I'm almost always against such a thing happening and prefer that people in high places stay in those places while not getting involved on the field.  But when certain assistant coaches are sucking at their jobs and the HC won't fire them, someone up there has to do something.  I thought it would be a foregone conclusion that Richie Hall would be fired last year after two utterly disgraceful showings in playoff games by his defense, yet MOS somehow thought his rope should be lengthened.  He had no problem letting Bellefeuille go 3 years ago, why the hell won't he put Hall on the firing squad?  Ridiculous!!

I got the feeling we'll be stuck with this incompetent defensive coordinator unless Wade Miller and the Board of Directors order his firing.  I hope they do it.

3 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

Of course, if the O had scored one more touchdown, the the D did do enough.  If you want to play the "what if" game, you have to allow for "what ifs" on both sides

 

The offense and Lapolice are to blame yes.  It certainly is their job to score points and not to just sit on leads or to call a QB outside run on 3rd down that the BC defense has already seen many times before.

 

But it's also incumbent on the defense to keep the other team out of the end zone.  Fail on Richie Hall bend and break last night.

11 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

The offense and Lapolice are to blame yes.  It certainly is their job to score points and not to just sit on leads or to call a QB outside run on 3rd down that the BC defense has already seen many times before.

 

But it's also incumbent on the defense to keep the other team out of the end zone.  Fail on Richie Hall bend and break last night.

You do realize that the other team is comprised of professionals that are paid to make plays, right.  Even the best defense in the world (and that is certainly not a Richie Hall defense) gets scored on.  BC managed 20 points in 60 minutes.  This one was on the O.  Not completely of course, but certainly the lion's share.

3 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

You do realize that the other team is comprised of professionals that are paid to make plays, right.  Even the best defense in the world (and that is certainly not a Richie Hall defense) gets scored on.  BC managed 20 points in 60 minutes.  This one was on the O.  Not completely of course, but certainly the lion's share.

And the defense is paid to protect the lead.  Next.

5 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

And the defense is paid to protect the lead.  Next.

Well, pretty hard to argue against such a  well thought out and detailed position as that.  I concede.

Edited July 16, 20187 yr by WBBFanWest

1 hour ago, WBBFanWest said:

Well, pretty hard to argue against such a  well thought out and detailed position as that.  I concede.

In the CFL if you hold a team to 20 points you should have a reasonable chance and expectation you can score 21.....

18 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

Well, pretty hard to argue against such a  well thought out and detailed position as that.  I concede.

No, the point was I was showing how ridiculous it is to use the offense as a foil to give Richie his Hall pass.

Just now, USABomberfan said:

No, the point was I was showing how ridiculous it is to use the offense as a foil to give Richie his Hall pass.

Sorry, but I never had Richie Hall kick my dog, so I just can't generate the same level of outrage that others here can.  I'd lose no sleep if they replaced him, but I can also recognize then there are other issues in this last loss that might be more relevant that Hall's D.   Not to worry though, there're lots of other games coming up so I'm sure that the "We hate Richie Hall and everyone who has ever known him" crowd will have plenty to rage about.

6 minutes ago, WBBFanWest said:

Sorry, but I never had Richie Hall kick my dog, so I just can't generate the same level of outrage that others here can.

No see that's the problem it is not manufactured.  The only manufactured outrage around here is the excessive blame put on Lapolice the instant the offense goes 2 and out.  Only thing we get upset about are when low expectations are put on the defense.

I think we can safely say that every Bomber player & coach contributed to that loss.  That truly was (for a change), a total team loss.

Can I pay and have this thread locked? It isn’t happening so get over it....a few more stinkers and they should all worry about their jobs. Fire the janitor too if you want remember the food chain ultimately works it’s way back up to who hired who....who kept who around......

2 hours ago, USABomberfan said:

No see that's the problem it is not manufactured.  The only manufactured outrage around here is the excessive blame put on Lapolice the instant the offense goes 2 and out.  Only thing we get upset about are when low expectations are put on the defense.

Did you watch that second half? The offense was a disaster, from the playcalling (LaPolice) to the execution (the players). Yes, the defense didn't play as well or as disciplined in the second half but there's no "manufactured outrage" here. The offense completely crapped the bed.

also tough to play shut down D when you're on the field for more than 20 minutes in a half of football.   the offence didn't do anything to give them a breather!

At the half, the score was 17-0.

