johnzo

Reilly, in the second half of the Edm/Mon game, showed more than any of our quarterbacks have all year. He played well enough to win, but the Eskimos D had no answer for Whitaker. There's some progress going on there. Also, Drew Willy may be playing himself onto the 2013 offseason QB carousel.

Man at this point I don't even need a win to be happy. I just need to see some signs.

Sheets

Ray's game against us is the closest thing to a perfect game that a QB has ever played in the CFL. 19/20 passing is unreal. For him not to get offensive player of the week is bullshit. It's funny how the conversation here this week has continued to center on Buck and not on our defence's utter failure to compete against the Argos.

This team doesn't just need a new starting QB. It needs an exorcism. I swear the bad vibes from Ottawa relocated westward after the Rough Riders folded in 1996.

Yup, I'll take Sheets. Hamilton's only hope will be to deploy a multinational squadron of giant jaeger mecha against him.

We run play action occasionally, and only once (the second game against Montreal) have I see the pass rush bite on it. The couple of times I noticed it against Hamilton, it slowed the rush not even a millisecond. I don't know what's wrong, whether Buck isn't selling it, or we have other tells, or whatever.

I don't know. It's a team game. He did pump fake Etienne wide open. People say that if we had even an adequate QB we could win with this team. I agree with that and I think we had an adequate QB for the first half, and if Pierce had performed in the second half like he had in the first we would have won the game. So what happened in the second half? I'm not convinced it's as simple as "Pierce sucks." I do know that we completely stopped running the ball in the third quarter after having some success with it in first half. yeah, when I look back at all of Pierce's best moments, they happen when he's wandering around the field and improvising. I think that you're onto something here -- which means that the fault lies with the coaches for trying to run something that doesn't suit their any of their quarterbacks. Remember how awkward McPherson looked in Calvillo's quick-release max-protect system? I wonder if Goltz will have the same trouble when he starts playing.

Well, he did play well enough to have us in the lead at halftime, and he didn't turn the ball over. Did someone mention Glenn in this thread?

The frustrating thing is that Buck did make some plays in the first half. He wasn't shooting the lights out but he did move the ball for a TD and the Palardy miss. He was 10/14 for about 130 at halftime but then he completely fell apart in the third quarter. Gotta rewatch the game and see what changed in the third quarter, whether Hamilton started blitzing more or what. Another weird thing: who could have anticipated that Etienne would be outplaying Matthews at this point in the season?

Benching Denmark seems like a silly move. He's not the problem.

I don't think I've ever heard a player publicly call out his coaching like AC did last week. Unless they turn it around fast that locker room is going to fester.

Interesting formation in short yardage with Whitaker taking the snap and Calvillo lining up as a tailback. I guess the point is to get Calvillo on the field for short yardage so that the Stamps have to think about the possibility of a gadget pass play?

What? The entire Montreal offence was built around AC getting the ball out fast. (At least it was back before the current goofs ruined it.)

Cool. Definitely a sportier name than "(Bank) Field" or "(Insurance Company) Field" or "(Telecom) Field."

"Hi, Hank. Name's Dexter Davis. I'm playing in my first CFL game today. It's nice to meet you."

Getting George Cortez was a great move. The guy has had awesome offences wherever he's coached. Yeah, that Scott McHenry block on the end-around, where he was just hanging around waiting for the play to develop and then he totally springs the runner .... that was something I'd never seen before.

Note to self: check for bluto posts on riderfans.com in the days leading up to Bombers vs. Argos games.

Pierce = does just enough to win far more than he loses. Glenn = does just enough to win about as much as he loses.

Kyries Hebert probably feels there's a "Winnipeg rule" after this past weekend.

Assuming we don't sign Matthews before the expansion draft, it seems like he's a risky guy to protect. If he rebounds this year and looks like he's going to explore free agency, then it's likely a waste of a spot to protect him, since all we'll get for protecting him is an extra couple of months to negotiate. If he doesn't rebound this year and turns out to be a one year wonder, is it worth protecting him at all?

If I'd stuck with my vote-against Hamilton strategy I'd be zero strikes right now. It's gonna be starting tailback vs. the TiCats for me from here on out.

Matthews is a free agent next year, isn't he? Why protect him?

Simpson

Yeah, look at how back the Ticats are hooped without both Fantuz and Stala -- you gotta hang onto all the starting-calibre NIs we can.