A pattern with 2 faces.

2013: Ram run D is porous to begin, and then tightens up and becomes effective enough to end the season with a high rating.

2014: Ram run D is even more porous to begin, and then tightens up and becomes lights out superb, promising to end the season with a high rating.

With more or less the same personnel, apart from AD.

Both faces count. The bad run D early, then the improvement.

Seems to me that the onus is on the coaching staff to start next year with solid run D. Assuming reasonable good health.

Maddy wrote:

Is there a reason not to like what Hill has done?? … He seems to be solid. He’s a veteran, doesn’t seem to panic, has shown that he is more than just a warm body neutral to offensive success, and the league has plenty of book on him already.

If the decision is to bring Bradford back, is there a better backup option than Hill anywhere?

What is the deal with the developmental QB they drafted last year?

1st that draft guy from last year was cut. He didn’t show much. And he was a late rounder.

Now, about Hill. I like Hill. As a backup, I don’t think you can do better. Any better and you’d have a QB controversy. I strongly support the idea of re-signing Hill.

Here’s my read of the guy. He plays very steadily near his own personal ceiling. That’s a very good thing in itself. Indeed, it is my belief that we might well have challenged for the division title with Hill out there, had the defense played well early and the Davis experiment had not been pushed too far.

The downside is his personal ceiling. I think it’s pretty limited. I doubt he’ll ever give a team much more than what we’ve seen this year. Which will win quite a few games with a good defense but not, I don’t think, go deep into the playoffs. I don’t think he has the arm strength or accuracy to match that of a proper, mid-table starting QB.

Bradford, IMO, could take us much further. I have always liked the guy a lot. I think that a healthy Sam with this year’s talent would cruise into the Pro Bowl and win at least 10 games.

I just don’t trust his knees. I don’t believe he’ll give us more than a few games, if we’re lucky.

So, in my view, the best path would be to sign what Dak calls a “a salty old veteran who is a known commodity” … a known commodity a notch or two above Hill’s ceiling. Given that, I’d be fine with either keeping or cutting Sam.

But, everyone seems to say that such a QB will probably not be available. And I sense that Fish and Snead want to try Sam one more time. OK, if that is the case, if you have Sam and Hill …

Then I think you want a developmental guy with a good chance to grow into Sam’s replacement in the event that, as seems all too likely, his knees kill his career next year. I mean, I think we need a guy like that no matter what. A guy with some hope of stepping up when Hill retires and Sam either retires or needs younger quality backup.

Now, one last point:

Maddy wrote:

If this is going to be a Fisher offense, which will have a strong running presence,

You know, we ain’t there yet! We have the RBs, but not the OL to be what everyone assumes Fish wants.

The last couple of years, our best offensive games have relied on the pass more than the power run. Hell, we can’t even run effectively to protect a lead! We have a long way to go before we have a power running game. And I am not sure that we are truly committed to that model.

• This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by rfl.

Dak wrote:

Hell, I’d rather go with a salty old veteran who is a known commodity with known strengths and weaknesses at the NFL level. ESPECIALLY if you’ve got a good team around him. I don’t want a good supporting cast having to suffer through the rookie’s learning curve.

This is what Arians did at AZ with good results.

Except for the issue of injury.

That guy on the Rams Addiction podcasts who shares funny tweets is besotted with Long’s wit. He is pretty funny.

Dak wrote:

I look at the rest of the season this way: The Rams have to keep winning so they can go into Seattle and play in Week 16 for what will be their Super Bowl. I want that to be a game that matters, and if the Rams are 8-7, playing for a winning record will matter a lot, even if there are no playoff hopes. And, it will matter to the Seahawks, I’m sure, because every win means a better chance of playing at home in the playoffs.

Exactly. Going 9-7 would matter, as the 10 wins mattered last year for AZ.

However, Fisher will have a real challenge keeping the team focused enough to run the table. With the playoffs OFF the table, it’ll be hard to keep the momentum going game after game. Suppose we beat AZ on Thurs. night … but are officially eliminated from the playoffs? Can we really keep it going for another TWO games? AZ was playing their last game for the division last year, if I recall.

Realistically, I see us going 8-8, losing to either AZ or SEA. That would be a bit of an improvement, but pretty disappointing.

This team is so frustrating. It really, honestly should be in the Super Bowl conversation.

OL and QB for next year!

ej gaines

it’s impossible to say enough about this kid, a 6th rounder no less, who has played 98% of the rams defensive snaps thru week 14. in fact ej is only one of two 2014 6th rounders on pace to start every game this year. moreover only 6 of the 676 6th rounders taken from 1990-2013 were listed as starters every game their rookie year, and all but ej were olinemen.

