So, as usual, I take a couple of days off from the board after a game especially after a loss, ESPECIALLY after THIS loss, to get away from the insanity of the emotion right after a game, but I also read through the angry posts after my cooling off period and caught the usual flavour. Many blame Hall and his bend don't break style (which has held up in 9 wins BTW - and that last drive was more a busted coverage for a 60 yard gain than a soft zone - that WAS break, not bend, on that play at least), many blame LaPo. Some ID breakdowns in the secondary, some point to the missed kicks, one or two spread out the blame to all parties. A couple point to blown calls by the ref, especially the missed helmet swing which should have had Adams Jr. ejected by the letter of the rule. A couple looked at Streveler and his ill-timed INT, but many more seemed to be willing to give him a pass (not surprisingly, the loudest of those were the same people who have been dumping on Nichols all season and pumping Strev's tires - or blowing something else of his, since the start of the year). It is almost comical the level of self-flaggellation this fan board goes through after a defeat like this, hope there weren't too many sprained ankles from yet again hopping off the bandwagon. However, one thing in particular that has been a repeated theme is the "we go conservative on offence, why change what worked. LaPo tries to out-think himself and be a genius, he is too predictable and lousy, etc. etc."

Therefore, rather than knee-jerk reacting to jump on the Lapo-bashing train or try too hard to defend him against the chattering noise without any substantive backing, I looked at the offensive play-calling from the game to get a feel at least for what was being called and if it did change, or if the critics are merely venting and seeing what they want to see to defend their inherent biases. We know Harris' carries by quarter were 5, 3, 2 and 3, and Streveler was 5, 3,1 and 3 (and 2 of those 3 in the 4th were actually both sacks), but was the reduction in running a play-calling matter or simply the fact that they ran less offensive plays overall due to Montreal being on the field longer? The raw data shows that the Bombers ran 19, 11, 12, and 12 offensive plays (counting field goals and attempts but not punts) by quarter, and Montreal ran 7, 17, 14 and 24.

Anyway, here is what the numbers say. Make your own analysis of it to defend your entrenched points of view (I'm sure a few will), but I guess in the end what I see is that the same "inept, useless (fill in your vitriol-filled adjective here) LaPo playcalling" that cost us the game in the 4th is the same that got us the big lead in the first place. Maybe Montreal made adjustments, maybe the INT was a big momentum switch, maybe the issue isn't the coordinators but the players who blew assignements or caved when the pressure got too high for them. Maybe, maybe not.

Bombers ran 8 pass plays, 5 QB runs, and 6 RB runs in the first quarter. It was 4-3-3 in the 2nd (and a kneel down), 7-1-3 in the 3rd (and a FG), and 5-3-3 in the 4th (and a FG miss), so aside from the lack of QB runs in the 3rd, the percentage of type of play call seemed fairly consistent. To be fair, I have not re-watched the video to see how the running plays were designed to see if the style of run (up the gut, sweep, pitch, etc.) changed, but as for the passes, this is what I can say:

I looked at each pass from the point of catch (where the ball was thrown/caught relative to the line of scrimmage), the YAC yardage, and the TOTAL yards worked for (in 6 instances the pass was caught behind the line of scrimmage so the actual gain was less than the total yards worked for)

 

1st quarter:

-4 POC, 10 YAC, 14 YWF (10 yard catch)

-5 POC, 3 YAC, 8 YWF (3 yard catch)

11 POC, 1 YAC, 12 YWF (12 yard catch)

11 POC, 0 YAC, 11 YWF (11 yard catch)

5 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (5 yard incomplete pass)

2 POC, 10 YAC, 12 YWF (12 yard catch)

7 POC, 0 YAC, 7 YWF (7 yard catch)

13 POC, 0 YAC, 13 YWF (13 yard TD catch)

 

2nd quarter:

-2 POC, 11 YAC, 13 YWF (11 yard catch)

7 POC, 2 YAC, 9 YWF (9 yard catch)

35 POC, 39 YAC, 74 YWF (74 yard catch)

10 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (10 yard pass intercepted)

