MC

This is a gamble I can get behind. We had to. Nichols is not coming back, and Streveler is not a CFL Qb. You cant just throw away a whole season when you can gamble on ZC. Tape him up, give him extra padding in his helmet ,and pray to christ he can do something on offence. People jumping in with their negativity need to pipe down.

Nichols efficiency rating is 107.2, which is the highest of any QB in the CFL. I know only yards count on this board and not wins but guy was having a great year. 

How many tickets would the Bombers sell if they had to double the prices?
They would not be able to purchase medical insurance that would cover them while they live in the States for less than $20,000 (USD) a year - and that would include very high co-pays, co-insurance, and out-of-pocket max's.  And that is even if they could get it all.  

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  
The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  
The one thing about the current head coach is that he has successfully taken the bullet for the players' failures.  Some people would say that is a sign of leadership.

Who going to pay for all the medical bills for all the players?  This isn't the NFL which has billions of dollars available.

Have to assume both Gray and Roh injuries are for real, I doubt they're getting yanked out because of their play.  They've both played well.

Not only was he raw as an HC when he got the job... the team was a dumpster fire due to bad mgmt and a revolving door of coaches and GM's.  Walters and O'shea decided to try and build a consistent championship contender, which means not pulling a Taman and trading away all your draft picks on aging vets.
That combination was going to end up in ALOT of losses for their first couple of years (combined with the fact we really didn't have a QB until we acquired Nichols)

Hmm... trying to think of a team that has it's offensive and defensive philosophies and sticks to it no matter what.  Oh yeah, it's the Stampeders under Hufnagel.
He has been there long enough to know what types of players fit with his system and which do not. 
You should hear the Calgary fans complain when their team loses.  It sounds just like this group here.  
You might be surprised the way many there talk about BLM.  It doesn't sound anything like how other fan bases talk about him.

Just spoke to #CFL director of officiating Darren Hackwood about why Vernon Adams was not ejected for swinging his helmet at Adam Bighill. "It's a miss," he said. "It's safe to say that he should have been ejected for what he did."
They admitted they screwed up.  The rest of what you want are just platitudes.

Derek Taylor (on 620 radio in Regina) was just going off on the CFL today for not throwing Adams out. He said absolutely the Bombers would have won if the right call was made. He interviewed Arash Madani who agreed and said the CFL needs to be held accountable. Taylor further commented that if the tables were turned and Bighill had hit Adams with his helmet "he would have been suspended for the entire year!"

If they didn't see it, they didn't see it.  At the same time, being that this is such a QB driven league (hence all the rules to protect them) I'm not surprised at all that the refs would err on the side of keeping a QB in the game over ejecting him.  

I watched the game just like everyone else and while I *believed* he hit Bighill with the helmet and deserved an ejection, I didn't actually see the helmet hitting Biggie.
We could infer that he was hit but without clear evidence of that how can they toss a team's starting QB?

Calgary has done the exact same thing this year, twice at home. Blew a 15 point lead against Ottawa, gave up a late TD to lose. Had a 14 point lead on Hamilton and lost, gave up a late TD there. Up 11 with under 2 minutes against Montreal, gave up a 96 TD yard drive in 51 seconds, then a 2 point convert, then an onside kick, then 2 TDs in overtime. Anyone concerned about them right now?
And hey, concern is one thing. Demanding that we gas our coordinators immediately and not even let them fly home is another. We are 9-4 with the #1 scoring offence and #1 red zone offence in the league. Sky is not falling.

Sure, most plays have multiple reads that can lead to several different routes being run or result in different progressions.  For instance, any receiver may have three or more route options depending on whether there how the DB is shading or whether the safety is sitting high or moves up.  If the QB and the receiver get one of those reads wrong, then it looks like the QB has a bad throw, takes a sack when he shouldn't, or takes the checkdown.  The QB knows that he doesn't have to call an audible because the defense just told him that he has another option anyway.  That is why QB's don't come into their own until they have been around for long enough to be able to process the defense.  Running QB's do better out of the gate because they just run when they can't process what is happening. That will only go so far though.  Sooner or later, he has to learn to make plays from the pocket.

Lapolice does less with more better than anyone.  It's actually remarkable how consistent his offense has been in stalling for entire quarters and halves over almost half a decade, like can score 3-4 TD's in little more than a quarter then in the same game not get a first down for a quarter.

