We have had much discussion (and threads) about the Bomber's defense ... we had a 5 alarm fire against hamilton ... other games kept us close enough to win (or barely lose) ... now that we have won a few games and the smoke has cleared, and that we have Leggett back, rate Ritchie's defense and tell us what you really think

When its forcing turn overs and sacking qbs its elite. When it isnt its among the worst. And when you have elite level talent and regular struggles its bad. A big thing for me as well is his adjustments havent been good this year, and the team tackles poorly out side of a couple excellent one on one tacklers. A lot of tackling is coaching. 

If he was fired right now, i doubt very much he would have another DC job with in a couple years. If he did, itd be a desperation move by a bottom dweller. He is below replacement level for contending teams. 

I'm going to say above average. Hall has some very good talent to work with, and some good depth, but I need to give Hall some credit too. This defense is on the rise.

Looking at the most recent stats the Bombers are in the top three in most categories.

Things have improved since that Hamilton travesty.

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Things have improved since that Hamilton travesty.

 

2 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

Looking at the most recent stats the Bombers are in the top three in most categories.

all true, but we have also played bc twice and toronto twice as our follow up to ham. 

Not much point in voting because this will be agenda driven, facts be damned. 

18 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

 

all true, but we have also played bc twice and toronto twice as our follow up to ham. 

You can only play who you are scheduled. Look who Calgary has played. 

I watch nearly every game across the CFL each week and while I get just as frustrated with our defence as the rest of you, I would say the only defences that are better in the league are Calgary and Saskatchewan, and probably Ottawa although their latest showing is disconcerting. 

So that puts us above league average. Frankly, most of the defences in the league are being exploited like crazy and I think that has a lot to do with the modern PI and illegal contact rules. 

For several weeks our secondary has had some first year guys due to injury and we’ve still shown well, including sitting near the top in takeaways. I believe that we’ve been making mental errors where someone is out of position on a play. When guys are in position, they tend to win their battles (with the exception of the Edmonton season opener). 

The only thing that drives me nuts are how successful other teams are with five to ten yard outs on the wide side, but when you consider that that is rarely, if ever, a first read, it means we’re taking away what the QB actually wants. 

Hall over the last few weeks has let his front four do their jobs more often and been smarter about when to blitz and who is blitzing. Maybe just maybe we’ll see some progress. 

For those of you that don’t watch every game and complain when Reilly or Masoli puts up 300+ yards on us, try to remember that they do that against virtually everyone they play. It becomes very easy to complain about what we’ve got when we’re not comparing it to the rest of the league, the same way we sometimes see our guys as all stars and forget that other teams have good players too. 

Our defence is also very disciplined in terms of penalties, rarely being the team that hands over free first downs (with a few exceptions). That’s worth something. 

I still have the bitter taste of last season’s western final (and season as a whole) in my mouth, as I’m sure we all do, so that definitely creates a bias, but so far this season, this defence has been pretty decent. Let’s see if that remains true on Friday or not. 

Richie's D succeeds when we put sustained pressure on opposing quarterbacks. This year, we've been better since the front 7 have performed better. We're still giving up a lot of yards per game but not yielding as many points to opponents. In the past few years the O has had to score a gazillion points each game because the D was giving up so much. So far this year we've been better. I agree this next game will be a good test to see what kind of team the Bombers are.

Edited August 7, 20187 yr by Doublezero

3rd in net offence against in the league

40 minutes ago, Doublezero said:

Richie's D succeeds when we put sustained pressure on opposing quarterbacks. This year, we've been better since the front 7 have performed better. We're still giving up a lot of yards per game but not yielding as many points to opponents. In the past few years the O has had to score a gazillion points each game because the D was giving up so much. So far this year we've been better. I agree this next game will be a good test to see what kind of team the Bombers are.

Not totally true...we sit 3rd in rushing yards against...and 4th in passing yards against....so basically in the top 3rd of the league in regards to yardage given up, and 2nd best in points given up....so the defense has actually improved and progressed as the season has gone on.

I think something was said to Richie Hall...or perhaps "suggested" in terms of scheme and how personnel are deployed and has been reflected in the results the defense has put up the last 4 games.. 

