Jump to content

Game Day Thread- Week Twenty one , GAME 18: Winnipeg Blue Bombers @ Edmonton November 3rd, 2018


Recommended Posts

Injuries are part of the game. They lost Walker who is one player. The rest of the receiving corps stayed intact. Calgary was competitive until they lost their fourth starting receiver. What happened in Calgary was a legit reason for their downfall but they have issues elsewhere on that team as well.  You can't point to the Walker injury & say that's why they missed the playoffs. Besides, Edmonton's defense  has been awful this year. 

Edited by SpeedFlex27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Injuries are part of the game. They lost Walker who is one player. The rest of the receiving corps stayed intact. Calgary was competitive until they lost their fourth starting receiver. What happened in Calgary was a legit reason for their downfall but they have issues elsewhere on that team as well.  You can't point to the Walker injury & say that's why they missed the playoffs. Besides, Edmonton's defense  has been awful this year. 

It made a difference because of the Esks’ over reliance on the deep shot - Williams is easier to cover with Walker out. So, partly the injury, but partly self-inflicted due to scheme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Troy and Pasaglia are the only 2 recent

Here's the clip of Ben Cahoon kicking a FG in overtime against the Argonauts on August 2, 2007:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoPHuQsdGzE

Here's the box score of the next game (August 9, 2007), where Ben Cahoon had two touchdowns:
https://www.cfl.ca/games/1419/calgary-stampeders-vs-montreal-alouettes/

What am I missing here?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mark H. said:

It made a difference because of the Esks’ over reliance on the deep shot - Williams is easier to cover with Walker out. So, partly the injury, but partly self-inflicted due to scheme. 

Well, that's their problem. If losing one guy causes them to miss the playoffs then it's a flawed offensive philosophy. Other teams dealt with loss of impact players better than Edmonton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loving Lankford today. First time I can say that in a couple of years.

I don't know if it is Streveler or Lapo's play calls, but I would like to see a few more quick slants and timing patterns thrown. I believe I heard that Streveler has only thrown 5 passes so far. So far it has appeared as though on all of his throwing downs he is looking deep and then holding the ball until pressure comes. At that point he runs (which has had some mixed results) or checks down to LaFrance (which hasn't been working). The ball never seems to be our of Streveler's hands quickly in any event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Blue_Dragoon said:

Loving Lankford today. First time I can say that in a couple of years.

I don't know if it is Streveler or Lapo's play calls, but I would like to see a few more quick slants and timing patterns thrown. I believe I heard that Streveler has only thrown 5 passes so far. So far it has appeared as though on all of his throwing downs he is looking deep and then holding the ball until pressure comes. At that point he runs (which has had some mixed results) or checks down to LaFrance (which hasn't been working). The ball never seems to be our of Streveler's hands quickly in any event.

He's playing like a rookie wanting to use his legs first than finishing his reads. LaPo ain't helping him though  with his playcalling. Pretty vanilla stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Well, that's their problem. If losing one guy causes them to miss the playoffs then it's a flawed offensive philosophy. Other teams dealt with loss of impact players better than Edmonton. 

Andrew Harris out would have a similar impact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

He's playing like a rookie wanting to use his legs first than finishing his reads. LaPo ain't helping him though  with his playcalling. Pretty vanilla stuff. 

Although the playcalling is suspect at best, that is largely his role in our regular offense, so I don't have any problem with that - for this year. If it persists though and becomes chronic then it is absolutely a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

the offensive play calling reminds me of what we saw during the 4 game losing streak.  We're also seeing that Streveler is having a hard time reading and reacting to the blitz.  

I hadn't really though about it but you are right about similarities between the offensive plan from then and the one so far today. Even with completely different QBs, upon reflection the play calling seems very similar.

I know it is crazy to think that one player could make that big of a difference, but it feels like it is this way every time Dressler is out. Our winning rate without him (sub 10%?) and terrific winning rate with him (something like 75%) is just mind boggling and too large a sample size to be mere coincidence anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Don't like the way Lankford drops that ball on punts. Great 69 yard punt but he comes forward on his first step after getting the snap holding the ball with just one hand. But that is a minor correction he'd need to work on if he was a full time punter. 

Are you really criticizing a receiver on his kicking ability?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Apparently not, TSN said both Passaglia and Westwood did it.  I don't recall either event.

they mentioned it was the last game of Passaglia's career... the defence probably didn't even touch him.  Westwood on the other hand, that would have to have been some sort of broken play, fumble recovery or something!    I guess we know why they've kept Lankford around though... dual filler!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BomberBall said:

That wasn’t a horse collar tackle.  CFL refs have no idea how to make that call properly.

Definately not a penalty. And what bugs me about those is it wouldn't have even happened if there wasnt a hold. Penalties that happen after a hold or offside shouldn't even count as they wouldn't have happened if the other team didnt commit a penalty. Ah well.

 

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...