TrueBlue4ever

Bierness in studio allows Rod Smith to do play by play exclusively. Suspect he will be the number 2 guy as Black moves to number 1.

Hey, Crapigna was perfect last night……from inside 15 yards.

BC should be looking for a new kicker pronto.

Lucky Whitehead would have added something to that Bomber receiving corps last night. Just sayin’

And Rourke back in at QB for BC.

There are 50/50 balls, and then there is what Reilly is throwing tonight. I’ve seen field goal tries with a better spiral than what Reilly is tossing up this game. And yet they are clawing back. They may want to use their global position on someone other than their kicker, he has left points on the field.

Most ever medals by Canada at a summer games in a non-boycott year.

There is something about Barker that has irritated me in the past, but I thought he gave a pretty good breakdown of the Sask game plan for the half and how it compensated for their o-line woes. He has good insight and can communicate it to an audience well to my mind.

I recall some “running like a chicken with his head cut off” scrambles that ended with a log throw that went incomplete. But I may have conveniently forgotten some of the completions. He did seem to hold on to the ball longer than Nichols would have, and extending the play could become very valuable at times. I just hope he doesn’t need to use that escape valve as much as he did yesterday. Quick reads, rather than improvising, would give me more comfort with this offence. Anyway, glad to see some mobility back there, but I don’t think he made the difference where Nichols would not have yesterday.

Can anyone explain why Reilly is in now? If he is healthy enough to play, why did he not start? If he was being protected tonight for long term benefit down the road, why bring him in at the half down by 23? And when the struggling rookie got 2 scoring drives in a row to end the first half and was getting into a bit of a rhythm? Very questionable coaching decision in my mind. Maybe part of a rope-a-dope scheme?

BC looked severely outmatched all half, and yet they have more points through 30 minutes than the “will they go 14-0” Ticats had all game yesterday. 🤣

1. Oliveira - took over the game in the second half and gave us our only offence in those 30 minutes. 2 big plays on second and long that both extended scoring drives. 2. Mike Jones - tackling machine and his hard hits caused havoc and turnovers. 3. Steve “stove” Richardson - provided pressure all night and was in Masoli’s kitchen a ton. Deserved more penalty flags for the holding he fought through. HH - struggled watching the game to see that one big play that made a difference for my planned “Cactus” ramble since all the momentum plays turned into nothing burgers. Oliveira made a big play on 2nd and 13 with his swing pass execution and later a draw play for 11 on 2nd and 9, but he was consistent without the home run shot. Thought maybe Mike Jones’ forced fumble would be a momentum changer but they didn’t even get a field goal out of it. The club never really “put the game away” even though they were never really in danger. So I started thinking outside the box, maybe salute Legghio for some nice directional punting that kept Hamilton on a long field, maybe the fan with the “Riders Suck” sign that drew what felt like the night’s biggest cheer (somewhat telling about the enjoyment factor of the game), maybe the scramble by Collaros and pass to Demski for 50 yards, but the offence still seemed unsettled after that and I can’t fully reward a receiver tripping over his own feet with a chance at a TD. Even thought about saluting all the fans who got doubly vaxxed and came out, the club for getting protocols in place to allow for a full house, or the health care workers who deserve all the credit in the world and a fat pay raise for their tireless efforts in an impossible job these past 18 months. But keeping it game related, I go back to a play in the second quarter that seemed innocuous in the big picture at the time, but loomed larger upon reflection. Willie Jefferson was set to rush the QB, but ad libbed and dropped into coverage and read Masoli’s eyes perfectly, intercepting a pass well inside Bomber territory. A great show of both football smarts and athleticism (dude has a massive reach with those long arms). We punted away later so it seemed nothing came of the turnover, but Hamilton was driving and would have re-taken the lead even if held to a field goal, and given how unproductive our offence was most of the night, keeping points off the board there and maintaining momentum proved vital once the game played out in full.

Predictions based on wishful thinking are often wrong. Fajardo still has his warts, but he is running a quick release passing offence well, and like Collaros can extend plays with his legs.

I think last night was a classic LaPo/Nichols game. Ball control offence, heavy run game, control the time of possession. Collaros hardly lit it up, only 217 yards. Nichols would have produced the same, maybe even a few more yards as he would have engaged Oliviera in the swing pass game more (remember his one catch went for 21, so it worked the k e time they went to it). The big difference was Collaros extending plays with his scrambling, but honestly how well did it work? Don’t recall any big plays out of nothing that often other than the one Demski catch after all the running around, lots of those passes went incomplete anyway, and he took a couple of sacks for big losses where Nichols should have swallowed a smaller sack or thrown it away, or run a controlled rollout. I will say Collaros’ ability to run for first downs was important and above what Nichols could achieve but again that was not a serious weapon he went to again and again. That game was won by the defence, having Nichols and LaPo in yesterday and it is the same result. I can see games where the Collaros’ style will win us games because we need to win a gun slinging shootout, but I can also see it costing us games. He was lucky in at least 2 throws not to be picked off. But I was hoping a Grey Cup win might get people to lay off on the Nichols/LaPo bashing. Guess some will be married to that narrative forever, and to me that is disappointing. They deserve better IMO.

If I can’t get half credit for a 2 point convert, then I say a hard no. I’m bitter that way. 😉

Yeah, it’s like those fans who criticize Offensive coordinators and QBs who win games for being “Game managers” who can’t go through their reads or “passive” strategies and who “suck at play calling”. The height of arrogance and ignorance. 😉

The jersey tug was a play where the Bombers took a holding penalty. O’Shea could have challenged but it would only have resulted in offsetting penalties, so he let it slide and saved it for later (the trapped “catch”).

Greg Ellingson

Will be a good lead in to prep for the Happy Honker ramblings of this guy.

Will never be enough likes for this gif.

Thanks for the clarification. My sources at the Bomber Store (I checked with 2 of them) gave me different info. It seemed to not make sense.

I could point out how many times LaPo has had the number 1 offence in his coaching career, how offensive schemes and play calling kind of go hand in hand, how “not being a big play riverboat gambler” or “ball control limit the turnovers” is not the same as “sucks as a play caller”, how his conservative style may have to do with the weapons he was handed, or simply ask how many teams you have coached or Grey Cup rings you have won compared to him since you seem to have all the answers, but it would fall on deaf ears because you have had an axe to grind with him seemingly forever, culminating in your support of Joe Mack over LaPo when the team faltered with them both and you wanted to assign blame. So throwing your credibility chips in with Mack tells me all I need to k ow about your judgment, just as cherry picking one division final loss in Calgary against a Grey Cup winning team as proof that LaPo is a failure does. Honestly, if I wanted to hear from a clown, I’d conduct interviews at the circus.

I know. But the lots usually lined up with which gates you used in the past. Gate 4 had been my assigned gate in the past. Anyway, if anyone has a ticket that has a gate other than gate 1 listed, please advise, otherwise we will all be going in at Gate 1.

Gate 3 or 4 is my normal assigned gate given where I park, and my ticket says gate 1. I am puzzled by it too, but that’s what I was told.