Well said, A1.

Gaines is draft gold–a low round guy who becomes a quality starter. That’s how you build a really good roster without spending a ton of money.

Maddy wrote:

Fisher had the six players from the RGIII trade as coin toss captains. That’s pretty good.

LOL.

But you know, honestly, I was watching that last quarter and was feeling tension. The game was in the bag. No question. But I really wanted that 2nd goose egg.

Eternal Ramnation wrote:

The part about TA’s use as a threat to set up Mason’s screen is for me obvious TA is stressing defenses whether or not he touches the ball

ER, I’d be interested in knowing what you see that causes you to say that.

I don’t see it at all. TA has touched the ball many times in 2 years, and I rarely had any sense that the defense was finding it hard to close the door on him.

People say that down field plays are set up by adjustments to TA. Well, how is what defenses are doing any different from what they would do A) trying to shut Tre down and B) not generally respecting our WRs?

Honestly. What do you see? I don’t see it at all.

TackleDummy wrote:

IMO, the Rams OL is not as bad as some people seem to think. I look at Wells and Joseph as both being average. But I would not term them as “seriously below standard”. Saffold’s shoulder is certainly giving him problems. However he is playing through it pretty well. I think his off season surgery has a good chance of fixing it. And Person does not stink. In fact, I see him as moving into a starter’s role next year. Person is the kind of lineman that Fisher has had in the past. He was a seventh rounder who has spent three years developing. This is not unlike Barksdale, who was a castoff and developed with the Rams. Robinson, on the otherhand, is the first 1st round OL draft choice by a Fisher team. He is coming along well given that he is a raw talent with little pass protection experience. My guess is that by next season he will be stout in all phases of the game at LT.

Having said all of that, I also would like to see the Rams to draft an OL fairly early in the coming draft. As well as a QB and an LB. I doubt that all three positions will be addressed, however, since it is unlikely that a player of value will be there at those positions just when the Rams need them.

Well, we’re not that far apart. I like RObinson a lot and feel he is on track. Happy me.

I have always liked Saffold. The shoulder is a problem, however. I have no idea if surgery can solve it. Hope so. But certainly we have to take significant steps to back him up next year, ’cause I don’t see how we can count on him.

Barksdale is fine. Hope we re-sign him. I think we will.

Which leaves OC and ROG. And here we differ.

I liked both Wells and Joseph … in theory.

But I think they are playing poorly. A good OL rarely gives up pass-rushing pressure up the middle. We give it up a lot. And both guys are very inconsistent in run blocking.

I look at the OAK game and see a big play off tackle right … and then a lot of futility. In the 2nd half, our interior OL did nothing. Against a distinctly average OAK D front. We got whipped up front. A lot. I do NOT see average level blocking there.

And Person? Lord. The fact that his draft status and years in the league match Barksdale does not say that he can match Barksdale in quality of play. It doesn’t work that way.

Plus, we have no idea whether Jones can play at all. No idea. Anytime someone has tried to inquire, the answer is a non-answer. I doubt he is showing much, or we would have heard and he would have gotten some snaps.

And if he can’t go, then we desperately need an OC to go with an OG. And depth to support Saffold. We must get stronger up the middle. That’s one reason I can’t see us being genuine contenders this year, even if we had the record to allow us to try.

znhater wrote:

It’s just to me this should be a non issue. No one minded calling them the redskins for all those years. And now, some people who aren’t even Indian thinks it’s offensive. Hell, Snyder even had some native Americans in the booth with him sporting redskins gear a couple of weeks ago.

People that say “the r word” or the “Washington team” are just adding fuel to the fire imo. It’s only derogatory if used that way, and in 44 years of living i have never used it or heard it used that way. My grams was full blooded Cherokee and i never heard get say anything about a redskin or say that it offended her. Just my 2 cents worth.

I’ll just point this out.

In the mainstream world of the American majority … no one minded the name for decades. Not on the surface. Not in mainstream public discourse.

That is a long way away from saying that “no one minded.” What bothers minorities is virtually always invisible to majorities … until the minorities are allowed to express themselves. Indeed until they learn HOW to express themselves. Generally, when that begins to happen, the majority is shocked. “Where has all this come from?” And it instinctively trivializes disaffection and alienation expressed by the minority. “Suddenly everyone is taking offense at these little things that don’t matter. Non-issues.”

Well, they’re not non-issues to the minority. Or, at least, to significant members of the minority. There will of course always be diversity of response. Snyder can certainly find individual Native Americans willing to express an affirming reaction. That’s fine. They can do that.