 

3rd quarter:

-4 POC, 6 YAC, 10 YWF (6 yard catch)

6 POC, 4 YAC, 10 YWF (10 yard catch)

(-) POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (pass incomplete out of bounds)

15 POC, 4 YAC, 19 YWF (19 yard catch)

8 POC, 6 YAC, 14 YWF (14 yard catch)

-2 POC, 0 YAC, 2 YWF (0 yard catch)

-6 POC, 6 YAC, 12 YWF (6 yard catch)

 

4th quarter:

8 POC, 7 YAC, 15 YWF (15 yard catch)

8 POC, 0 YAC, 7 YWF (8 yard catch)

6 POC, 4 YAC, 10 YWF (10 yard catch)

4 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (4 yard catch)

13 POC, 0 YAC, 0 YWF (pass interference called)

 

So a quick glance at the numbers does not suggest that our game plan changed significantly in terms of run/pass play selection frequency (and how often do we hear "why get conservative and play kill the clock with the run? Throw it!" when the run gets stuffed, and then "why throw it when the run has been going so well? Chew up yards on the ground and kill the clock, don't overthink things!" when we try not to play conservative run - people will play both sides of the argument so long as it suits their "LaPo sucks" agenda at the time in question) or pass game startegy. It certainly suggests that the short pass and check down is used a lot and that we don't stretch the defence, save for Adams bomb to Harris. Funny that Nichols gets roasted for that style of "game management" but nary a peep about strong-armed Streveler not throwing further downfield than 15 yards once in this game. And hey, this short pass game plan worked gangbusters in the first half when we rolled up the points. Also (as a pre-emptive strike for those who will argue we need to anticipate the Montreal halftime adjustment and NOT stick with what was working because they will catch on), the last time we were rolling with the short pass and then shook things up against BC by inserting Streveler for Nichols, we had a quick turnover and lost the lead by NOT staying the course, so damned if you do, damned if you don't.

So is it the coaches "changing things" that cause our offence to bog down, or the players losing focus, or blown assignments? I won't make a definitive statement, but you can likely guess from this post that I am not about to crucify the coaches alone for this loss. Make what you will of the numbers, if anyone can use these stats to show me how the game plan suddenly flipped from ultra aggressive to ultra conservative based on these numbers, please feel free to break it down for me. Just back it up with what is actually happening, not just what you feel is happening to match the narrative you have already created in your head to justify your bias.

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by TrueBlue4ever

Just now, JCon said:

That's not what he said. 

Not exactly that's why I said paraphrased...but the gist is accurate. If you disagree then correct me.

1 minute ago, Deiter Fan said:

Not exactly that's why I said paraphrased...but the gist is accurate. If you disagree then correct me.

I did, I said, "that's not what he said". It's up there. ^ 

Huge O'Shea fan here, but he has his faults and one of them that always baffles me is the overly respectful way he wants to coach his football team against opponents. When O'Shea played, he was one of the most ruthless players you could imagine and there wasn't much he wouldn't do to win the game. Now that he coaches, it's like if he had his way, he'd go into the opponents locker room and hand out orange slices at halftime. 

If your team comes into the locker room at halftime with that kind of league and you have a young QB full of attitude, you don't stifle that with this "hold your horses, fellas" stuff, you tell them to get out there and stay focused but step on their throat and make them remember what kind of football team you are. It's ridiculous. You can blame it on the players all you want, but it's not a coincidence that this stuff has continually happened whether it was Drew Willy, Matt Nichols or Chris Streveler under centre. We get a lead, we get cautious and polite and we blow it. It's sad and quite frankly, it's the exact type of stuff that makes me believe we aren't going to win a championship unless O'Shea changes his stance on this stuff. Winners play to win and if they come into a locker room at halftime up three scores, they want to end the game up six scores. Punish the other team.

Don't even get me started on LaPolice. The guy goes ultra conservative with any kind of comfortable lead and then seems to panics his way into calling stupid gimmick **** to get back on track. Brilliant offensive mind, but man does he struggle with game script and he always has. Does not put his players in a position to succeed once they get up on an opponent. It's gross that it keeps happening over and over. Beyond frustrating.