Chicken or egg? Are our stats improving because we are playing less talented teams or are the less talented teams the reason our stats are improving? We'll get a good chance to see this week when we play a team that dominated our defense earlier in the season.

you can only play the teams on the schedule as you go...if the defense had continued the trend they were on, then yeah it would be a concern, but they seemed to tighten up and change their scheme....so I would dare to say they are much improved from the start of the season...we shall see

Just now, Booch said:

you can only play the teams on the schedule as you go...if the defense had continued the trend they were on, then yeah it would be a concern, but they seemed to tighten up and change their scheme....so I would dare to say they are much improved from the start of the season...we shall see

That's the 'argument' everyone likes to trot out when their is a chicken and egg argument. Of course we can only play the teams that are on our schedule. That doesn't change the question of if it's playing bad offenses with backup QB's that's making us look good or our defense making them look bad.

The the have made bad offences look bad exactly what Calgary does.

Thing with football on any day a piss poor offense can own a good defense...and a poor defense can own a great offense...but it has to be looked at as a over all picture if you ask me. Some teams schemes match up better against other teams and vice versa and while still maybe give up more yards and points than another teams defense still win.

7 games in is a good marker of where you are at as a unit..and generally defenses from my experience trend upward whereas a lot of times offences may peak and trend down as teams learn their pro's and cons

Currently as it stands We rank 2nd in points given up/per game..2nd in takeaways..3rd in TD's given up..1ST in sacks(tied)..3rd in net offence allowed..2nd in Yds against/per play..first in penalty yards against (one of most important if you ask me) and 2nd in points off of turnovers which I include in a defensive teams stats...

So pretty good indicator of where this defense sits against other teams in the league and for the most part the couple teams hovering around us in the stats categories have played generally the same teams or weaker eastern teams for the most part so to say our results should be tempered because of opponent, then the Cgy's And Sask's of the league should have their defensive stats tempered as well because for the most part, both have played a schedule to date with the same weak offenses, 

Some interesting stats from stat page. One for the entire league is when a sack occurs on a drive a TD is only scored 3%when no sacks occur. Also on second down and 4-6 yards Bombers are only letting teams convert at 34% rate next closes team is at 43% most are in 50s and 60s.

A bit early for this poll I think.  I would have waited until after this next game against Ham to see if they were finally doing their job and not getting burned by Mr. Dumpoff Masoli, a QB who Hall has seemed to have a faulty plan for stopping.

Even there though, he should get no pass until his defense shows they'll stop choking away playoff games.  Until I see that, he will continue to be a liability here.

I'd like to look at what the stats are when guys like Masoli or Lulay can complete the same underneath pass over and over again without our defense making any adjustments.... 

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Chicken or egg? Are our stats improving because we are playing less talented teams or are the less talented teams the reason our stats are improving? We'll get a good chance to see this week when we play a team that dominated our defense earlier in the season.

this is saying the exact same thing two different ways...

How good an indicator are the first 7 games when 5 of them are against the bottom 3 teams (BC,Toronto,Montreal)?.

1 minute ago, bearpants said:

this is saying the exact same thing two different ways...

I'll restate... Do we look good because we are playing bad teams or do they look like bad teams because they are playing us.

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Chicken or egg? Are our stats improving because we are playing less talented teams or are the less talented teams the reason our stats are improving? We'll get a good chance to see this week when we play a team that dominated our defense earlier in the season.

That's not chicken vs egg... that's Chicken vs Nekcihc.

Edited August 7, 20187 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

51 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I'll restate... Do we look good because we are playing bad teams or do they look like bad teams because they are playing us.

thanks... this time it makes sense! 😃

I'd have to think it's a little of both... while I agree with you that BC and Toronto are not exactly world beaters on offense... our defense held both teams in check in the second half of a back-to-back... which is hard to do... also of note, I'm blaming the BC loss on offense... I thought the D held us in and gave us every chance to win...

Edited August 7, 20187 yr by bearpants

13 minutes ago, bearpants said:

thanks... this time it makes sense! 😃

I'd have to think it's a little of both... while I agree with you that BC and Toronto are not exactly world beater on offense... our defense held both teams in check on the second half of a back-to-back... which is hard to do... also of note, I'm blaming the BC loss on offense... I thought the D held us in and gave us every chance to win...

Yep and BC put up similar stats and points against Calgary as they did on us in their second game, and Toronto put up gaudy numbers with their third string QB in a comeback effort against the best D in the east. 

We need to grade our D against the rest of the league, and in that regard, we are in the top four for sure. 

58 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I'll restate... Do we look good because we are playing bad teams or do they look like bad teams because they are playing us.

It can be both you know.