How can Rams fix several bad decisions before facing the Patriots in Week 11?

As the LA Rams prepared to host the Miami Dolphins in Week 10, there was a sense that the team had to rush their injured offensive linemen to the football field to handle business. The team wanted to get both Jonah Jackson and Steve Avila onto the football field. While that may have been prompted by good intentions, it certainly did not hold up on the football field.

Perhaps the coaching staff failed to comprehend that the group was already facing upheaval with the injury to RT Rob Havenstein, and the fact that backup swing tackle Joe Noteboom would take his place. But the game is history. The team felt it best to swap out three players who had not surrendered a single quarterback sack in Week 9, for offensive linemen who were returning to health, but who hadn't played together as a group all season:

The Rams needed the best out of the offense.

Unfortunately, they didn't get it. Four quarterback sacks, one interception, no touchdowns. For the second week in a row, the Rams offense seemed hapless and ineffective. Is the team becoming too predictable once more?

After two consecutive weeks of leaning more into their 12-personnel offense, the Rams backed off in Week 10. Let's run down the formation breakdown since the team's Week 6 BYE:

• Week 7: 1 RB - 100% | 1 TE - 85% | 2 TE - 15%
• Week 8: 1 RB - 100% | 1 TE - 55% | 2 TE - 45%
• Week 9: 1 RB - 100% | 1 TE - 69% | 2 TE - 31%
• Week10: 1 RB - 100% | 1 TE - 91% | 2 TE - 9%

Here are a couple of thoughts about the Rams use of two tight ends. The most points scored since the BYE happened in Week 8, the same week in which the offense played a two-tight end offense nearly half of the time. But the other anomaly occured in Week 10. In a game with a backup offensive tackle, why did the Rams suddenly drastically cut their use of 12-personnel?

I'm not an NFL coach, but wouldn't the extra help blocking for a backup offensive tackle only make sense?