O2L

Because we almost exclusively handed the ball off after the Bailey touchdown to kill the clock. Our game plan was situational based on being up a touchdown. If we were down a touchdown the play calling would have reflected that (just like how when it was tied, we threw a deep ball to Bailey). Edmonton wouldn’t have scored anymore points because they didn’t when they actually needed to. They were down by a touchdown and still weren’t able to score when they absolutely needed to, so it’s fair to say that even trying their hardest to score they weren’t able to. If anything, their playcalling would have been more conservative with the lead just like ours was. Does this mean that the Bombers would have come back had they been down by seven? No, not necessarily. But they did score ten points after what may have been a Grymes pick six from fairly similar field position to where a good kick return could have gotten them, so it’s certainly not out of the question that they could have done that. These are pretty simple concepts to understand…

For L’ks sake, these rules are L’king confusing!

Fixed it for you

Duke to Sask. damn.

This GDT really took a weird turn

Well looks like Duke will probably head to BC with Lucky out now

Sadly, I was out of town for all the festivities but I watched a ton of videos. Was Collaros at the parade? I’ve seen a lot of Strev, Nichols, and McGuire.

Guys, I don’t mean to defend a Rider fan here, but his response about Collaros being done etc was a direct response to someone else saying Labatte is done and citing very similar reasons as to why someone *could* say Collaros is done. He literally used the same text but replaced Labatte with Collaros to make a point. It was meant to be facetious, from what I could tell. Best to read it in context.

Not to mention, even if they score, that outs the game into overtime. It doesn’t mean they win.

Whitfield on LA has some nice patience and vision. The football isn’t great but it’s not as bad as some of you are making it out to be. This is week one of eight expansion teams, will take some time for these guys to build chemistry, especially O line.

Aside from Labour Day/Banjo Bowl we have no back to back games, and our final two games of the season are eastern opponents so assuming we aren’t the crossover team we won’t end up in a situation playing a team back to back to end the season/go into the playoffs again. In other words, we won’t see the BS three games against Calgary run we saw to end this year. Also no more than two away games in a row (and two home games in a row) which is nice.

What about Dinwiddie as OC?

Nichols throws less picks and throws the ball away or takes a sack as soon as there’s pressure. Collaros is better at evading pressure and making something out of nothing, but also takes more risks with dangerous passes. Outside of the above, they’re relatively similar. I personally prefer Collaros when comparing their differences, but don’t mind Nichols.

Any chance you have a hi-res of this? I would love to use it but I'm on a 2880 x 1800 monitor.

Thanks Rich! Appreciate the site and if you ever decide to open it to donations I’ll be the first to pony up some cash!

I know everyone’s gotta eat, but this isn’t good. I’d much sooner donate a little bit if there was an option for that. This just compels next to use an ad blocker or stop visiting the site.

Injured otherwise I’m sure we’d pick him up!

Hopefully enough to make the passing game for the Stamps null and the bomber run game top priority

In any particular order? 🙂

I agree about not being worried about the Riders, I’m more worried about trying to beat a team three times in a row. Home field advantage obviously helps but we haven’t fared so well in home playoff games in recent history.

So, purely for fun as we know the Bombers wouldn’t intentionally lose, would we be better off losing to Calgary so they can take first place and we don’t have to play them three times in a row, instead playing Sask in the first round (but in their house)?

Not sure about that, because Calgary has the tiebreaker against Sask. I believe next in line is combined wins against eachother? Or maybe divisional wins?

Yeah I more mean from a numbers standpoint. For us to finish first ahead of them, they’d need to lose two of their last three and we’d need to win out in a back to back with Calgary. For Calgary to finish ahead of them, they’ll have to beat us. So it’s a catch 22 because even if you win out, sask can still finish ahead of us thanks to the tiebreaker, in which case we then helped them get to first place. All things considered, they’re the most likely of the three teams to finish first based on who they’re playing and cal and us playing eachother.

No matter which way you cut it, I think we need to resign ourselves to the fact that Sask is finishing first. Arguably the worst part of that is three games in a row against Calgary.

Defensive play calling last two games has been so much better. Might be same schemes, but it’s all about timing as to when a play is called and I’ve been very impressed by what’s been called when in these two games.