Tweet
I'll start with the obvious.
I condemned Scott Line#&% early in his tenure with the Rams (perhaps unfairly, but ultimately rightly, so).
I fully support Steve Spagnuolo.
Why the difference?
Well, it just does not come down to wins and losses.
Line#&% took over a team that was a bit down, but still had a core of players (Bulger, Jackson, Bruce, Holt, Curtis, Pace, Little, etc.) who been to the playoffs. His job was to sustain the remaining pieces of the GSOT, refresh the roster, stabilize the organization, and return to the playoffs.
When Spagnuolo took over, that core was gone (Bruce, Curtis), on the way out (Holt, Pace) or worn down by three injury-plagued seasons (Bulger, Little). The only true known commodity was Steven Jackson. Spags' job was to REBUILD.
So... given the difference in the HCs' respective "missions," there should be no surprise that there have been different initial results.
Line#&% failed accross the board. His inability to manage playcalling duties with HC duties hindered the effectiveness of the veteran offense. His player personnel decisions were poor. His style caused division, rather than unity. And, of course, the team suffered on the field.
Spagnuolo's success or failure simply can't be evaluated at this point. Anyone who thought that the Rams could remove the (arguably over-priced and under-performing) base of veterans, elevate a bunch of players with 0-3 years experience, and start winning immediately (and I include myself in this category) was kidding him or herself.
This is not a new scenario. Teams often, following a successful run, have to bottom out entirely before returning to success. Look at the Cowboys during the transition from Tom Landry to Jimmy Johnson. First you have to break ties with the past (regardless of the short-term consequences), then you have to make good personnel decisions, and then... and only then, can a new era begin.
The error of the Line#&% regime is that it wrongly tried to sustain an era that, in reality, was already gone.
This is the first year in which the Rams organization has truly accepted that the GSOT years are over, and that a new chapter needs to written.
I'm still banking on Spagnuolo being the man to help write the next story.
I condemned Scott Line#&% early in his tenure with the Rams (perhaps unfairly, but ultimately rightly, so).
I fully support Steve Spagnuolo.
Why the difference?
Well, it just does not come down to wins and losses.
Line#&% took over a team that was a bit down, but still had a core of players (Bulger, Jackson, Bruce, Holt, Curtis, Pace, Little, etc.) who been to the playoffs. His job was to sustain the remaining pieces of the GSOT, refresh the roster, stabilize the organization, and return to the playoffs.
When Spagnuolo took over, that core was gone (Bruce, Curtis), on the way out (Holt, Pace) or worn down by three injury-plagued seasons (Bulger, Little). The only true known commodity was Steven Jackson. Spags' job was to REBUILD.
So... given the difference in the HCs' respective "missions," there should be no surprise that there have been different initial results.
Line#&% failed accross the board. His inability to manage playcalling duties with HC duties hindered the effectiveness of the veteran offense. His player personnel decisions were poor. His style caused division, rather than unity. And, of course, the team suffered on the field.
Spagnuolo's success or failure simply can't be evaluated at this point. Anyone who thought that the Rams could remove the (arguably over-priced and under-performing) base of veterans, elevate a bunch of players with 0-3 years experience, and start winning immediately (and I include myself in this category) was kidding him or herself.
This is not a new scenario. Teams often, following a successful run, have to bottom out entirely before returning to success. Look at the Cowboys during the transition from Tom Landry to Jimmy Johnson. First you have to break ties with the past (regardless of the short-term consequences), then you have to make good personnel decisions, and then... and only then, can a new era begin.
The error of the Line#&% regime is that it wrongly tried to sustain an era that, in reality, was already gone.
This is the first year in which the Rams organization has truly accepted that the GSOT years are over, and that a new chapter needs to written.
I'm still banking on Spagnuolo being the man to help write the next story.
Comment