Should this regime be on the hot seat?

[SPuDS]

Just now, Noeller said:

Beyond useless??? We were a kick away vs Toronto and a starting QBs calf muscle away vs BC this week, losing by like 9pts. Jesus Christ. We're not getting pumped in all 3 phases and losing 55-0....

Yea its a little bizarre how people are taking  these last few losses.. if you read the board and didn't see the games, you'd think it was back to the days of Tim Burke's reign of error and blow outs..

 

we barely lost by a converted touchdown to BC after being down by... what, 2 all game?  Then a last second kick missed in toronto..  the ebbs n flows that go through our fan base psyche is insane.. 

 

 

[blue_gold_84]

27 minutes ago, Noeller said:

Beyond useless??? We were a kick away vs Toronto and a starting QBs calf muscle away vs BC this week, losing by like 9pts. Jesus Christ. We're not getting pumped in all 3 phases and losing 55-0....

Getting pretty worked up there, amigo. No need to go all bonus eruptus!

Edited October 31, 2017 by blue_gold_84

[trueBlue83]

40 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

we barely lost by a converted touchdown to BC after being down by... what, 2 all game?  Then a last second kick missed in toronto..  the ebbs n flows that go through our fan base psyche is insane.. 

 

 

Did you watch the whole game??  how it was even that close was the insane part.... it had no business being that close.  nearing the end of the 2nd quarter, BC had 238 passing yards to our 32, and it was a 3 point ball game (aided by a blocked punt TD).  BC took some stupid penalties extending our drives and getting us into FG range.  They play even a bit disciplined, and that game is way out of reach early in the 3rd.

[SPuDS]

9 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said:

Did you watch the whole game??  how it was even that close was the insane part.... it had no business being that close.  nearing the end of the 2nd quarter, BC had 238 passing yards to our 32, and it was a 3 point ball game (aided by a blocked punt TD).  BC took some stupid penalties extending our drives and getting us into FG range.  They play even a bit disciplined, and that game is way out of reach early in the 3rd.

ya I watched it and was in disbelief that we were in it as long as we were too, yup.  doesn't change the fact that we were and we could have managed to eke out a win if  Davis or Lefevor manage to get  a TD in 3 quarters, lol.  

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

9 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said:

Did you watch the whole game??  how it was even that close was the insane part.... it had no business being that close. 

But it was close, and that is a good thing- the other parts of the team picked up the slack.  Unless- you favour the rout theory.

[Tracker]

4 hours ago, Noeller said:

Beyond useless??? We were a kick away vs Toronto and a starting QBs calf muscle away vs BC this week, losing by like 9pts. Jesus Christ. We're not getting pumped in all 3 phases and losing 55-0....

I suggest we resume this discussion after the Calgary game.  One side of this discussion or the other ought to be vindicated. Or not. When considering either Taman or Barker for a talent bird-dog, would it not depend more on who did the actual scouting? I am not a Taman fan, but in both Winnipeg and Regina, he was probably micro-managed and pretty much told what to do and how to do it. How well he would do with a decent budget and oversight is a matter of speculation, but I am not happy with the results that Danny Mac and associated have produced.

[17to85]

What happens in the Calgary game means next to nothing other than the potential for home vs. road in the playoffs. The team is banged up to all hell, the starting qb is already a no go. The mentality is just survive until playoffs, which will have a lot more impact on determining what this team is about than the last couple games and this upcoming on in Calgary. 

 

This team for the past few weeks has looked an awful lot like a team that is just waiting for the regular season to end, they win in the playoffs does it really matter that they gassed a couple winnable games late in the year to teams that don't matter much in the grand sceme of things?

[Atomic]

Not to make excuses but we've literally lost our best receiver, best OL, best DL, and best defensive player overall.

And we'll see what happens with Nichols and Harris but that would be our best QB and best RB.

You can ***** about depth all you want, but nobody wins the Grey Cup with those kind of injuries.  Not even the almighty Calgary Stampeders.  Nobody.

[SPuDS]

4 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Not to make excuses but we've literally lost our best receiver, best OL, best DL, and best defensive player overall.

And we'll see what happens with Nichols and Harris but that would be our best QB and best RB.

