ZN, imo there's a difference between a boring offense and an effective offense.

The Run and Shoot was an exciting (non-boring) offense; Chip Kelly's offense is an exciting (non-boring) offense.
However its effectiveness is questionable on the overall outcome of the game.

An effective offense that accomplishes what the strategy is for winning a games can be very boring, but lead to wins. Chuck Knox was famous for that.

The problem with Fisher's offense since coming to the Rams is: it is ineffective, it is boring, it is frustrating, it is predictable, and it doesn't lead to wins.

Now if you find Fisher's offenses as leading to excitement because as a result of terrible offense the only possible way to win for the Rams has been defensive tussles, then fine. But the lack of an offense that leads to winning games, however one characterizes it, would have sent most HCs into the job market. And it should have sent Fisher there 2 years ago. To me it has been sheer incompetence on his part, or a stubborn blind eye on how the league has changed both offensively and defensively over the last 10, 12 years or so, as have the rules, that makes the game a bit different game from when he had a couple of good years with the Titans.