Well not the result we hoped for. 

Calgary's D had the game of their life. Solid rushing on Nichols, shutting down the threat from harris and great coverage down field. We simply lost the game because we couldn't counter.

There were a few stupid calls from the refs, but ultimately these didn't cost us... inability to put yards on offense and score more than field goals did us in.

Making progress, excited for 2019.

(And yes, made it on TV multiple times! LOL!)

My view from the stands says Calgary D played well but our offense didn't even try and make it hard on them. We played right into what they expected and really only made them cover about 10 yards of field. Didn't even try and push the ball downfield other than the one play where Streveler had Harris deep but missed him. Until under 5 minutes left that is. 

 

That was the difference really. The Stamps made the Bombers defend the entire field, the Bombers didn't do the same. I can live with a loss when you try your best and come up short but the Bombers offense rolled over and prayed for the D to carry the day, but BLM ain't going to turn the ball over, you actually have to go out there and beat him. The D did an admirable job and Lapolice and his passive bullshit wasted that effort.

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

My view from the stands says Calgary D played well but our offense didn't even try and make it hard on them. We played right into what they expected and really only made them cover about 10 yards of field. Didn't even try and push the ball downfield other than the one play where Streveler had Harris deep but missed him. Until under 5 minutes left that is. 

 

That was the difference really. The Stamps made the Bombers defend the entire field, the Bombers didn't do the same. I can live with a loss when you try your best and come up short but the Bombers offense rolled over and prayed for the D to carry the day, but BLM ain't going to turn the ball over, you actually have to go out there and beat him. The D did an admirable job and Lapolice and his passive bullshit wasted that effort.

Bang on.   LaPo's playcalling was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too conservative for this game.    The defence played their butts off and i think because they kept it close it made LaPo stubbornly stick to a game plan that clearly wasn't working.   Nichols was too quick to throw away the ball too.  We needed to stretch out their d.   The old saying comes to mind "The passing game can open up the running game".  It's so maddening that this game was there for the taking and we should be talking about how the Bombers can be beat the RedBlacks.  Instead we're stuck on another year on the longest Grey Cup drought in the league.   

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

My view from the stands says Calgary D played well but our offense didn't even try and make it hard on them. We played right into what they expected and really only made them cover about 10 yards of field. Didn't even try and push the ball downfield other than the one play where Streveler had Harris deep but missed him. Until under 5 minutes left that is. 

 

That was the difference really. The Stamps made the Bombers defend the entire field, the Bombers didn't do the same. I can live with a loss when you try your best and come up short but the Bombers offense rolled over and prayed for the D to carry the day, but BLM ain't going to turn the ball over, you actually have to go out there and beat him. The D did an admirable job and Lapolice and his passive bullshit wasted that effort.

To me it looked like we took the offensive game plan from a week earlier and hoped it would exact the same result.  Unfortunately the two opponents couldn't been more different. That's entirely on Lapo.

Totally. You play not to lose against Saskatchewan that's one thing, but even when he plays poorly Mitchell isn't going to hand you a game. You need to beat a team like the Stamps in all phases. We have a team that is capable of doing that but Lapolice crippled the offense with the passiveness. 

What I can't understand is just a few weeks ago, this offense put up its best performance against this Stampeders defense.

On 2018-11-18 at 8:19 PM, jazzsax said:

Well not the result we hoped for. 

Calgary's D had the game of their life. Solid rushing on Nichols, shutting down the threat from harris and great coverage down field. We simply lost the game because we couldn't counter.

There were a few stupid calls from the refs, but ultimately these didn't cost us... inability to put yards on offense and score more than field goals did us in.

Making progress, excited for 2019.

(And yes, made it on TV multiple times! LOL!)

from someone who was actually at the game... was Calgary's downfield coverage as good as it seemed?... it just felt like there was never anyone open except for the two overthrows (Adams and Harris)...

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

What I can't understand is just a few weeks ago, this offense put up its best performance against this Stampeders defense.

Because they treated that game like a playoff game and wanted to win it. 

1 hour ago, bearpants said:

from someone who was actually at the game... was Calgary's downfield coverage as good as it seemed?... it just felt like there was never anyone open except for the two overthrows (Adams and Harris)...

Yep. Honestly they played their game of the year, and as some commentators said, possibly the decade. Their coverage was always on the man, the only time it got loose was the last two minutes. 

The two overthrows were probably the only times we got open. 

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

To me it looked like we took the offensive game plan from a week earlier and hoped it would exact the same result.  Unfortunately the two opponents couldn't been more different. That's entirely on Lapo.

Unless MOS agreed with Lapo........ cause I think MOS is allowed at anytime to tell his OC to change it up.....

On ‎2018‎-‎11‎-‎18 at 6:19 PM, jazzsax said:

Well not the result we hoped for. 

Calgary's D had the game of their life. Solid rushing on Nichols, shutting down the threat from harris and great coverage down field. We simply lost the game because we couldn't counter.

There were a few stupid calls from the refs, but ultimately these didn't cost us... inability to put yards on offense and score more than field goals did us in.

Making progress, excited for 2019.

(And yes, made it on TV multiple times! LOL!)

what sign did you go with?

5 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

what sign did you go with?

