this is a good question, but one that is hard to know without being on the field and watching it happen. So everything that I say is merely an educated GUESS.
First I am comfortable with the Patricia/Yates running of the OL. Yates has been an OLman in the NFL and has been dong this for a while, and Patricia was an OLman right through college, and while coaching the DL and being a DC he KNOWS all the offensive line concepts and blocking schemes from those many years trying to defend them. AND you don't be around Dante for all those years and not pick up a LOT of good coaching points. So clearly he has enough knowledge and experience to coach our OL.
But the key to any good coaching is the ability to TEACH, and that goes for any level of football (or any sport for that matter). CAN you translate what you want the player to do so that they understand what they need to do, AND make them want to do it. That last point is key. I never wanted to have a kid run through a brick wall for me just because I said so. I felt it is equally important to explain WHY running through that wall was important. So if you can communicate details of what you need, AND motivate them with the understanding of WHY it needs to be done this way, then it is more than likely you are going to get the results you want on the field....eventually.
So if they are instituting a new blocking scheme or marrying something new to what they have already been doing, I'm less interested in the end result at this point. For the next few weeks, I'll be looking at the effort and even more importantly the "buy in" from the players. As teachers, I want to know HAVE the coaches communicated the importance of what they are doing AND the potential rewards of the change when they finally get it right,
Yates and Patricia have BOTH been coaching in the NFL for a while. I don't think they could have stayed in their positions as long as they have if they DIDN'T have the ability to communicate and motivate grown men. I hope that answers you question to some degree