You mean the way they kept the defense the same after Williiams Jr. left? The offense is going to change anyway, because by default they mix it up so as to erase all of the alignments and calls the opposing teams now have on tape. But the verbiage remaining consistent through the playbook is of pivotal importance - even if you don't buy it. You have a lot of players on record saying that they were feeling their way through the offense and learning the terminology as the season wore on. In no way would I like to throw all of that out and show them an entirely new set of things to learn. Just like the players, the OC has room for improvement and growth within the offense.I'm not buying the "being happy because we can keep it consistent" argument now that Schotty is staying. The Rams could have kept the offense the same if Schotty left.
I'm not buying the "being happy because we can keep it consistent" argument now that Schotty is staying. The Rams could have kept the offense the same if Schotty left. The more I've thought about it, the more I want Schotty out of here. He's mediocre and a team should always be trying to get better- that goes for players and coaches. If you could find someone that's better and could use the same offensive verbiage, then hire them. The Rams probably could have probably had that in Turner or Chudzinski. This just reinforces my concerns about Fisher being loyal to a fault. What Fisher does with Finnegan will be another test.
You mean the way they kept the defense the same after Williiams Jr. left? The offense is going to change anyway, because by default they mix it up so as to erase all of the alignments and calls the opposing teams now have on tape. But the verbiage remaining consistent through the playbook is of pivotal importance - even if you don't buy it. You have a lot of players on record saying that they were feeling their way through the offense and learning the terminology as the season wore on. In no way would I like to throw all of that out and show them an entirely new set of things to learn. Just like the players, the OC has room for improvement and growth within the offense.
Yeah I think what is being "interpreted" as a lack of imagination on Shotty's part was IN FACT his realization that MAYBE he had gotten a little TOO imaginative with TOO MANY inexperienced players and the best laid plans for all that physical talent weren't doing as well as it looked in practice that MAYBE they should have been a little less concerned about revealing the double secret stuff in pre season.I'm glad Schotty is back. His playcalling was improving towards the end of the season -- love the Bailey double reverse and Austin's fake reverse. He knows what he is working with now, in terms of Austin and the rushing attack.
The veterans on defense said it was different, but the PC deflection was to say it's an easy adjustment. Clearly it wasn't. They can't keep the same verbiage on offense if they brought in a new coordinator. The philosophy may remain consistent, but the plays themselves wouldn't be. Coordinators never adopt the previous OC's terminology or plays. At least to my recollection, I can't think of a single instance where a new OC (on any team) came in and just took over the previous guy's playbook. That goes with the OC from my understanding. Martz didn't leave his playbook behind.I'm not sure you read what I typed. I said I wanted the offense and verbiage to stay the same. I do feel that is important. I just want the person calling the plays to be different. Your Williams Jr example is perfect. They supposedly kept the D the same but look how different the results were because of the caller. Williams was much better than Walton.
I don't think that just because you change OC's that it means you can't use the same verbiage and offensive scheme. The new OC needs to adapt rather than the whole team having to adapt to him.
That's the main reason I'm only lukewarm about replacing him.BigRamFan pointing out the crux:
I know many of us questioned Schotty's performance/calls last year but I don't think the benefits of continuity with this young team can be over emphasized.
The veterans on defense said it was different, but the PC deflection was to say it's an easy adjustment. Clearly it wasn't. They can't keep the same verbiage on offense if they brought in a new coordinator. The philosophy may remain consistent, but the plays themselves wouldn't be. Coordinators never adopt the previous OC's terminology or plays. At least to my recollection, I can't think of a single instance where a new OC (on any team) came in and just took over the previous guy's playbook. That goes with the OC from my understanding. Martz didn't leave his playbook behind.
If it's just a matter of the play calling being unimaginative, I still have to ask how anyone knows how to differentiate between bad play calling and bad execution. How do we know that Tavon (for example) was supposed to be in one place, but the ball didn't arrive in time, or a defender threw him off course, or he didn't run the right route, or pressure forced an early throw or different decision with the ball? Does anyone really know how the offense is designed to attack a specific defense?
I dunno. I guess I'm prone to defend Fisher's choice to keep a guy who went to back-to-back AFC Championship games with Mark Sanchez and not a wealth of receiving talent.