This is probably the softest D I've watched in decades a Bomber fan. I'm flummoxed. Owsh Walters and Hall (edit woops thats a bit embarrassing) had the off season to try and plug holes but it looks like it's the same old same old: not enough consistent pressure and incredibly  soft coverage. It's just infuriating. 

So what are some immediate things the coaches can do to try and make this D, arguably as bad or maybe worse than Hamilton's, closer to middle of the pack?

Edited September 3, 20178 yr by White Out

God forbid Lankford scores another touchdown or we'll all be complaining about him still in 2020.

On 9/7/2017 at 6:47 PM, tracker said:

Wild wouldn't be the first very good player whose body couldn't take the pounding and had to pack it in early.

But this most recent injury has nothing to do with that. It's a broken wrist.

On 9/8/2017 at 7:13 PM, AKAChip said:

God forbid Lankford scores another touchdown or we'll all be complaining about him still in 2020.

Bahahaha.... 

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Bahahaha.... 

Yeah he was excellent today with his one catch where he was essentially uncovered. I guess a touchdown erases all...

3 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

Yeah he was excellent today with his one catch where he was essentially uncovered. I guess a touchdown erases all...

I guess you didn't watch the game. He also had a rushing play for 12 yards and 2 kickoff returns for 50 yards. 85 combined yards and a score... Keep whining about him being in the lineup, though.

Edited September 10, 20178 yr by blue_gold_84

2 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

I guess you didn't watch the game. He also had a rushing play for 12 yards and 2 kickoff returns for 50 yards. 85 combined yards and a score... Keep whining about him being in the lineup, though.

WOW! A rush for 12 yards???! Two kickoff returns for 50???? Put him in the hall of fame. If you are satisfied with less than mediocre production from someone on the roster, good for you. Obviously you're easily impressed. 

One of the biggest complaints about players is their lack of contribution. I believe that's what's been pointed out in Lankford's case. If he's going to be in the lineup, he has to contribute. He did.

6 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

WOW! A rush for 12 yards???! Two kickoff returns for 50???? Put him in the hall of fame. If you are satisfied with less than mediocre production from someone on the roster, good for you. Obviously you're easily impressed. 

He did his job yesterday. He got into the endzone. By no means a perfect player but with his speed he keeps the defense honest and opens up the short/middle part of the field because you have to respect his speed. 

I think Kyries Hebert suits this D. Can play both WIL and MAC. And brings the attitude.

Edited September 10, 20178 yr by M.O.A.B.

27 minutes ago, M.O.A.B. said:

I think Kyries Hebert suits this D. Can play both WIL and MAC. And brings the attitude.

Maybe as a rental player.

3 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Typical childish rebuttal.

I pointed out what he actually did. Nowhere does that imply he's HOF worthy or that anyone is easily impressed.  No wonder nobody here takes your commentary seriously. Obviously, you're just a presumptuous assclown.

Alright let's try again. 

If you don't believe that Lankford's contributions could not be adequately replaced and then some by Thorpe or even someone completely different altogether, then we will never come to an agreement. If all it takes for you to be satisfied by Lankford is one catch every two games and a couple of 25 yard kick returns then all the power to you. In my mind it's a waste to have a guy on the roster more or less solely for kick returns when he only gets to touch the ball 4 times a game in a good day. Even someone like you, who clearly loves him some Lankford can't deny that he is a lacklustre receiver and even if he is better than I give him credit for, they don't throw him the damn ball! At least Thorpe was getting targets and making things happen 5, 6, 7 times per game. 

So forgive me for being flippant when your highlights of his stellar game consist of 4 touches. A 25 yard kickoff return average is average. Plain and simple. 

3 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Typical childish rebuttal.

I pointed out what he actually did. Nowhere does that imply he's HOF worthy or that anyone is easily impressed.  No wonder nobody here takes your commentary seriously. Obviously, you're just a presumptuous assclown.

I suppose this means you speak for everyone. It's very difficult to have a discussion with someone who makes it very clear that they know next to nothing about football. 

Lets try this another way.......Thorpe is a better fit (and an additional safety valve) for this O.

4 hours ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

He did his job yesterday. He got into the endzone. By no means a perfect player but with his speed he keeps the defense honest and opens up the short/middle part of the field because you have to respect his speed. 

Yup. Speed kills.

1 hour ago, do or die said:

Lets try this another way.......Thorpe is a better fit (and an additional safety valve) for this O.

Agreed. This edition of the Bombers is not a big-play offense like BC, Edmonton or even the Riders. We do have Adams and Dressler who are very quick but the 10-15 yard passes are Nichols' bread and butter. And that is what Thorpe brings.

7 minutes ago, tracker said:

Agreed. This edition of the Bombers is not a big-play offense like BC, Edmonton or even the Riders. We do have Adams and Dressler who are very quick but the 10-15 yard passes are Nichols' bread and butter. And that is what Thorpe brings.

And that's what the  other side of the  discussion says. That is, we already have that aspect of the game covered. Lankford brings the speed, if only to open up the very same short stuff you're talking about. Somebody has to stretch the field besides Adams. I honestly can't say which receiver suits our offence better, but I don't see the point in questioning who the Coaches do. Maybe, all it takes, is a little  more time for Thorpe..

3 hours ago, AKAChip said:

I suppose this means you speak for everyone. It's very difficult to have a discussion with someone who makes it very clear that they know next to nothing about football. 

