Other issues that may derail a great Rams season

[LesBaker]

I'm not as worried about Schottenheimer as others, and I might be in the minority when I say that I think his playcalling is the best we've seen since Martz left. Even with a rebuilding roster full of young players. I'm also not worried about his ability to call a spread offense-type attack, since that's not what we'll be implementing. This is going to be all about mismatches and high-low reads for Bradford, and that's something that's right in his wheelhouse.

Penalties do concern me a little, because that's something that's been a constant with Fisher's teams. It should continue to be a problem this year too with all the youth and the new defensive scheme.

The turnover ratio doesn't concern me so much. The Rams could have had WAY more turnovers than they had, but it was just the way the ball was bouncing. I saw a few games in a row where we could have had a half dozen turnovers, but ended up with none. That said, I would like to see that overall number improve.

I would expect our starting field position to improve DRAMATICALLY this year. When's the last time we had a decent punt or kick returner? 2001? Maybe 2007-2008 with Dante Hall? Tavon should net us some huge benefits on that front, and I would hope that Hekker continues to pin teams back and Zuerlein improves on his accuracy from 50+ yards out. Of that whole unit, only Zuerlein worries me. But I expect - with these new weapons - that we won't need him to hit from beyond 50 that much anymore. Like Stu said -- he'll be reduced to kicking 1-pointers.

Other than that, I'm really only worried about O-line health.
I'm rather shell-shocked in that regard.

And who among us don't at times think, ya know if Shotty were to get a gig somewhere as a HC and with Fishers probable relationship with the doudle M, would there be a "story " on the Mad One coming back to be an OC for with this bunch of skill position players?

Hush. Your. Mouth.

:boing:

 

[iBruce]

Gotta agree with you Bonifay. OL worries me. And our safeties.

 

[albefree69]

BonifayRam preaching to the choir:

Since Snead & Fisher arrival they have drafted only 2 Ol'ers.. both last day draft selections.

Only two OL starters remain from the 2012 OL at the same posts. Of these 2 Ol'ers both are coming off rehabbing events & both are 32 yrs old. Wells who underwent three rehabbing events on the same leg in less than one yr has shown me nothing of what he was in Green Bay. I thought Turner was much better than Wells myself @ OC.

:???: @ OLG remain where we have Chris Williams & Shelley Smith competing for that spot CW has never been good enough to win a starting positions by other than default in his entire NFL career. Smith who wavered before the season by the Texans was solid enough but is no powerhouse either.

Both our starting OT's have fallen to injuries the last two season. Saffold has missed parts or whole 21 NFL games in that time. Long was considered to be in decline @ the end of 2012. Rams do not have a proven bonified legit swing OT.

This present Ram OL cadre has only four players who were on the 53 player roster when the 2012 season began & all of those four had injury issues missed games attached to them (Saffold, Dahl{IR}, Watkins{IR} & Wells).

Snead & Fisher have done so well with bringing in serious big time weapons that have everybody bouncing off the walls in delight :zomg: :ja: :tyty: :brava: . But none of it will amount to anything unless this UNPROVEN NEW OL jells. The most important positive thing is we have a Paul Boudreau as our OL master who can pull this off & put together an OL that could be one of our best since GSOT days.

I've been worried about the same points you mentioned here and talking about it for the last two years. But I'm not as worried about it as I was last year for several reasons.

LT- Long's performance declined in each of the the last two years but that was due to small nagging injuries that the doctors don't seem to be worried about. He underwent the longest physical I've ever known of before we signed him. With time to heal, I'm expecting a big improvement in his performance this year. Speaking of performance, his never degraded to anything less than average which I believe is a plus considering we'll have Saffold at RT. But I expect better.

OLG - Williams & Smith's performance improved quite a bit over the course of the few months Boudreau had them under his tutelage. ROK seems to be getting his weight and conditioning issues under control. His performance in college and practice when healthy was very good until he wore out due to those issues I just mentioned.

C - Wells is old but I think Jones will be able to take over for him almost immediately if he gets injured again. PFF rated him #1 at center prior to the 2012 season. I don't agree with your perception that Turner was an upgrade. Although I was sorry to lose him I don't think he's worth his new contract.

RG - Dahl is also old and starting to suffer from, IMO, PED related injuries but he'll hopefully last another year. If he doesn't we have the same options here as at LG.

RT - Saffold played well last saeson when not injured and the type of injuries he's suffered from appear to be flukes that wouldn't suggest that he's injury prone. Here's something from PFF:
<a class="postlink" href="https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/01/28/ranking-the-2012-offensive-lines/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... ive-lines/</a>
"Stud: After a rookie year where he got too much praise, and a sophomore season where he earned his criticism, I for one wasn’t expecting much from Rodger Saffold (+8.6). Color me wrong, as he excelled in pass protection, looking like the player he was drafted to be."

Backups - With the addition of the very versatile Barrett Jones and the development of our guards, I think the backup situation is the best its been in many years. Granted that isn't saying much. Chris Williams is another short (very) term solution at T in addition to the other Ts on our roster.

Keep in mind that our O-line didn't give up a single sack the last two games of the season. That could be misleading due to the help they were getting from the RB and TE positions.

