(premature but here goes) theory

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Rams Huddle (premature but here goes) theory

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #55313
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    On the offense, particularly the run game, I’ve seen people questioning coaching, and personnel. I honestly don’t think it has anything to do with any of that.

    Last year the very things we’re looking at were better. And Boudreau has been a very good OL coach for a long time. Even previous Rams OLs were good in those periods where they were not F’d up by injuries. So you have to ask what changed.

    I will say this. I don’t see a line with bad schemes or inadequate personnel. Instead I see exactly what I saw to start the season in 2009, 2011 and to a lesser extent 2012–an offense out of sync with itself. Why? New system. If you have LINEMEN who are somewhat “off” because a system is new and they are not quite in tune with it, then your offense struggles. AND when that happens you also see guys pressing. Trying to make something happen.

    Personally I think the factors are obvious. But to make sure of this, I want to see if there is improvement in the run game, even incremental improvement. Because here are a combination of factors at work.

    1. It the history of teams moving, only one had a winning record the year after a move. Say what you will, but, moving apparently subtracts from a team being ready. That’s the history.

    2. Being out of sync is a scheme install thing. Players not quite there yet with the new scheme. We keep hearing that they changed the offense more than we realized.

    3. Boras has never installed an offense before as a coordinator.

    IF this theory is right and that series of things combines to make them out of sync and pressing and not fully “in tune” the way they were at the end of the season last year, then there ought to be improvement in certain areas as the offense becomes more comfortable.

    The key to that is the running game. Does it improve. Actually the passing game already has, and in fact is better than it has been for years (yes even with Keenum because Keenum IMO is better than Foles [at least the melted down version], Davis, Hill, and Clemens).

    What about the defense? Well the defense did have issues in Game 1 but they rapidly fixed that by altering their approach some. But then this is their 3rd year in that system and they have been coached to adjust rapidly (see for example the Bills game where the defense was one thing in the 1st half and another thing in the 2nd half…and that was with a new and different DL).

    If the run game starts to gel, I will be convinced of this.

    I will NOT be able to convince those who put it all on the coaches, though. But for me it’s real. I saw what being out of sync meant at the start of 2009, 2011, and to an extent 2012. You can SEE IT if you are used to seeing it.

    #55314
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I hope you’re right.

    In the mean time, playcalling should be adjusted while the offense grows in sync.

    There are some things that are working better than others, and they could go to those plays more often than they do – which in turn would relax the “pressing” in other areas.

    So…I have officially started the Boras Skeptic Society. There will be a Facebook page soon.

    #55315
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I hope you’re right.

    In the mean time, playcalling should be adjusted while the offense grows in sync.

    There are some things that are working better than others, and they could go to those plays more often than they do – which in turn would relax the “pressing” in other areas.

    So…I have officially started the Boras Skeptic Society. There will be a Facebook page soon.

    If they are out of sync then playcalling makes no difference.

    In terms of teams changing what they call, that happens all the time in the course of a season. This is a young team with basically a new OL. Knowing what to call for your personnel takes time. Compare GW’s first year with the D v. this year. They can adjust rapidly and were able to do things like shut down Buffalo in the 2nd half because GW knows what to do with these guys AND the players KNOW the system. Meanwhile Boras is new to them and they are new to Boras, as a coordinator, and that includes a relatively inexperienced OL, which is always tricky.

    The last thing we want is to hire yet another NEW coordinator. But either way I don’t see problems in that regard. I just don’t. And I complained about the coordinator at length in 2006 (when it was really Linehan) and in 2011 (McD). I am not an automatic coordinator defender.

    But back to the main point. If they are out of sync then our judgment of playcalling will not be based on anything. Under those conditions, what looks like a bad call could actually be a play screwed up by execution issues, and we would not be able to tell the difference (fans are notoriously incapable sometimes of sorting out execution from playcalling…because they cannot possibly know if a play was executed properly. Only a coach watching film can tell that.) So we may dislike a certain type of play NOW but then when they are settled in, and comfortable, and playing at a 2nd nature level, that very same play could work like gangbusters.

