building it in a way you seem not to credit or accept as legit, for some reason.

They have a long list of linemen they acquired from 2012-2013 and actually did field good lines in that period when they weren’t wrecked by multiple multiple simultaneous injuries.

A lot of their acquisitions played well for the Rams on good lines, when they had never done anything before the Rams and then never did anything since, either. Some free agents left and became decent starters, so they weren’t all of the “didn’t do anything since” type. So for example Mike Person and Joe Barksdale are still playing. But while they contributed to good line play for the Rams in 2012 and 2013, guys like Richardson, Turner, Williams, and Smith didn’t do much after the Rams and all priced themselves out of the Rams budget which is why they left.

To me, not counting that kind of FA acquisition and only counting draft picks is a kind of blind spot.

For example in 99-2001 the OL included several guys who were precisely like the kinds of guys they brought in from 2012-14. Nutten, Gruttaduaria, McCollum, and Timmerman were all the same type of acquisition–a combo of both high and low market FAs. Same as 2012-13.

Honestly, you CAN build a line with that kind of player. Teams have done it for years. It is one of the ways you can build a line.

I really do believe there’s no real reason to downgrade one type of player over another type of player when it comes to OL building. There are lots of different ways to do that (build lines), and they can all work. Bringing in young vets and high market FAs is not failing to address the line, it’s addressing it> but in a way you seem to discount for some reason. But it DID work. When not injured those lines played well.

No approaches to line building work, though, when injuries get into high numbers and wipe out what you’ve built.

…

they took a bunch of retreads and injury risks and tried to fashion an oline out of it. and it blew up in their face.

IR, that’s just a spin. They did the exact same thing Vermeil did in 98–guys like Nutten and McCollum are just low market FAs. What you call retreads. Calling them retreads is spin. Or if you want we can use the term and say Vermeil and Hanifan made a good line out of retreads.

And no one they signed from the outside was an injury risk. (Saffold clearly was of course. But he’s the only 1.)

Wells had no prior history of significant injuries before the Rams. He played every game in 2011 and was a pro bowl selection. He had a routine scope after the season which had no effect on subsequent injuries. His long list of injuries with the Rams, including 2 bizarre infections (one of which landed him in ICU) had no connection to anything that happened to him before.

Long had issues with his arms causing 2 surgeries. The real issue there was, could he be the same player he was before the 2 surgeries. He actually was pretty good in 2013—PFF ranked him the 7th best OT overall in the league. The knee injuries had nothing to do with the arms and no one could, would, or did predict knee injuries, especially the freak occurrence of 2 to the same knee.

That stuff just happens…and bizarrely, it keeps happening. They signed as a UDFA or drafted 8 OL keepers in the last 2 years. All but one, Donnal, had no previous injury history. So far now 7 of those 8 have been injured. That was as predictable as saying that Long’s arm surgeries meant future knee injuries.

In terms of this year, injuries put them in the position to have to re-do the line. That wasn’t predictable, it just happened. At that point they had to choose between 2 poisons. (1) bring in veteran linemen and pay for them out of future cap space, or (2) go young and save the future cap space for their own 2016 free agents.

At least the way they chose promised the best benefits longterm.

Will a young OL struggle? Of course. But what has made it worse is…drumroll…more injuries. Havenstein is PFF’s best-ranked rookie lineman, but he missed time. So did 2 of his replacements—Williams then Donnal, both injured. (That means they lost 3 ROTs this year for various amounts of time.) That meant shifting Reynolds to OT and playing 2 of their least ready guys at guard (Rhaney and Wichman). So losing Hav then Brown meant a triple whammy.

The injuries KEEP happening, and it doesn’t matter if the guy was never injured before in his life (Hav) or if he had 2 arm surgeries and then managed to get completely unrelated knee injuries on top of it (Long).

.

some follow-up

===

CoachO

For all the flack Boudreau gets from some fans, there isn’t a coach on this team who is more detail oriented. He is constantly coaching these guys on technique. Be it hand placement, footwork or just correcting “who” they are supposed to block on any given play. So yes, they coach these guys on technique and fundamentals constantly.

From what I’ve been told, the issue is work ethic. Greg Robinson has never had to learn how to be better because he has always been so physically better than those he lined up against, that the “mental side” of his game was unnecessary. He played in a system at Auburn that had four running plays and one protection in pass pro.

Getting him in the film room and actually retaining the things they ask of him have been the biggest challenges.

I was told just the other day that there were at least three separate instances in the Cardinals game where he failed to recognize a blitz that came from the outside. After it was specifically made a point of emphasis during the week in both the film room and on the practice field. All three plays resulted in Foles running for his life and throwing the ball away.

The technique issues he has are more from not knowing what he is supposed to do on any given play which causes him to either hesitate at the snap or in the case of not recognizing the blitz, taking a false step inside and not being able to recover in time to handle his assignment.

It is more mental than physical. He just isn’t comfortable enough in his assignment which causes him to either hesitate or flat out do the wrong thing. I think it’s him not being mature enough to dedicate himself to do what it takes to “prepare as a professional.” I understand that the veterans of the unit (Barnes, Reynolds and Saffold) have tried to take him aside and show him how to watch film. How to prepare. And he just wasn’t all that interested in putting in the time.

A few weeks ago, I read something where he (Robinson) acknowledged that it has been an adjustment for him. He admitted that he’s always been able to get by on his physical skills and the struggles he was having were more from “off field” issues. I took this to mean “in the classroom”.

They have zero “other options”. He is a #2 draft pick. They are invested in him. But more than anything, with all the injuries, their hands are tied. Unfortunately moving him to guard won’t change the things he’s having issues with. And quite honestly might make it worse. His teammates are as frustrated as the fans are.

At some point the responsibility has to fall on the player. If that light bulb doesn’t come on soon, he won’t be in the league very long. On the other hand, assuming it clicks for him, he can and should be a very good LT for a decade.

Now with all that being said, I feel the need to say that we as fans tend to focus on individuals and how we think they are performing. Of all the units on any football team, the OLINE is all about cohesion. It’s not as much about the individuals as it is the sum of the parts. And with all the injuries there just isn’t going to be much cohesion and consistency. Robinson has lined up next to FIVE different guys who have taken their turn at LG in 12 weeks. That is bound to be an issue for a guy who is still trying to figure it out.

In terms of the offense, what I expect is that we see Boras change how they utilize some of the things that have been been “forgotten” in this system. And hopefully find a few more than the four plays on the play sheet that Cignetti ran. Specifically an intermediate passing game.

Run the ball all you want. But at some point you have to push the ball downfield. And I’m not talking about throwing it 40 yards downfield just to take a failed shot. Incorporate an attack that focuses on that 12-18 yard range. Something is seriously lacking so far.

I bet he makes it.

wv wrote:

Its interesting how the went in another direction
with Hav though. Havenstein was Mr Try-Hard,
from a pro-offense-school. Not a physical freak.
Just a tough, hardnosed football player.
And he seems to be working out.

An interesting detail about all of this. Some say the Rams should have taken Jake Matthews in 2014 instead of Robinson. Okay, I can see the case for that. One argument is that Matthews was more ready to go. He did have a rough first year, and not all it because of injury (though some of it was cause of injury), but he’s doing fine in his 2nd year.

But. According to PFF rankings, while Matthews in his 2nd year is (at present) ranked as the 19th OT overall, Havenstein in his 1st year is ranked 20th.