 

[-X-]

X possibly taking the word horrible out of context:
I don't know, Albe. I wouldn't throw the word "horrible" around quite so flippantly. Horrible would indicate something well below the league norm, or near the bottom of the league. He could use improvement, for sure, but being 13th in the league in touchbacks isn't horrible. The Miami game was his worst (2 of 5 - one from 66 yards out), so I don't know that that would skew his whole season and make it horrible. He was also one FG shy of tying the NFL record for consecutive field goals made to start a season. That's not horrible. 7 of 7 from 40-49 isn't horrible. The 58 and 60 yarders against SEA and the game winner against SF were pretty clutch, no? I guess what I'm saying is, "horrible" takes the shine off the apple to me.

I disagree about the defense too. It could have been called better at times, but there are no excuses when it comes to the type of defensive alignment we had to use. If you don't have the horses to play man coverage, then you just don't do it. They did ... a few times ... but it's not something they can do on a regular basis. Fisher addressed that a few times last year, and said that this year they won't have to keep plays in front of them as much. I'd say the offense was our achilles heel, in that it didn't allow the defense to play to its strengths. Imagine if that defense ever had a lead? Look what they did to ARZ when they did. Also, take the last game of the season. That was an offense (SEA) that came off of scoring 58, 50 and 42, and this defense held them to 20 in their own house. We couldn't score 21? Just 21? All things considered - that team last year exceeded expectations. Two new systems, tons of turnover, and they held their own against everyone except two teams. Two teams that have been doing the same exact things on offense for over a decade (NE and GB).

Almost all those things you said weren't horrible weren't horrible. If you read what I said again I think you'll find that I was careful to limit my concerns (and labeling) to two very constricted areas and not to his overall performance.

The first concerned FG tries ONLY from 30-39 yards. 67% success rate on what is basically a chip shot is horrible IMO and it cost us a game.
The second "horrible" concerned his touch back rate. You might have skimmed over the part where I said "for someone with his leg strength". He was sixth in that department but I firmly believe he should have been 1st. It was a relative statement and not an absolute. :ww: Considering that field position was one of the "issues" we're discussing , it's important that he starts kicking to his potential.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/kickoff-touchback-pct" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/ki ... chback-pct</a>

As for the defense part, I think you might have forgotten the context in which the paragraph was written. What is the title of this thread? What I'm saying in the paragraph is that I'm worried about us doing that THIS YEAR when we DON'T have those issues.

If you read that again you'll find that at no time did I say the reasons we didn't play man to man WEREN'T justified. I didn't say, in that paragraph, that we would have done better had we used man to man more often (although I believe it). I said it cost us games (which it did IMO) and I implied that I want us to stop doing that this year.

Its a damn good thing that you or others, do disagree with much of what I say cause what fun would it be if you agreed all the time? What would I or in some cases you, learn when agreeing? I like it when you disagree with me much more than when you agree.

So yes, I disagree with your whole reply! :ww:

Well, of course you're right. I didn't mean to parlay your horrible and make it look like you were offering an indictment of his entire career. That's my bad. But *horrible* is still a heavy word even in the context in which you used it. 6th in TB% isn't horrible. He was inconsistent from that FG range, but like I said -- one game screwed most of his percentages. I only offered those other bright spots in order to illustrate the other things he did very well for a rookie. So if a rookie can do great things, a rookie can be afforded some latitude for his mistakes. Semantics, I guess.

The defense we'll still have to disagree about though. You said you heard a lot of *excuses* about why we were playing zone so much. I simply said they weren't excuses. They were justifiable reasons. Then I just wanted to again point out the good things that defense did in spite of the fatal flaws you perceived. I'm all about affording people latitude when I feel they deserve it. I'm the ying to your yang, maybe. I don't know. I just know that they could have been much better if the offense was only marginally better. Tying for the league lead in sacks when you rarely are playing with a lead -- is something special. I'm not really worried about how they'll play defense this year now that we know Blake isn't making the calls anymore.

Safety is a little concerning for obvious reasons, but how can it possibly be any worse.
We got a little addition by subtraction working in our favor this year. :yeh:

 

[RamFan503]

Its a damn good thing that you or others, do disagree with much of what I say cause what fun would it be if you agreed all the time? What would I or in some cases you, learn when agreeing? I like it when you disagree with me much more than when you agree.

So yes, I disagree with your whole reply! :ww:

Nope. You're wrong.

 

[albefree69]

X wrote:
Safety is a little concerning for obvious reasons, but how can it possibly be any worse.
We got a little addition by subtraction working in our favor this year. :yeh:

Thanks for saying something I can disagree with. :yeh:

I would characterize that as a "big" addition by subtraction. :ww:

RamFan503 inching up the humor ladder:
Nope. You're wrong.

Not bad for a youngster.:bwah:

 

[had]

When I think about the Rams offense, and what could go wrong, I think about them being unable to move the chains, unable to manufacture first downs, unable to find a rhythm, find confidence. I think the offense will have to get hit full in the mouth by a stout defense, and learn to hit back, before this thing takes off.