    I will be on the Doubt Boras bandwagon on the other hand if the run game NEVER works, all season.

    #55324
    sanbagger
    Participant

    I have wondered the same thing. I’ll even go as far as saying if that theory holds up what we saw early on as opposed to now supports it.

    After the niners game the bad guys were bragging they knew the play calls by the formation….fast forward to the Bills game and they disguised the plays very well….fooling Buffalo and having big plays available, only to miss on them.

    Possibly in the Niner game they had less of the playbook to work with.

    It is a possibility.

    I still think Saffold is playing bad, Barnes is the same he has been (bad) and GRob isn’t coming around as quickly as I would like.

    So…Itr could be a combination

    #55329
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Yeah, i think that too, but I’m not sure. Time will tell, as you noted.

    Of course what i AM sure about is that the Football Godz hate the Rams.
    Thus, as soon as the Ram Offense began improving Hayes-Quinn-Brockers got hurt,
    and Tru got the high-ankle thing.

    So, i expect the Offense to put up 30 soon, and the D to allow 35.

    The Godz insist on 7-9-Bullshit.

    w
    v

    #55336
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I hope you’re right.

    In the mean time, playcalling should be adjusted while the offense grows in sync.

    There are some things that are working better than others, and they could go to those plays more often than they do – which in turn would relax the “pressing” in other areas.

    So…I have officially started the Boras Skeptic Society. There will be a Facebook page soon.

    If they are out of sync then playcalling makes no difference.

    I think a team can be out of sync on some plays, and in sync with other plays. And that, in fact, is what I see.

    #55353
    Herzog
    Participant

    I think they are out of sync also… but I blame that squarely on Fisher. Why are the blocking schemes changed every effing year…. in today’s NFL with shortened practices…. continuity is important. BUt every year it’s a new this or new that.
    I hate it.

    #55355
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I think they are out of sync also… but I blame that squarely on Fisher. Why are the blocking schemes changed every effing year…. in today’s NFL with shortened practices…. continuity is important. BUt every year it’s a new this or new that.
    I hate it.

    It;s not the blocking schemes, it’s the offense as a whole. You hire a coordinator you get his offense.

    I am not sure I “blame” anyone because I haven’t yet seen where this ends up. If they straighten out I am just not going to be complaining that they only went 3-2 in their first 5 games.

    The DC isn’t new. The ST coordinator isn’t new. The offense managed to scrape out 3 wins out of 5 while being out of sync. If that’s the reason they lost 1 of the 2 games they lost, then there’s a chance they get better. You can get a team to be in sync through the sheer force of time through reps. You can’t make a team that isn’t scrappy with heart, be scrappy and have heart.

    #55361
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    Whenever you add something new to your game, a different technique, a different skill, you take a performance hit. You don’t get the improvement until you can integrate it seamlessly. Or, it isn’t enough to know it, you have to be able to use it without having to think about it. imo

    Agamemnon

    #55386
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    it doesn’t account for the fact that this slide goes back to last year. the running game has been stuttering since last year.

    boras was oc since last year. boudreau has been here for awhile. if they did indeed change blocking schemes they need to evaluate if they are playing to their players’ strengths.

    boras has had time to evaluate players for part of last season as well as the offseason. no significant additions to that side of the field currently playing.

    adding some new schemes or techniques does not by itself explain how extremely horrible this run offense has looked. i do not buy it.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 2 months ago by Avatar photoInvaderRam.
    #55390
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    it doesn’t account for the fact that this slide goes back to last year. the running game has been stuttering since last year.

    Well that’s a good point, but to be absolutely precise, in his last 4 starts, Gurley had different outcomes game by game. He wasn’t sputtering in every game.

    Stats = Attempts Yards Y/A TDs

    Either way, IMO these guys are simply not going to put in schemes that do not conform to the players’s strengths. They’re not going to make a mistake like that. That’s the kind of mistake you expect from an entirely new staff.