 

Multiple Choice Question:  At halftime, If I told you that the Bomber defence would give up only 20 points in the 2nd half, would you be:

A. Satisfied that we should win

B. Mad because they should do better

C. Worried the Bombers would lose the game

 

AT that point in the game, I think 90% of us would be happy and would assume that we should win the game.  In a dome game and our offense, there is no way we should lay an egg.  We did.

On 2018-07-15 at 10:08 PM, DR. CFL said:

In the CFL if you hold a team to 20 points you should have a reasonable chance and expectation you can score 21.....

Especially when your offense turns the ball over 4 times in a half.

How many times did the D get the ball back in that game?  How many times did they set the offense up with great field position off a takeaway?

The offense reasonably should have produced several more TDs and this game should not have been close.  The defense did their job.

8 hours ago, trueBlue83 said:

also tough to play shut down D when you're on the field for more than 20 minutes in a half of football.   the offence didn't do anything to give them a breather!

TOP was BC 30:28 - WPG 29:32, so no, the defense didn't tire out because of TOP.

48 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

TOP was BC 30:28 - WPG 29:32, so no, the defense didn't tire out because of TOP.

How was the ToP break down by each quarter? I'm betting the lions had the ball for MOST of the second half and gassed the Bombers D in the 4th quarter.  

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

How was the ToP break down by each quarter? I'm betting the lions had the ball for MOST of the second half and gassed the Bombers D in the 4th quarter.  

I think you are right that the Lions had the ball for more time in the second half than we did. That doesn't mean our D should have been gassed in the 4th though. They should have been well rested after winning the TOP battle in the first half.

2 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

I think you are right that the Lions had the ball for more time in the second half than we did. That doesn't mean our D should have been gassed in the 4th though. They should have been well rested after winning the TOP battle in the first half.

If we are looking for a logical explanation for the second-half implosion by the Bombers, we will be looking for a long time. It was a group brain cramp, but I would have been somewhat comforted if O'Shea had displayed some anger after the game.

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

I think you are right that the Lions had the ball for more time in the second half than we did. That doesn't mean our D should have been gassed in the 4th though. They should have been well rested after winning the TOP battle in the first half.

That logic is faulty. get up- go do 40 wind-sprints, come back and tell me you're not tired and gassed and I will wag my finger at you and tell you "There is NO way you should be gassed- you should be well ******* rested after sitting on your duff all morning."

 

 

Edited July 17, 20187 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

If we are looking for a logical explanation for the second-half implosion by the Bombers, we will be looking for a long time. It was a group brain cramp, but I would have been somewhat comforted if O'Shea had displayed some anger after the game.

It is true, but some posters here are misunderstanding that offenses don't cause defensive coverage breakdowns.  Also, few of the minority Hall defenders understand that his scheme causes losses in the TOP battle because it gives Goltz level QBs easy throws.  But don't worry they say, we must be content to keep a DC who has perennial bottom ranking defenses.

42 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

That logic is faulty. get up- go do 40 wind-sprints, come back and tell me you're not tired and gassed and I will wag my finger at you and tell you "There is NO way you should be gassed- you should be well ******* rested after sitting on your duff all morning."

 

 

Lol, I was thinking this as well.

The point is that this is not the first time this has happened with a Hall bend but don't break and/or prevent defence, so whether they

are tired or not is only a small factor...He does not put the defence in a position to win most times.

This D has collapsed in 2 playoff games.  This year..... got blown away by Hamilton and couldn't make a stop in crunch time, against Edmonton and BC.

So I am still a bit nervous about it.....

 

The O shat the bed big time. Anyone who doesn't believe that... hey I have an island to sell you...

The D... shutdown BC in the first half. The second half had some good turnovers, but couldn't address issues in the secondary (as usual). Bunch of useless penalties and BC had opportunities to score.

 

Don't blame the D fully for this one.... but we definitely don't have a D that's winning us games in the crunch.... 

6 hours ago, ALuCsRED said:

At the half, the score was 17-0.

 

Multiple Choice Question:  At halftime, If I told you that the Bomber defence would give up only 20 points in the 2nd half, would you be:

..

Wait, ONLY 20 points?

Projected over a full  game 20 points works out to... *runs some complicated algorithms* 40 points. I don't think anyone is cracking open a beer celebrating 20 points surrendered per half.

Team loss. Period.