Jump to content

Smoke 'n' Mirrors


Recommended Posts

Bombers have been winning in a manner which left them open to being described as more lucky than good. This game was a real crucible. For all his hubris, Jones is a darned good defensive coach and has built a very good defense in Regina, so this win cannot be written off as  lucky. Bombers were full value for the win- unlike last week where two plays in the first quarter rattled the Bombers and the Riders got excited. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

our coordinators might be slow out of the gate but they adjust as well as anyone so coming from such a poor outing on Labour Day I really didn't worry about them coming up with better adjustments than the Riders would bring. 

They adjusted beautifully, especially on O. 

I thought we got a fair number of lucky breaks on calls in the first half, and when they did they took full advantage of them for sure.  Got nervous with a few that should have been picked off as well.  The game was pretty tight in the first half, but I think we got lucky with that one PI.  The punt return was a thing of beauty.  The big thing was  this D that keeps giving up the big plays finally got turnovers.  I said before that the turnovers masked some of those busts IMO, and it showed again today.  Adjustments in the second half equated to domination.  Interesting season series.  Essentially a game of equals in the preseason game and first regular season meeting and then a dominating showing by each team respectively.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rider breaks ... blatant holding on Okpalaugo (non call), blatant spear on LeFevour by Sask after a successful terd down gamble (non call), called no catch on the D Adams reception on the first drive of the game that was about as good as the one made by Bagg later near the goaline ... 

Edited by IC Khari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IC Khari said:

Rider breaks ... blatant holding on Okpalaugo (non call), blatant spear on LeFevour by Sask after a successful terd down gamble (non call), called no catch on the D Adams reception on the first drive of the game that was about as good as the one made by Bagg later near the goaline ... 

Hurl at MLB...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rebusrankin said:

Seriously name a break other than the PI?

 

I thought The PI allowed for a huge momentum surge, so it was pretty big, especially going into half.  Take the goggles off.  For a fast example, the one interception I don't know how we were not called offside.  It seemed pretty clear.  I am not saying that the riders didn't get some breaks, I never said that remotely.  I said that when the Bombers got them they took advantage.  This is a good thing.   These breaks happen all the time (especially in a Proulx officiated game), it is part of the game.  Difference was we capitalized a lot more than they did on some of the 'iffy' reffing, and yes, it was iffy, both ways.  I know a lot of people like to look at things really tinted in how they look, that is not me,  I cheer for the Bombers as much as anyone, but that does not mean that I can't be unbiased and not look at the grander picture, because I am a football fan first.  I don't know how someone could sit there and say the Bombers  were not beneficiaries of a few calls, and I could say the exact same thing for the Riders.  We just did something with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HarryCarayGary said:

 

I thought The PI allowed for a huge momentum surge, so it was pretty big, especially going into half.  Take the goggles off.  For a fast example, the one interception I don't know how we were not called offside.  It seemed pretty clear.  I am not saying that the riders didn't get some breaks, I never said that remotely.  I said that when the Bombers got them they took advantage.  This is a good thing.   These breaks happen all the time (especially in a Proulx officiated game), it is part of the game.  Difference was we capitalized a lot more than they did on some of the 'iffy' reffing, and yes, it was iffy, both ways.  I know a lot of people like to look at things really tinted in how they look, that is not me,  I cheer for the Bombers as much as anyone, but that does not mean that I can't be unbiased and not look at the grander picture, because I am a football fan first.  I don't know how someone could sit there and say the Bombers  were not beneficiaries of a few calls, and I could say the exact same thing for the Riders.  We just did something with them.

tenor.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bombers picked the balls off that our DB's got their hands on. The Riders didn't. Could have been a different game if the Riders held on to a couple of the INT balls that Nichols threw up in the first quarter.

The phantom PI in the end zone at the end of the  half was A game changer. We went into halftime with a 9 point lead instead of a 5 point lead. I have no idea why Jones didn't use his challenge flag on that one. We won by 20, so the extra 4 points wasn't THE game changer.

The Riders made a ton of mistakes that we capitalized on. Carter running it out of the end zone to the 10 then backtracking to the 5 just to get tackled. The stupid onside kick that sucked all the advantage out of their TD and gave us great field position. The stupid onside punt that gave us a short field and more points. My absolute favorite tho was their punt team going to the wrong side of the field because our returner went there and our blockers pointed that way. That one cost them a huge 90+ yard punt return for a TD.

I was wondering before the game who the pretenders and who the contenders were. Now I know for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

My absolute favorite tho was their punt team going to the wrong side of the field because our returner went there and our blockers pointed that way. That one cost them a huge 90+ yard punt return for a TD.

I'm not going to say it was Saskatchewan's mistake, but rather a brilliantly orchestrated, practiced football play designed and executed perfectly. Like any well designed play, it involves deceiving the opposing team, and leading them to do what you want them to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of excuses for the riders on this board... wtf.

Bombers just flipped the script that's all...  Santos-Knox INT on the third play of the game was key - that was not a Sask mistake, that was all extra effort by S-Knox

Pressure by Poop Johnson all game - guy makes a huge difference to the DL and the D

Roosevelt TD was Sask capitalizing on a mistake by Jones/Hurl imo... no one in the middle  

Walker's awful tackle attempt classifies as a mistake

Adams PI call was bogus yup - but Wpg would still get FG otherwise

Game was already over by the time Bridge came in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

I'm not going to say it was Saskatchewan's mistake, but rather a brilliantly orchestrated, practiced football play designed and executed perfectly. Like any well designed play, it involves deceiving the opposing team, and leading them to do what you want them to do.

O'Shea being "underhanded" again, without a doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...