You can ***** about depth all you want, but nobody wins the Grey Cup with those kind of injuries.  Not even the almighty Calgary Stampeders.  Nobody.

Next man up, super duper depth, blah blah blah..

 

you are dead on tho.  We lost many key cogs in our offense and defense over the span of 4 weeks.   with next to no time to replace them with even remotely adequate fill ins.   we were lucky to be able to rig our ratio so that we off-set Jeffcoat getting in game.   We haven't been able to work the same magic, skill wise, at  SAM or at WR (which isn't too shocking. not too many teams have a 1000 yard receiver waiting in the wings... it is pretty sad that our 3rd option has been so non-existent tho) O-line somehow survived the loss of Bond, who is arguably one of the best lineman in the league..

 

Nichols and Harris will both be back, that I have no doubt.. I also know O'shea and everyone else will not dare look to this as an excuse for our failing if it happens.. but I mean, it is hard to deny it will be largely detrimental when push comes to shove.   Leggett is probably the best SAM LB in the league.  Bond probably the best guard in the league.   thats 2 big holes but I do think we can win even with these glaring holes.

[Mark H.]

It's a perfect storm for the offense. Bond & Flanders missing from the running game, Bond & Adams missing from the passing game.

That's cornerstone talent - right there.

Westerman and Leggett on defense, same thing. Although I'm not entirely convinced of Westerman's impact on the ratio - IMO that was not being utilized properly.

[blitzmore]

2 hours ago, tracker said:

I suggest we resume this discussion after the Calgary game.  One side of this discussion or the other ought to be vindicated. Or not. When considering either Taman or Barker for a talent bird-dog, would it not depend more on who did the actual scouting? I am not a Taman fan, but in both Winnipeg and Regina, he was probably micro-managed and pretty much told what to do and how to do it. How well he would do with a decent budget and oversight is a matter of speculation, but I am not happy with the results that Danny Mac and associated have produced.

Yes of course...11 wins and a wounded quarterback for 12  is not nearly enough!!!

[Engelwood]

On 10/29/2017 at 1:05 PM, USABomberfan said:

I also believe he wants to win and will not keep a defensive coordinator who is the biggest detriment to winning ever.

Gary Etcheverry say hi.

[Atomic]

7 hours ago, Engelwood said:

Gary Etcheverry say hi.

Gary Etcheverry who got fired after one season?  Not sure how that supports the false point that MOS won't get rid of a bad DC.

[bearpants]

I would be fully on board with Jim Barker as Kyle Walters' right hand man... we know that would only happen with the agreement that Walters "call the shots" with Barker and O'Shea having input... if it wouldn't work this way, it would never happen...  

[B-F-F-C]

19 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Gary Etcheverry who got fired after one season?  Not sure how that supports the false point that MOS won't get rid of a bad DC.

True! But I'm not sure that MOS believes that the defensive problems are the fault of Richie Hall.  

[Atomic]

8 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

True! But I'm not sure that MOS believes that the defensive problems are the fault of Richie Hall.  

Maybe not.  Hard to get a good read of MOS.  We'll only truly know once the season ends and we see who the coaches are next year.

[blue_gold_84]

1 hour ago, B-F-F-C said:

True! But I'm not sure that MOS believes that the defensive problems are the fault of Richie Hall.  

There's been considerable turnover with personnel but the same deficiencies exist. What's plagued the defense for three seasons remains. What's left to change: the man in charge of the defense.

[Mark F]

11 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

There's been considerable turnover with personnel but the same deficiencies exist. What's plagued the defense for three seasons remains. What's left to change: the man in charge of the defense.

I wonder if some of the coaches are having a bit of trouble explaining things to some of the players. Maybe some of the players don't catch on as well as we would like. 

instinct, intelligence, studying, stuff like that, might be a bit lacking in some of the players. Some guys seem to know where to be, but can't do what's needed when they get there. Poorly coached in college, no tackling skills. who knows.

probably there isn't one answer, a few things combine to give the team such a poor defence. Over a period of years. Needs to be fixed.... won't be this season. too late.