So, as usual, I take a couple of days off from the board after a game especially after a loss, ESPECIALLY after THIS loss, to get away from the insanity of the emotion right after a game, but I also read through the angry posts after my cooling off period and caught the usual flavour. Many blame Hall and his bend don't break style (which has held up in 9 wins BTW - and that last drive was more a busted coverage for a 60 yard gain than a soft zone - that WAS break, not bend, on that play at least), many blame LaPo. Some ID breakdowns in the secondary, some point to the missed kicks, one or two spread out the blame to all parties. A couple point to blown calls by the ref, especially the missed helmet swing which should have had Adams Jr. ejected by the letter of the rule. A couple looked at Streveler and his ill-timed INT, but many more seemed to be willing to give him a pass (not surprisingly, the loudest of those were the same people who have been dumping on Nichols all season and pumping Strev's tires - or blowing something else of his, since the start of the year). It is almost comical the level of self-flaggellation this fan board goes through after a defeat like this, hope there weren't too many sprained ankles from yet again hopping off the bandwagon. However, one thing in particular that has been a repeated theme is the "we go conservative on offence, why change what worked. LaPo tries to out-think himself and be a genius, he is too predictable and lousy, etc. etc."
Therefore, rather than knee-jerk reacting to jump on the Lapo-bashing train or try too hard to defend him against the chattering noise without any substantive backing, I looked at the offensive play-calling from the game to get a feel at least for what was being called and if it did change, or if the critics are merely venting and seeing what they want to see to defend their inherent biases. We know Harris' carries by quarter were 5, 3, 2 and 3, and Streveler was 5, 3,1 and 3 (and 2 of those 3 in the 4th were actually both sacks), but was the reduction in running a play-calling matter or simply the fact that they ran less offensive plays overall due to Montreal being on the field longer? The raw data shows that the Bombers ran 19, 11, 12, and 12 offensive plays (counting field goals and attempts but not punts) by quarter, and Montreal ran 7, 17, 14 and 24.
Anyway, here is what the numbers say. Make your own analysis of it to defend your entrenched points of view (I'm sure a few will), but I guess in the end what I see is that the same "inept, useless (fill in your vitriol-filled adjective here) LaPo playcalling" that cost us the game in the 4th is the same that got us the big lead in the first place. Maybe Montreal made adjustments, maybe the INT was a big momentum switch, maybe the issue isn't the coordinators but the players who blew assignements or caved when the pressure got too high for them. Maybe, maybe not.
Bombers ran 8 pass plays, 5 QB runs, and 6 RB runs in the first quarter. It was 4-3-3 in the 2nd (and a kneel down), 7-1-3 in the 3rd (and a FG), and 5-3-3 in the 4th (and a FG miss), so aside from the lack of QB runs in the 3rd, the percentage of type of play call seemed fairly consistent. To be fair, I have not re-watched the video to see how the running plays were designed to see if the style of run (up the gut, sweep, pitch, etc.) changed, but as for the passes, this is what I can say:
I looked at each pass from the point of catch (where the ball was thrown/caught relative to the line of scrimmage), the YAC yardage, and the TOTAL yards worked for (in 6 instances the pass was caught behind the line of scrimmage so the actual gain was less than the total yards worked for)
 
1st quarter:
-4 POC, 10 YAC, 14 YWF (10 yard catch)
-5 POC, 3 YAC, 8 YWF (3 yard catch)
11 POC, 1 YAC, 12 YWF (12 yard catch)
11 POC, 0 YAC, 11 YWF (11 yard catch)
5 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (5 yard incomplete pass)
2 POC, 10 YAC, 12 YWF (12 yard catch)
7 POC, 0 YAC, 7 YWF (7 yard catch)
13 POC, 0 YAC, 13 YWF (13 yard TD catch)
 
2nd quarter:
-2 POC, 11 YAC, 13 YWF (11 yard catch)
7 POC, 2 YAC, 9 YWF (9 yard catch)
35 POC, 39 YAC, 74 YWF (74 yard catch)
10 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (10 yard pass intercepted)
 
3rd quarter:
-4 POC, 6 YAC, 10 YWF (6 yard catch)
6 POC, 4 YAC, 10 YWF (10 yard catch)
(-) POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (pass incomplete out of bounds)
15 POC, 4 YAC, 19 YWF (19 yard catch)
8 POC, 6 YAC, 14 YWF (14 yard catch)
-2 POC, 0 YAC, 2 YWF (0 yard catch)
-6 POC, 6 YAC, 12 YWF (6 yard catch)
 
4th quarter:
8 POC, 7 YAC, 15 YWF (15 yard catch)
8 POC, 0 YAC, 7 YWF (8 yard catch)
6 POC, 4 YAC, 10 YWF (10 yard catch)
4 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (4 yard catch)
13 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (pass interference called)
 