 

On 2018-11-18 at 7:19 PM, jazzsax said:

Well not the result we hoped for. 

Calgary's D had the game of their life. Solid rushing on Nichols, shutting down the threat from harris and great coverage down field. We simply lost the game because we couldn't counter.

There were a few stupid calls from the refs, but ultimately these didn't cost us... inability to put yards on offense and score more than field goals did us in.

Making progress, excited for 2019.

(And yes, made it on TV multiple times! LOL!)

Are you the guys with the spikes on the shoulder pads? 

I love those guys.

 

19 hours ago, jazzsax said:

Yep. Honestly they played their game of the year, and as some commentators said, possibly the decade. Their coverage was always on the man, the only time it got loose was the last two minutes. 

The two overthrows were probably the only times we got open. 

See and I think a big part of that is because we didn't threaten them downfield until the last 2 minutes. Should have seen how it would look if we'd made them defend the entire field. Guys were able to get open deep the few times they tried, and it's because Calgary was sitting on the short stuff. 

1 minute ago, 17to85 said:

See and I think a big part of that is because we didn't threaten them downfield until the last 2 minutes. Should have seen how it would look if we'd made them defend the entire field. Guys were able to get open deep the few times they tried, and it's because Calgary was sitting on the short stuff. 

We were able to complete balls in the last 3 minutes because they were up by 10 and were playing prevent.

26 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

See and I think a big part of that is because we didn't threaten them downfield until the last 2 minutes. Should have seen how it would look if we'd made them defend the entire field. Guys were able to get open deep the few times they tried, and it's because Calgary was sitting on the short stuff. 

I been saying all year Nichols wasn't working on throwing it downfield enough,  so it's not much of a surprise we didn't see enough of it Sunday. 

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

See and I think a big part of that is because we didn't threaten them downfield until the last 2 minutes. Should have seen how it would look if we'd made them defend the entire field. Guys were able to get open deep the few times they tried, and it's because Calgary was sitting on the short stuff. 

Agreed. The book on the Bombers was "take away the short game and Andrew Harris and you've got them." As so it was. Realistically, Adams was the only deep threat and he was largely ignored because it looks like he will not make the tough, contested catches.

22 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

What I can't understand is just a few weeks ago, this offense put up its best performance against this Stampeders defense.

Keep in mind, that Stamps D was missing 4 starters. Including their MVP in Johnson. Take away Bighill, and 3 other starters on the Bombers D and see how well they perform.

8 hours ago, Tracker said:

Agreed. The book on the Bombers was "take away the short game and Andrew Harris and you've got them." As so it was. Realistically, Adams was the only deep threat and he was largely ignored because it looks like he will not make the tough, contested catches.

I can't help but wonder if Calgary signed Matthews just to keep him away from us. Imagine what we might have been able to do with him. I still don't know how he got away from us. 

5 minutes ago, J5V said:

I can't help but wonder if Calgary signed Matthews just to keep him away from us. Imagine what we might have been able to do with him. I still don't know how he got away from us. 

I'm pretty sure Calgary or any other team are not signing guys just so that they won't play for another team.

Edited November 22, 20187 yr by Brandon

22 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I'm pretty sure Calgary or any other team are not signing guys just so that they won't play for another team.

that's not why we signed Bighill? 

1 hour ago, J5V said:

I can't help but wonder if Calgary signed Matthews just to keep him away from us. Imagine what we might have been able to do with him. I still don't know how he got away from us. 

It might have had to due with the fact that they had 5 injured receivers. 

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

It might have had to due with the fact that they had 5 injured receivers. 

Don't you find it odd that Matthews, a one-time Bomber, couldn't be enticed to come back to Winnipeg? We could have used a big-bodied receiver like that. It might have meant the difference between success and failure. We are supposed to be the place where all players want to go now because of the culture here. So what happened? In 5 years all we've managed is Dressler.

12 hours ago, Tracker said:

Agreed. The book on the Bombers was "take away the short game and Andrew Harris and you've got them." As so it was. Realistically, Adams was the only deep threat and he was largely ignored because it looks like he will not make the tough, contested catches.

You know - when I think back, they ran almost the exact same offense when Kevin Glenn was our QB. Short passes, quick release and feed chuck diesel. 

1 hour ago, J5V said:

Don't you find it odd that Matthews, a one-time Bomber, couldn't be enticed to come back to Winnipeg? We could have used a big-bodied receiver like that. It might have meant the difference between success and failure. We are supposed to be the place where all players want to go now because of the culture here. So what happened? In 5 years all we've managed is Dressler.

Yeah, but if you're Matthews, where would you sign? Calgary to catch passes from one of the most prolific passers in modern day CFL history, or Winnipeg who has Matt Nichols, who throws short passes, hands off to Harris and locks down on Adams? (And by the way, I like Nichols...but just saying).

11 hours ago, blueingreenland said:

Yeah, but if you're Matthews, where would you sign? Calgary to catch passes from one of the most prolific passers in modern day CFL history, or Winnipeg who has Matt Nichols, who throws short passes, hands off to Harris and locks down on Adams? (And by the way, I like Nichols...but just saying).

Tough call.

I don't think we made a big push for Matthews. I think that the 'we're happy with the guys we've got' is what management actually believes, not just what they say to the media.