So....??

**laram0** · #1 (**permalink**) -01-02-2008

We now have a bonafide Offensive Coordinator (Al Saunders). Not just any O.C. but an O.C. with a very impressive history in the NFL. We've read that H.C. Scott Linehan is going to hand over the reigns of our offense to Al Saunders. Has Linehan setup the buffer he needs to keep the Clan off of his back? Most notably S.L.O.P.?

Let's face it our Defensive Coordinator (Jim Haslett) hasn't set the league on fire. He hasn't been terrible maybe average or a little better (at least in the 1st half of games). During the 2007 season our Offense consistently sputtered in the 2nd half of games but so did our Defense for one reason or another. Yet I don't remember reading anything about a JIM HASLETT OPPOSITION PARTY (J.H.O.P).

SO...?

Now with Al Saunders running the Offense and Jim Haslett running the Defense, I guess Linehan can finally get some sleep feeling like S.L.O.P. might back-off ?

S L A P

*Nick_Weasel* · #2 (**permalink**) -01-02-2008

I've never been a huge Jim Haslett fan. As you mentioned, the 1st half of games seemed to go well defensively, but the Rams had to be one of the worst teams in the league at half-time adjustments (on both sides of the ball).

Also, it seemed that every time we got a decent lead Haslett got off his gameplan and stopped applying pressure. Then the other QB just picked up apart as he had all day to find a receiver.

I guess he hasn't done that poorly, I'm not sure what we could have expected considering New Orleans wasn't exactly a defensive powerhouse during his time there anyway.

**HUbison** · #3 (**permalink**) -01-02-2008

Oh, there's a million ways this could play out. Here's just a few:

1. The Rams O goes off-the-hook this year.

Position 1: "We had healthy players. Linehan could have done that just as easily as Saunders. Just like he did in 2006."

Position 2: "See what happens when we have proven talent running the offense."

2. The Rams O sputters yet again.

Position 1: "It's all about the players. Not even a proven coach like Saunders could get anything out of these guys. Linehan actually got more out of these guys in 2006 than he should have."

Position 2: "Linehan has screwed up this team so bad, that not even Saunders could turn it around."

Position 3: "I hate Mike Martz."

There's a million ways this could go, but each of them should be interesting.

**AvengerRam** · #4 (**permalink**) -02-02-2008

Its is clearly a two-edged sword:

On the one hand... Its nice to see Linehan is willing to get help.

On the other hand...Why did it take him 2 years to figure out that he needs a top notch OC?

Ultimately, one thought keeps bouncing around my mind...

Is Linehan really more qualified than Saunders to be the Rams' HC?

To be continued...

*Chris58* · #5 (**permalink**) -02-02-2008

[quote=AvengerRam;211003]
On the other hand...Why did it take him 2 years to figure out that he needs a top notch OC?

Probably because in Linehan's first year the Rams were very effective offensively once he took the reins from Olson. After having success as HC/OC he didn't see the need to hire an OC.

*r8rh8rmike* · #6 (**permalink**) -02-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by laram0

Now with Al Saunders running the Offense and Jim Haslett running the Defense, I guess Linehan can finally get some sleep feeling like S.L.O.P. might back-off ?

S L A P

I'm hoping SLOP gets some sleep, lots of it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris58

Probably because in Linehan's first year the Rams were very effective offensively once he took the reins from Olson. After having success as HC/OC he didn't see the need to hire an OC.

This sounds about right to me. I'll never understand why people want to completely disregard what Linehan was able to accomplish offensively in 2006, especially after losing his starting center in week one and his starting LT in week two.

*RAM-BO* · #7 (**permalink**) -02-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Its is clearly a two-edged sword:

On the one hand... Its nice to see Linehan is willing to get help.

On the other hand...Why did it take him 2 years to figure out that he needs a top notch OC?

Ultimately, one thought keeps bouncing around my mind...

