[Elvis]

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fish ... -rams.html

Bonsignore: Extending contracts of Coach Jeff Fisher, GM Les Snead is only logical move for Rams

Aug. 17, 2016 Updated 9:09 p.m.


Jeff Fisher may not have coached a team into the playoffs for the past seven seasons, but he appears to have the Rams headed in the right direction.
KEVIN SULLIVAN, STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

By VINCENT BONSIGNORE / STAFF WRITER

IRVINE – If reading between the lines is your thing, a conclusion or two can be drawn from some recent messages coming out of Rams camp.

And if those instincts prove correct, the long-range direction of the franchise and at least the shot-term plan at quarterback could soon reveal themselves.

Behind the scenes, it's looking more and more like Coach Jeff Fisher and General Manager Les Snead will get contract extensions before the season opens.

With contract talks as fickle as they can be sometimes, anything can pop up and sabotage things. But with all sides open to extending the relationship, there is a clear path to an agreement. With those dynamics in place, things usually get done.

And as Fisher told me recently: “I’m planning on coaching here a long time, so I’m not concerned.”

If so, the job security moving forward will also provide the comfort level that allows Fisher and Snead to make decisions with the big picture in mind rather than out of self-preservation.

Like, say, the parameters and timeline they follow in determining when to hand the quarterback reins to rookie Jared Goff.

But more on that in a bit.

Both Fisher and Snead are entering the final year of their original five-year contracts. And while the 27-36-1 record they’ve compiled since 2012 – and the seven seasons that have passed since Fisher coached a team into the playoffs – don’t make a compelling case for extending their tenures, a little bit of perspective and nuance might change that perception.

The franchise Fisher and Snead inherited four years ago was in absolute shambles – as evidenced by the 15-65 record over the five years that preceded their arrival. Since then, they’ve completely turned over the roster while creating a solid foundation that features the reigning Offensive Rookie of the Year (Todd Gurley) and 2014 Defensive Rookie of the Year (Aaron Donald).

And by moving up in the draft last April to pick Goff first overall, they presumably added their franchise quarterback.

If Goff hits, the lone remaining glaring hole is at wide receiver, where the Rams have been unable to identify and develop an adequate No. 1 target.

While a high-end wide receiver remains a frustrating pursuit, it palls in comparison to the disaster site they encountered upon arrival. Considering the starting point, the Rams have made steady progress under Fisher and Snead.

By extending the relationship, the Rams are acknowledge the roster advancement and casting a vote of approval for the vision moving forward.

That doesn't even account for the message it would send – or the drama it would create – if the Rams sent Fisher and Snead into 2016 as lame ducks on top of the challenges and distractions created by the cross-country move from St. Louis, their first season back in Los Angeles and nurturing a rookie quarterback.

Knowing a little bit about the media as I do, I can pretty much assure weekly shade being thrown on the long-term status of Fisher and Snead status if they’re dangling by a string all season. And it wouldn’t just be the media talking about it, either. That’s the kind of conversation that finds its way to the locker room.

Is that a distraction the Rams really want to subject themselves to in a season that will be full of them?

Especially when they can eliminate it by giving Fisher and Snead security beyond this season?

Stability comes at a price sometimes, and in this case it’s worth the cost.

That might not sit well with fans itching for a change, but it does make sense.

Which brings us to the battle between Goff and incumbent Keenum for the starting quarterback job, and how locking up Fisher and Snead long term will mean decision-making based on the big picture rather than self interests.

Keenum has done nothing so far to warrant a demotion, and Goff has shown little yet to make the case he deserves the starting job.

Three weeks remain before the Rams have to make a final call, but if standard NFL timeline is used it’s really only another week or so. It’s typical for teams to play their starters into the second half during the third preseason game, and then go exclusively with back ups in the fourth game.

So, if Keenum is the starter next week when the Rams play the Broncos, it will be a strong signal he’ll line up behind center against the 49ers to open the season.

Based on how Fisher sang Keenum's praises after Saturday's preseason opener against the Cowboys., you get the feeling he's tightening his grip on the job.

“If (WR) Tavon (Austin) makes the catch, Case ends the game 7-for-7 and did everything he needed to do,” Fisher said. “That’s just what we want to see, he’s feeling good in the offense, he’s running the operation, you can see his movement skills. I think it was after the penalty we and on third-and-short, third-and-seven, he scrambled, didn’t get it and got down. He understands keeping drives alive. As we expand this offense through training camp, he’ll have a lot more opportunities to make those big plays.

“Again, I was pleased. I know all your attention is on Jared, but Case played good.”

Short of Keenum definitively playing himself out of the job – or the Rams falling flat on their face – what justification will there be to make an in-season switch?

That is, unless a coach and general manager are operating without a safety net.

That tends to change the dynamics.

Without job security, you wonder if Fisher and Snead will long-play the quarterback situation and let it sort itself out organically. In other words, not feel compelled to prove a point they were correct in drafting Goff first overall, or to try and buy themselves more time by rolling out a rookie quarterback.

There is no proof to suggest either would let their personal situations cloud their decision-making, at least not consciously. But you have to believe on some level it's a factor.

The Rams can eliminate even the possibility of that by giving Fisher and Snead peace of mind.

If the Rams go belly up in 2016, they can always cut Fisher or Snead or both loose and go in another direction. They'd have to eat dead money, but Stan Kroenke's deep pockets can easily afford it.

On the other hand, if a young, talented roster continues to ascend and Goff turns out to be the quarterback the Rams believe he can be, Fisher and Snead will be the undisputed architects of quite the turnaround.