It doesn’t change the fact that many Native Americans feel quite differently about it. Indeed, it doesn’t change the fact that many AMERICANS feel differently about it. Many members of the mainstream are offended. I am. WV is. Apparently, significant numbers of professional journalists are, so much so that they are changing their behavior.

It is an issue, a significant issue, because many Americans feel it is a significant issue. You are perfectly free to feel personally that it shouldn’t be. Your experience may tell you that it would be a non-issue to certain individuals you know. But for many Americans, it is a highly significant issue. And they are free to feel that.

What one cannot honestly do is to say that, since it didn’t pop up in mainstream discourse previously, it was never a matter for anyone. That’s like saying that, because we never hear on mainstream media or common conversation about how Sikhs or Basques or Innuits or Tagalogs or stamp collectors or train spotters or Hmongs or calligraphers or chess players feel that their concerns are non-issues.

American society changed significantly in the mid-1960s. It did not stop being racist. Issues of prejudice and discrimination were not eliminated. But something changed.

What happened was quite simply that minorities discovered that they could speak up for their perspective. That’s the biggest difference between now and a time in which a fictional North Carolina town called Mayberry could simply erase all the black faces from its streets. It simply isn’t easy any more to silence the voices of those who take offense at being disrespected and alienated by the mainstream. They don’t suffer in silence any more.

What that means is that, as the decades roll by, sources of suffering which had long remained invisible, “non-issues” to the mainstream get brought forward so that their seriousness has to be dealt with. The suppressed non-issue becomes perceived as the issue it always was.

Again, you can decide if you wish that this should not be so. But you can’t say it has never been an issue or that the thousands of Americans who feel it is an issue don’t have every bit as much right to tell you when they’re pissed off. And guess what–Native Americans have a LOT of good reason to be pissed off! Hell, I’m pissed off with them.

Winnbrad wrote:

The defense has become self-aware.

QB puzzle still not solved.

Everything else, pretty damn good.

Well, I see 2 lingering problems:

Our WRs are immensely improved … but thin. Losing quick hurt. With Quick, Bailey, and Britt together, we’d be much more of a threat.

But the biggest problem I see is the OL. Wells and Joseph are seriously below standard and Saffold’s shoulder is a problem. And Person stinks. We have no depth anywhere.

We need to draft interior OL next spring. That and LBs.

A massive failure to take a golden opportunity.

Before the season, everyone assumed SEA, SF, and AZ would be major powers. Many of us on this board predicted that SEA or SF or both would fade. They have. And AZ is a very shaky division leader.

We had a chance to step up this year. And we failed to do that. Coaches and players were not ready for the start of the season and dug a deep hole. A lost opportunity.

Losing Sam was part of it. But given what we have seen without him, we could have easily been 7-5 rather 5-7. Discipline would have done that. We didn’t have the discipline.

I would bet on the Rams this week. I never bet. But, if I did, I think the Rams would be worth a wager.

Coming from me, that’s saying something. It’s not easy or natural for me to actually predict a positive outcome. Indeed, I am experiencing waves of superstitious doubt. Make a prediction about the Rams and you doom the lads to failure, right?

But, it’s time. Barring a catastrophic wave of injuries, I think this team takes a step tomorrow. I think they play up to their ability, not down to the weakness of the opposition. More importantly, they win a game that matters.

It doesn’t matter a lot. It’s a very small step. But it’s the sort of step over which they have consistently stumbled and crashed over and over again in the last 2.7 years.

See, they have a chance to win a 2nd game on the bounce against a bad team, a game which would get them within 1 game of .500 against a vulnerable division leader. Next week, especially on Thursday night, would be the real test of whether this team was learning to win meaningful games.

But to get to next week, we need to beat a bad WASH team. OAK was bad, and we smoked them. But WASH is different. Not because of WASH. But because it would be 2 in a row and a step toward near-relevance. Under Fisher, we have repeatedly shown that we can win the odd game in isolation. We have never, however, shown that we can win connected games leading to competitive relevance.

I think tomorrow we take that small step leading to the bigger step against AZ. I think things are set up well for us and against WASH. I think we’ll get it done.

I don’t think it will be enough for this year. We dug too deep a hole in Weeks 1-4, and then in KC, AZ and SD. We ain’t going to the playoffs this year.

But there is no earthly reason why we can’t be at least a .500 team. We ought to aim, seriously aspire to, 9-7. Honestly. We OUGHT to do that. If Fisher’s vision and program are leading to anything, then it should be that.

OK. So let’s do it. Last week was nice, but it was not a chance to build something. It was just a one-off. This week? This week is a chance to actually build something …

Fish … Williams … Schotty …

Players …

You can do this. So do it. We expect nothing less than success tomorrow.

I must say, I am impressed with Cook. I had no idea he had this much articulate depth.