Rich comment coming someone who resorts to being admittedly flippant... Next thing to admit: being a  presumptuous douchecanoe. I merely pointed out what Lankford actually did yesterday. I laid out the facts plain and simple and said he contributed to the team's success in the Banjo Bowl. Your reaction:  jumping to childish conclusions, spouting garbage comments like "hall of fame" and insinuating I'm easily impressed and then saying I love him.  You then follow it up by saying I don't know anything about football.

That is comical. Pathetic on your part, but utterly comical.

Edited September 11, 20178 yr by blue_gold_84

16 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Rich comment coming someone who resorts to being admittedly flippant... Next thing to admit: being a  presumptuous douchecanoe. I merely pointed out what Lankford actually did yesterday. I laid out the facts plain and simple and said he contributed to the team's success in the Banjo Bowl. Your reaction:  jumping to childish conclusions, spouting garbage comments like "hall of fame" and insinuating I'm easily impressed and then saying I love him.  You then follow it up by saying I don't know anything about football.

That is comical. Pathetic on your part, but utterly comical.

The guy resorting to juvenile name calling is the one throwing stones. Keep it up pal, looks real good on you. 

41 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

The guy resorting to juvenile name calling is the one throwing stones. Keep it up pal, looks real good on you. 

Truth hurts, eh. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

13 hours ago, AKAChip said:

Alright let's try again. 

If you don't believe that Lankford's contributions could not be adequately replaced and then some by Thorpe or even someone completely different altogether, then we will never come to an agreement. If all it takes for you to be satisfied by Lankford is one catch every two games and a couple of 25 yard kick returns then all the power to you. In my mind it's a waste to have a guy on the roster more or less solely for kick returns when he only gets to touch the ball 4 times a game in a good day. Even someone like you, who clearly loves him some Lankford can't deny that he is a lacklustre receiver and even if he is better than I give him credit for, they don't throw him the damn ball! At least Thorpe was getting targets and making things happen 5, 6, 7 times per game. 

So forgive me for being flippant when your highlights of his stellar game consist of 4 touches. A 25 yard kickoff return average is average. Plain and simple. 

He also made an excellent ST tackle on the kick return that ended the first half,  Morris would have turned the corner if it wasn't for Lankford's BLAZING speed cutting him down.  Add that to the TD saving tackle he made on Logan earlier this year that makes 3 TD's  scored and at least one he's prevented.  The guy is a human grey-hound, LaPo just needs to figure out how to utilize his speed more effectively and more often and rewards will be reaped.  Much like McDuffie last year, Lankford is a great specialty tool to have in the toolbox.

Edited September 11, 20178 yr by Throw Long Bannatyne

9 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

And that's what the  other side of the  discussion says. That is, we already have that aspect of the game covered. Lankford brings the speed, if only to open up the very same short stuff you're talking about. Somebody has to stretch the field besides Adams. I honestly can't say which receiver suits our offence better, but I don't see the point in questioning who the Coaches do. Maybe, all it takes, is a little  more time for Thorpe..

If we can't question/insult/pillory the coaches, it would pretty much shut down this forum.

17 hours ago, AKAChip said:

WOW! A rush for 12 yards???! Two kickoff returns for 50???? Put him in the hall of fame. If you are satisfied with less than mediocre production from someone on the roster, good for you. Obviously you're easily impressed. 

 

17 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Typical childish rebuttal.

I pointed out what he actually did. Nowhere does that imply he's HOF worthy or that anyone is easily impressed.  No wonder nobody here takes your commentary seriously. Obviously, you're just a presumptuous assclown.

 

14 hours ago, AKAChip said:

I suppose this means you speak for everyone. It's very difficult to have a discussion with someone who makes it very clear that they know next to nothing about football. 

 

9 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Truth hurts, eh. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Can you imagine what this place would look like if we had lost???

32 minutes ago, WBBFanWest said:

Can you imagine what this place would look like if we had lost???

Well some people would be a lot happier I can tell you that much. 

11 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Rich comment coming someone who resorts to being admittedly flippant... Next thing to admit: being a  presumptuous douchecanoe. I merely pointed out what Lankford actually did yesterday. I laid out the facts plain and simple and said he contributed to the team's success in the Banjo Bowl. Your reaction:  jumping to childish conclusions, spouting garbage comments like "hall of fame" and insinuating I'm easily impressed and then saying I love him.  You then follow it up by saying I don't know anything about football.

That is comical. Pathetic on your part, but utterly comical.

 

11 hours ago, AKAChip said:

The guy resorting to juvenile name calling is the one throwing stones. Keep it up pal, looks real good on you. 

 

10 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Truth hurts, eh. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

 

 

Hey... just a quick suggestion- maybe take this **** to PM so we can keep some class on this site. You're bringing us all down.

Edited September 11, 20178 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

1 minute ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Hey... just a quick suggestion- maybe take this **** to PM so we can keep some class on this site. You're bringing us all down.

The same way you could've just PM'd me with your suggestion... Chippy's MO on this forum is well documented and I defended myself accordingly when he made irrational comments fueled by his obvious hatred for Ryan Lankford. I merely pointed out what Lankford did on Saturday, which shouldn't have elicited the pitiful replies it did.

Speaking of suggestions, you could just ignore the posts on here that bring you down.