[OldSchool]

I'd rather we wait. Fisher himself has set the bar that he should be judged by in his episode 1 of hard knocks speech.

[Hacksaw]

Agreed OS. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Time to see how these guys do first.

[dieterbrock]

Well except PPG doesn't tell you about the context.

How many teams with a melted down qb and a very inexperienced and then also injured OL make the playoffs? Or, have a high PPG?

Any? Ever?

In fact I think given those circumstances, and playing such a tough schedule in such a tough division, 7-9 is a real achievement.

Again, unless people can name teams that had similar circumstances and did better.

.

The irony here is comical. The context?
Yes, the context was in what the playoff teams have in common. Lowest PPG in the league is not a common trait.
Offense with Case Keenum only averaged about 16 ppg.

ot going to come close to the playoffs with that kind of production

You making this heatedly antagonistic aside, you just simply did not follow what I meant by context. You're not using the word remotely the way I am.

Context for me means an analysis of why the team is performing the way it is. There can be several answers to that in advance of looking, so you actually do have to look. You can just dismiss that kind of context and you can't NOT look and claim to know.

And to me that means looking at several key factors...not just the qb, and not just the coach.

So for example when CK started with a relatively healthy, stable OL the offense actually averaged 19.25 (pure offensive) points a game.

And that also has to account for the fact that CK is #2 type qb, not a franchise starter, let alone elite.

So I would say that yeah, an offense going 3-1 with a #2 qb and a relatively healthy but also inexperienced line is a sign of moving in the right direction.

Why do I look at whether or not the OL is relatively healthy? Because rarely does a qb and therefore an offense perform well when the OL is multiply injured to the point of being disrupted. It;'s actually something you can count on in analysis...it's routinely a determining factor, unless a team has that rare type of qb who can still thrive in those conditions.

Context to me means looking at the team analytically and accounting for its real situation. In contrast, to ME, what you did was just apply some kind of abstract, contextless thing and then nevertheless leap to conclusions about the team. And I don't think doing that is either comical or tragic... ... I just think it's an argument that won't stand up to scrutiny. But then we all make those at different times. C'est la.

On another level of this topic, what about PPG and the teams that made the playoffs last year? Of the playoff teams, 7 were in the top 12 in terms of PPG. That ranged from 28.6 to 22,6 PPG. If you count all the playoff teams, they ranged from ranked 1st (28.6 PPG) to 24th (18.9 PPG). The superbowl winner was ranked 22nd (19.6 PPG).

....

Context-
I was replying to the idea of what stat is common amongst playoff teams
Out of context- your post rehashing every excuse the Rams have had for not winning. Its tired by the way
Case Keenum did not lead the team to 19.6, so stop tweaking the numbers
Baltimore 13
Detroit 14
Tamp 31 (Outlier)
Seattle 16
San Fran 16
90 offensive points in 5 games 18ppg
Not going to win that way and cant expect the defense to score and play as well as they did.
The offense was ineffective but thanks to the D, and Gurley, they won 3 of the 5 games

The offense has been terrible in Fisher tenure. There's no denying it.
Switching gears here....
In the NFC, there have only been 4 teams to not make the playoffs since Fisher joined the Rams
Giants- fired Coughlin
Bears- fired 2 coaches
Tampa- fired 2 coaches
The Rams-
Heck there have been tems in the NFC that even made the playoffs, but still fired their coach
Eagles, Redskins, Atlanta and Sort of San Fran...

All teams go through it, and most still have a year now and again. Thanks to Fisher's prevent offense, we haven't reached the playoffs or even .500

[dieterbrock]

I changed my mind.
Let him earn the extension.
He has totally botched the Goff situation

[moklerman]

I changed my mind.
Let him earn the extension.
He has totally botched the Goff situation

And that's only if you want to give him a pass on making a Goff situation. The Rams didn't HAVE to give up 6 premium picks to go after a QB. Neither Goff or Wentz look to even be ready to play in the NFL. Why trade away so much for a guy who's just as much of a project as any of the other QB's in the draft?

[dieterbrock]

I changed my mind.
Let him earn the extension.
He has totally botched the Goff situation

And that's only if you want to give him a pass on making a Goff situation. The Rams didn't HAVE to give up 6 premium picks to go after a QB. Neither Goff or Wentz look to even be ready to play in the NFL. Why trade away so much for a guy who's just as much of a project as any of the other QB's in the draft?

Because he's not that much of a project. He looks bad because the Rams are clueless as to development
He's the #1 overall pick and has been dealt the ugly stick. Not how you develop a qb

[OldSchool]

I changed my mind.
Let him earn the extension.
He has totally botched the Goff situation

And that's only if you want to give him a pass on making a Goff situation. The Rams didn't HAVE to give up 6 premium picks to go after a QB. Neither Goff or Wentz look to even be ready to play in the NFL. Why trade away so much for a guy who's just as much of a project as any of the other QB's in the draft?

Because he's not that much of a project. He looks bad because the Rams are clueless as to development
He's the #1 overall pick and has been dealt the ugly stick. Not how you develop a qb

Yup if you take a QB #1 over all, even if you trade 6 picks to get him and two other picks. (People conveniently forget that in their attempts to make it look bad it wasn't a 6 for 1 trade like they falsely claim.) Most of the time if you take a QB in the 1st you give him snaps as your #1 QB. Fisher isn't doing that so he really isn't giving the kid a chance to win the job and it's making Fisher look bad in the process. Maybe we'll get lucky and he won't be here next year and we bring in an offensive mind at HC who will work with Goff.

[Hacksaw]

I thought that was what Weinke and Groh were supposed to do.