    It’s just more likely that the entire offense—not just the OL, not just Gurley, not just the qb—started the season out sputtering and misfiring.

    In fact before last Sunday Keenum and Austin were misfiring on passes, where it wasn’t even clear who was doing the wrong thing. Then, last Sunday, bang, it clicked. That just sounds to me like guys who are half a page off in relation to one another. Just classic out of sync-ness.

    And they didn’t just add new techniques. They changed the entire offense (Keenum spoke about this) DURING a move year. That means an offense that is still thinking not playing and doing that after a move–and right now being 3-2, the Rams are the only OTHER team in the history of football who were winning 5 games in after a move. Outside of that, move years are one long history of losing.

    #55398
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    it doesn’t account for the fact that this slide goes back to last year. the running game has been stuttering since last year.

    Well that’s a good point, but to be absolutely precise, in his last 4 starts, Gurley had different outcomes game by game. He wasn’t sputtering in every game.

    Stats = Attempts Yards Y/A TDs

    Either way, IMO these guys are simply not going to put in schemes that do not conform to the players’s strengths. They’re not going to make a mistake like that. That’s the kind of mistake you expect from an entirely new staff.

    It’s just more likely that the entire offense—not just the OL, not just Gurley, not just the qb—started the season out sputtering and misfiring.

    In fact before last Sunday Keenum and Austin were misfiring on passes, where it wasn’t even clear who was doing the wrong thing. Then, last Sunday, bang, it clicked. That just sounds to me like guys who are half a page off in relation to one another.

    i don’t deny that part of it is due to being out of sync. and i do notice that they are using austin more as a traditional wr than last year.

    so i acknowledge that part of it is being out of sync especially with offseason rules being so strict in how much times players can see the field.

    however. case in point. why use austin more as a traditional wr? is this trying to force something that isn’t there? i don’t know. maybe injuries have played a part. spruce and coop being sidelined haven’t helped things.

    but my bigger concern is the run game. they gotta scheme gurley to be more productive.

    i remember watching faulk in the preseason. he’d have no room running. rams used basic schemes and we all heard that once the regular season got going and they game planned opponents he’d be more productive. sure enough he looked like a different player.

    are the coaching staff doing a good job of identifying the opponents’ weaknesses and attacking them? are they identifying their players’ strengths and accentuating them. i guess we’ll find out.

    #55400
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    i also recognize the fact that the wrs have made strides under groh. britt and quick in particular look better. so i’m not trying to just trash the offensive staff. there are some bright spots.

    i do know that boo has a tendency to wear thin on players. i hope they’re not tuning him out?

    #55518
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I am now completely convinced of this, even though it wasn’t the running game that improved, it was the passing game.

    And yes they were passing against Detroit but still.

    They didn’t know the offense, not at the “just play” level anyway, and it hampered everything in the 1st 2 games.

    Now of course ironically the defense is caving (largely cause of injuries) so it’s lost re-in-syncness, but nevertheless it’s worth knowing that that’s what it was with the offense.

    #55520
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I am now completely convinced of this, even though it wasn’t the running game that improved, it was the passing game.

    ————–
    I thought the running game looked just fine in the first half. Havent watched the second half.

    w
    v

    #55523
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I thought the running game looked just fine in the first half. Havent watched the second half.

    w
    v

    Okay. But. Do we have ourselves a theory? Yes? No? Thotz?

    Also…Jack called you out in a post below. It’s high noon. Time to face the music. When the going gets tough, the tough use tenderizer.

    #55527
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I thought the running game looked just fine in the first half. Havent watched the second half.

    w
    v

    Okay. But. Do we have ourselves a theory? Yes? No? Thotz?

    Also…Jack called you out in a post below. It’s high noon. Time to face the music. When the going gets tough, the tough use tenderizer.

    —————-

    Well I’m sticking to the lone gunman theory.