Is Linehan really more qualified than Saunders to be the Rams' HC?

To be continued...

Well if Saunders becomes the HC I think he will become just another Linehan, an OC who is over his head.

**AvengerRam** · #8 (**permalink**) -03-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

I'll never understand why people want to completely disregard what Linehan was able to accomplish offensively in 2006, especially after losing his starting center in week one and his starting LT in week two.

Because he didn't really accomplish all that much. I've addressed this at length in the past, with specific examples and statistical proof. And yet... people still want to pretend that 2006 was a great year offensively.

Sigh.

**txramsfan** · #9 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

I don't know anymore....I don't hate Linehan, don't know the man. However, he doesn't seem to be the HC type. Decisive, knows what works in an instant, gamblers mentality when need be.

We could have a star studded staff and I still think Linehan would find a way to be average.

*chiguy* · #10 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

[quote=Chris58;211011]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Probably because in Linehan's first year the Rams were very effective offensively once he took the reins from Olson. After having success as HC/OC he didn't see the need to hire an OC.

You have that backwards...the offense did better when he gave up play calling responsibility. Of course, it also was because we played alot of bad defenses towards the end of his first season as HC.

**AvengerRam** · #11 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

[quote=chiguy;211590]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris58

You have that backwards...the offense did better when he gave up play calling responsibility. Of course, it also was because we played alot of bad defenses towards the end of his first season as HC.

You quoted me, but I didn't post that.

*r8rh8rmike* · #12 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Because he didn't really accomplish all that much. I've addressed this at length in the past, with specific examples and statistical proof. And yet... people still want to pretend that 2006 was a great year offensively.

Sigh.

He engineered the 6th ranked offense in the NFL and was at the top of the chart in red zone efficiency in 2006. He did this after losing his starting center and left tackle in the first two weeks of the season while trying to transition the team to a completely new offense. Maybe not great to some, but it's hard to argue that it wasn't very good under the circumstances.

**AvengerRam** · #13 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

He engineered the 6th ranked offense in the NFL and was at the top of the chart in red zone efficiency in 2006. He did this after losing his starting center and left tackle in the first two weeks of the season while trying to transition the team to a completely new offense. Maybe not great to some, but it's hard to argue that it wasn't very good under the circumstances.

He didn't "engineer" anything. The 2005 Rams - a team that was in turmoil due to Martz's illness - had only 12 fewer yards per game, while scoring an average of 2 points more per game.

If anything, Linehan maintained what was already there (and no, it was not a "completely new offense"), albeit with (1) extremely uneven performances, and (2) an oddly low scoring average in light of the the great turnover ratio in 2006.

*r8rh8rmike* · #14 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

He didn't "engineer" anything. The 2005 Rams - a team that was in turmoil due to Martz's illness - had only 12 fewer yards per game, while scoring an average of 2 points more per game.

If anything, Linehan maintained what was already there (and no, it was not a "completely new offense"), albeit with (1) extremely uneven performances, and (2) an oddly low scoring average in light of the the great turnover ratio in 2006.

I think the numbers in 2006 speak for themselves. It certainly doesn't surprise me that you refuse to give Linehan credit for anything. I'm still trying to figure out what caused SLOP to crawl back into it's shell during the later half of 2006.

**AvengerRam** · #15 (**permalink**) -05-02-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

I think the numbers in 2006 speak for themselves. It certainly doesn't surprise me that you refuse to give Linehan credit for anything. I'm still trying to figure out what caused SLOP to crawl back into it's shell during the later half of 2006.

You're not real big on facts, are you? SLOP was created in November 2006 (during the second half of 2006).

If you want to believe that 2006 was a great year for the offense, go right ahead and believe that. If you want to ignore that Linehan went from calling the plays, to giving that role to Olson, to taking it back, to hiring Saunders to take on that role, be my guest.

SLOP isn't going away until Linehan proves he can handle the job (or is fired). That has not happened yet.