So a quick glance at the numbers does not suggest that our game plan changed significantly in terms of run/pass play selection frequency (and how often do we hear "why get conservative and play kill the clock with the run? Throw it!" when the run gets stuffed, and then "why throw it when the run has been going so well? Chew up yards on the ground and kill the clock, don't overthink things!" when we try not to play conservative run - people will play both sides of the argument so long as it suits their "LaPo sucks" agenda at the time in question) or pass game startegy. It certainly suggests that the short pass and check down is used a lot and that we don't stretch the defence, save for Adams bomb to Harris. Funny that Nichols gets roasted for that style of "game management" but nary a peep about strong-armed Streveler not throwing further downfield than 15 yards once in this game. And hey, this short pass game plan worked gangbusters in the first half when we rolled up the points. Also (as a pre-emptive strike for those who will argue we need to anticipate the Montreal halftime adjustment and NOT stick with what was working because they will catch on), the last time we were rolling with the short pass and then shook things up against BC by inserting Streveler for Nichols, we had a quick turnover and lost the lead by NOT staying the course, so damned if you do, damned if you don't.
So is it the coaches "changing things" that cause our offence to bog down, or the players losing focus, or blown assignments? I won't make a definitive statement, but you can likely guess from this post that I am not about to crucify the coaches alone for this loss. Make what you will of the numbers, if anyone can use these stats to show me how the game plan suddenly flipped from ultra aggressive to ultra conservative based on these numbers, please feel free to break it down for me. Just back it up with what is actually happening, not just what you feel is happening to match the narrative you have already created in your head to justify your bias.
 
 
 

Momentum is a very dangerous thing. You don't want to give it away.

Sure, most plays have multiple reads that can lead to several different routes being run or result in different progressions.  For instance, any receiver may have three or more route options depending on whether there how the DB is shading or whether the safety is sitting high or moves up.  If the QB and the receiver get one of those reads wrong, then it looks like the QB has a bad throw, takes a sack when he shouldn't, or takes the checkdown.  The QB knows that he doesn't have to call an audible because the defense just told him that he has another option anyway.  That is why QB's don't come into their own until they have been around for long enough to be able to process the defense.  Running QB's do better out of the gate because they just run when they can't process what is happening. That will only go so far though.  Sooner or later, he has to learn to make plays from the pocket.

Did a double-take on the first name.  This is not the Trevor Knight that was at Oklahoma and lost his starting job to Baker Mayfield. 

I suspect that the refs have a blindspot when it comes to QBs because it's not usually them doing suspension worthy things.
So I can give the onfield ref a pass, but why in gods name did the eye in the sky not see anything? 
Not that I'm making excuses for the loss or have any bitterness towards that. The loss was easily preventable with or with the Als dirty VAJ still being in the game. 

Well...according to the accepted laws of physics the expansion of the universe should have slowed, stopped and began to retract at some point. Instead it continues to accelerate to the point that cosmologists theorize that at some point in the distant future our descendants will look skyward and not see one single star. 
In short...the universe doesn't make any more sense than this team.

We brought my 9 year old daughter and some friends(plus all her cousins and grandparents) to a game in Edmonton for her bday.  I talked to the bombers social media guy about how it was her bday party at the game and they treated us like royalty.  The girls got to enter from the team dressing room and stand at the bench during warm up.  The players came and wished her happy bday and then Whitehead gave her the game ball after the game for her bday.  Some of the players gave the other girls at the party some gloves and other swag too.  It was honestly the best bday party ever because of the way we were treated.....

I love CFL football but I do agree with some of the points.  Pass interference had swung way too far a few years ago.  I had no idea what it even was anymore.  I would watch NFL games and enjoy them more because they allowed the receivers and DB's to compete more.  Since the commissioner stepped in a couple of years ago, it has become far better and the games are more enjoyable.  I prefer the one challenge per game rule, but it is working okay this year by allowing a second.
I often wonder if we would be better off to just ditch the challenge system.  There are automatic reviews now at the right time anyway.  Most instant replay shows that the officials make the right calls almost all the time.  Fans are selectively blind or hallucinogenic when it comes to officiating and they see things that aren't there regardless of whether there is a review or not.
Other than that, I think the game is doing very well.  They need to tighten up on the head injuries though.

That absolutely sucks.  Hamilton fans are some of the very best in the CFL.  

That is not completely true.  Like all of us, we love our money.  But not like all of us, they know their window to earn it is limited.