He’s not just reading a PR statement. He is expressing a perspective reflecting not only intelligence, but balance and nuance. He keeps a lot of issues in mind here, and appeals to the angels of our nature.

I was taken with the moment when he apparently teared up over the statement by the African American police organization. That showed a person with heart and also an African American with a powerful sense of solidarity and identity.

I have stayed out of the discussion for the most part but those who know me can imagine where I stand. What I have resonated with most strongly is the recognition, I believe articulated by Zooey, that African Americans know in their bones and long past refutation that they remain, decade after decade, vulnerable to prejudicial police harassment and violence. They have lived their lives being harassed by cops and watching people who look like them die. That shared experience is surely what our African American WRs were testifying to.

And it’s what moved Cook when hearing from African American police whose voices are silenced in all of this. Yet Cook’s response remains fully human, engaged, aware of the positive role of police in his life and profession as well.

This incident testifies to Cook being a man and a human being. We’re all human, but most people live out of touch with their core humanity. Cook is in touch with his. He sounds like a guy one would like to know.

You know, the whole matter of intelligence and its relationship to athletic skill is interesting. Players of truly limited intelligence often struggle. The best athletes often play smart, a mental shrewdness in processing the demands of the game. But these players are often pretty unintelligent in the rest of life. One remembers Billy Kilmer’s obtuse recent comments about the Redskins–not just racist but simply dumb.

Sometimes, one finds intelligence in a player that goes well beyond game-smarts. And it can actually interfere with play. Kevin Carter was a highly intelligent, cultured man. He never seemed to love football enough to fulfill his potential.

I wonder if Cook is like that. Watching him play, I have had the impression of a dull person with great athletic gifts. Based on this incident, that impression seems false. He is clearly a thoughtful, reflective guy. He seems to be one of those rare players I would actually enjoy knowing.

Now if he can just quit dropping passes …

Let me just say that I don’t care for what we are doing with Tavon.

Schotty is committing a great deal to getting value from Tavon. He is committing a remarkably high number of snaps per game to plays custom designed for Tavon. And a high level of creativity. Not only elaborate specific plays, but elaborate combinations, all designed to spring him.

Now, all that would be OK if it worked. And it does … but on a marginal scale. We invest a great deal to gain–usually–about 5 yards. Yeah, Tavon broke one for 20 and a TD Sunday, but that’s rare. Most of his plays, passes and runs, go for about 5 yards.

And that’s a pretty minimal ROI. There are a lot of other ways to gain 5 yards. And here’s what’s most important. Other approaches stress defenses much more effectively.

The trouble with striving to get 5 yards for Tavon is that it doesn’t change the overall equation. Deploy your front 7 to stop Tre Mason. Then face a jet counter by Tavon. The same basic defensive set will stop both. We can see that in the fact that, when Schotty combines reverses, double reverses, and fake reverses in paired patterns, they never seem to result in a fooled defense. The message to the defense is simple: deploy along the LOS and have everyone stay at home. Contain and smother. It works with minimal stress.

Now consider other ways of getting 5 yards. Suppose we commit to power rushes up the heart of the defense. Tre and especially Zack can do that. Do it consistently enough and A) the TBs get the feel and timing for beating the defense and B) the DC starts to cheat safeties up, creating seams and gaps to exploit by our WRs.

Speaking of WRs, suppose we ran quick slants to Britt and Stedman for 5-7 yards as often as we run Tavon on reverse packages. Hit 3-4 slants per game and you change the defensive equation. You gain the same yardage, but the chance of breaking longer plays is greater and you distort the secondary as it attempts to deal with stresses on the periphery.

Now imagine that we devoted the number of plays we give to reverse packages to actual WR routes that stress the periphery. As I’ve said 100 times, they don’t have to be “deep” passes. They can be in the 8-15 yard range. Crossing routes. Sideline patterns. Combination patterns. These are not particularly difficult plays to run. Most teams execute them better than we do. In fact, we rarely run them! We keep attacking the LOS with complex rush and pass combinations. But, see, I figure Britt and Stedman CAN RUN intermediate patterns and catch 5-6 balls a game. I don’t see why not. Even OAK was hitting those balls a decent percentage of the time.

And the minute we do that, we create serious problems for the opposing DC. We distort the LB and secondary schemes and open gaps for the running game. And hell, Tavon can be a part of this. Go twins left, TE right and put Tavon in motion right. Let him flash upfield and run turns in and out. He can get open 10 yards upfield. Use it. Hit him upfield far enough to change the equation.

Aw, hell, what do I know?

I just know that what we invest in Tavon gains us a very minimal return. I think HE is capable and I know the O as a whole is.