If they can't produce even middle of the pack defence next season..... well that wouldn't be very good. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by Mark F

[blue_gold_84]

1 minute ago, Mark F said:

I wonder if some of the coaches are having a bit of trouble explaining things to some of the players. Maybe some of the players don't catch on as well as we would like. 

instinct, intelligence, studying, stuff like that, might be a bit lacking in some of the players.

probably there isn't one answer, a few things combine to give the team such a poor defence. Over a period of years.

I'm sure that's part of the equation. But that begs the question: is the system in place overcomplicated? Of course the players are required to execute, but is system requiring too much when it isn't necessary?

It's just mystifying how the defense as a whole, despite some key personnel changes (upgrades, in many cases), continues to struggle with the same problems under Hall's guidance. Something's gotta give and I think it's the man in charge, not his troops.

[GCn20]

On ‎2017‎-‎10‎-‎31 at 10:23 AM, Noeller said:

You want to hire a former GM to be a "scout" minion for Walters? No, that's ********. You need someone who's just a scout, period. Maybe someone who has dreams of one day becoming a GM, but is working their way up the ladder......but you don't want someone who thinks they know better and is going to do things their own way. Barker and Taman (who I love, btw) are awful ******* ideas and anyone who brings that up is insane for a lot of reasons. That scouting kid that we lost to the NFL....the young one.....that's the kinda guy we need right now.

I'm sure glad you did not make up stuff about their motivation and professionalism to try and endorse your opinion. Oh wait....I just read beyond the first sentence...never mind.

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, B-F-F-C said:

True! But I'm not sure that MOS believes that the defensive problems are the fault of Richie Hall.  

Possibly true and that's his evaluation to make as someone of far superior football intelligence than us.

[USABomberfan]

9 hours ago, Engelwood said:

Gary Etcheverry say hi.

Hall is just as bad if not worse, in fact he is so bad I put him at a worse level than Jeff Reinebold.

Etcheverry definitely had to go, make no mistake, but at least he had some imagination even if it was a bit too unconventional to produce a stingy unit.  Hall has none of that and has put out the softest D I have ever seen in CFL history.  Hall needs to get drop kicked out of here and sent to that unemployment line to beg for food stamps.

[17to85]

4 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

Hall is just as bad if not worse, in fact he is so bad I put him at a worse level than Jeff Reinebold.

If you really believe that then you are beyond hope. 

I mean seriously people, forget the yards given up, does this defense give us a chance to win? I say yes it does because very rarely does this team actually get blown out. It is time to face the facts, fans like to watch super aggressive defenses that generate two and out all the time, but this team isn't built to be that team and Ritchie Hall isn't that kind of defensive coordinator. Doesn't mean he's bad at his job, just means the expectations from the coaches and management is different than from the fans. 

[blue_gold_84]

6 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

Hall is just as bad if not worse, in fact he is so bad I put him at a worse level than Jeff Reinebold.

Etcheverry definitely had to go, make no mistake, but at least he had some imagination even if it was a bit too unconventional to produce a stingy unit.  Hall has none of that and has put out the softest D I have ever seen in CFL history.  Hall needs to get drop kicked out of here and sent to that unemployment line to beg for food stamps.

Yeah, you're not posting with blind emotion at all... How did Etcheverry have any more imagination that Hall? And please present your evidence showing this is the softest defense in the entire history of the CFL.

Sober up.

[SPuDS]

37 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

If you really believe that then you are beyond hope. 

I mean seriously people, forget the yards given up, does this defense give us a chance to win? I say yes it does because very rarely does this team actually get blown out. It is time to face the facts, fans like to watch super aggressive defenses that generate two and out all the time, but this team isn't built to be that team and Ritchie Hall isn't that kind of defensive coordinator. Doesn't mean he's bad at his job, just means the expectations from the coaches and management is different than from the fans. 

its essentially the same complaint and issue that people have with Hurl.  Hes not the conventional MLB so people freak out.  Hall's defense isn't what they are used to or wanna see so they freak out.  Now, I do get the angst about the yards given up and the "explosion" plays but beyond that, we've held some good teams in check at times.. continue to get turnovers and sacks... *shrug*

 

its not working great but it does work.. sometimes lol.