    …I think its pretty obvious they were un-gelled at the beginning of the year,
    and now they are getting in sync. I think the offense will be fine. They are healthy and improving. And this is with a backup QB. Seems encouraging to me.

    You already know what i think of the D — Without Quinn and Tru, its gonna be a struggle.
    GW is gonna have to create pressure somehow and thats gonna lead to big running lanes.

    Brockers and Hayes looked terrible to me, btw. I dont think they should have even played.

    w
    v

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 2 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    #55553
    Pancake
    Participant

    1. It the history of teams moving, only one had a winning record the year after a move. Say what you will, but, moving apparently subtracts from a team being ready. That’s the history.

    They didn’t have winning records after the move because they were not good teams in the first place. If the move negatively affected teams they should have worse records the following year right? But that’s not really how it breaks down. There is no significant drop in record other than the 84 colts. They were just a bad team and didn’t have a winning season until 1987.

    81 raiders were 7-9 and then went 8-1
    83 colts were 7-9 and then were 4-12
    87 cards were 7-8 and then were 7-9
    94 raiders were 9-7 and then went 8-8
    94 rams were 4-12 and then went 7-9
    96 browns deactivated ——
    96 oilers were 8-8 and then went 8-8

    #55556
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    1. It the history of teams moving, only one had a winning record the year after a move. Say what you will, but, moving apparently subtracts from a team being ready. That’s the history.

    They didn’t have winning records after the move because they were not good teams in the first place. If the move negatively affected teams they should have worse records the following year right? But that’s not really how it breaks down. There is no significant drop in record other than the 84 colts. They were just a bad team and didn’t have a winning season until 1987.

    81 raiders were 7-9 and then went 8-1
    83 colts were 7-9 and then were 4-12
    87 cards were 7-8 and then were 7-9
    94 raiders were 9-7 and then went 8-8
    94 rams were 4-12 and then went 7-9
    96 browns deactivated ——
    96 oilers were 8-8 and then went 8-8

    There is no leap to a winning record either, with the sole exception of the 81 Raiders. 6 other teams, and you would think at least one could improve to at least a modest winning record in a year? IF that were possible?

    YOu left out the Ravens. The Ravens of 96 were the Browns of 95. Same team. They went from 5-11 to 4-12.

    #55562
    sanbagger
    Participant

    Okay. But. Do we have ourselves a theory? Yes? No? Thotz?

    I absolutely believe there is credibility to this.

    I think a lot of attention was given to the passing game (installing Grohs O) and getting Goff ready and maybe the running game was overlooked a touch.

    I think TG should have been given more reps in pre-season as he was still learning the pro O.

    I like where this O is going and believe when Goff is ready to step in he’s gonna have an O that is ready. Starting him day 1 made no sense…that was the right call by Fish, and not a surprise since he’s done it before.

    The D is a different story, IMO. They really aren’t attacking the QB like they have. I’m seeing more cover 2 than I have seen from GW.

    I think he is attempting to cover for areas…first EJ was down and Sensabough was starting outside Tru…well, we know he wasn’t hangin then when EJ comes back Tru get’s hurt. So…are the DB’s hurting this group? I say yes and that’s the reason GW is reluctant to throw the sink at the QB.

    #55565
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I like where this O is going and believe when Goff is ready to step in he’s gonna have an O that is ready. Starting him day 1 made no sense…that was the right call by Fish, and not a surprise since he’s done it before.

    The D is a different story, IMO. They really aren’t attacking the QB like they have. I’m seeing more cover 2 than I have seen from GW.

    I think he is attempting to cover for areas…first EJ was down and Sensabough was starting outside Tru…well, we know he wasn’t hangin then when EJ comes back Tru get’s hurt. So…are the DB’s hurting this group? I say yes and that’s the reason GW is reluctant to throw the sink at the QB.

    ————-
    Yeah i agree with that.

    …and i dont even wanna think about how bad Goff woulda looked if he had been in that 49er game.

    w
    v

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.