1 minute ago, JCon said:

I did, I said, "that's not what he said". It's up there. ^ 

If you're so sure I'm wrong then you must know what he actually said...so feel free to share it.

4 minutes ago, Mike said:

Huge O'Shea fan here, but he has his faults and one of them that always baffles me is the overly respectful way he wants to coach his football team against opponents. When O'Shea played, he was one of the most ruthless players you could imagine and there wasn't much he wouldn't do to win the game. Now that he coaches, it's like if he had his way, he'd go into the opponents locker room and hand out orange slices at halftime. 

If your team comes into the locker room at halftime with that kind of league and you have a young QB full of attitude, you don't stifle that with this "hold your horses, fellas" stuff, you tell them to get out there and stay focused but step on their throat and make them remember what kind of football team you are. It's ridiculous. You can blame it on the players all you want, but it's not a coincidence that this stuff has continually happened whether it was Drew Willy, Matt Nichols or Chris Streveler under centre. We get a lead, we get cautious and polite and we blow it. It's sad and quite frankly, it's the exact type of stuff that makes me believe we aren't going to win a championship unless O'Shea changes his stance on this stuff. Winners play to win and if they come into a locker room at halftime up three scores, they want to end the game up six scores. Punish the other team.

Don't even get me started on LaPolice. The guy goes ultra conservative with any kind of comfortable lead and then seems to panics his way into calling stupid gimmick **** to get back on track. Brilliant offensive mind, but man does he struggle with game script and he always has. Does not put his players in a position to succeed once they get up on an opponent. It's gross that it keeps happening over and over. Beyond frustrating.

thats why I loved Cal Murphy and he had success...you had a team down...you keep kicking and pile on...and he took heat for it around the league for showing teams up...but he didn't give a rats arse....and if he seen a player ease up and coast....he wouldn't think twice to remove from game day roster next game...or flat out release you the following week...

I too am sickened by the mr nice guy image they want to promote....time to start being a bit of a prick...and trust me...a team feeds off that and never lets up and have the late game issues we do

You can't just turn it on and off in the course of a game when you feel the need...its pedal down...for 60 minutes...nothing more..nothing less

8 minutes ago, Deiter Fan said:

If you're so sure I'm wrong then you must know what he actually said...so feel free to share it.

I went back and listened to it again. I don't disagree with your interpretation. When I first listened to it,  Coach made it sound like a passive, "we're going to try to score more" versus "we're going to run up the score on them". But, that's splitting hairs and may not be that different. 

I'm wrong. 

How can you be "Canadian Mafia" and "nice guys" at the same time?  Conundrum.

6 minutes ago, JCon said:

I went back and listened to it again. I don't disagree with your interpretation. When I first listened to it,  Coach made it sound like a passive, "we're going to try to score more" versus "we're going to run up the score on them". But, that's splitting hairs and may not be that different. 

I'm wrong. 

I just went back and am listening to it again just to make sure I didn't get it wrong...and as I said it was just paraphrased so definitely not a word for word recreation...but I appreciate your integrity.

For anyone that wants to hear it

https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cjob/?gref=cjob

Sept 23 - 7pm - 8min in

Edited September 26, 20196 yr by Deiter Fan

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  

The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  

The one thing about the current head coach is that he has successfully taken the bullet for the players' failures.  Some people would say that is a sign of leadership.

2 hours ago, Noeller said:

The secondary has looked like world beaters at times this season...but then there's times, like the final drive in Sask and in Montreal, where they look like they couldn't stop the Rifles from marching on them. Not sure what that means exactly...

Prevent defense. 

 

5 hours ago, MOBomberFan said:

Sanchez explains why Man 2 is a dumb play in the redzone. Our DBs didn't jam anyone, just let them cruise on by. Bad call + bad execution = gimme go ahead TD

https://www.cfl.ca/2019/09/25/chez-sez-analyzing-bombers-coverage-on-final-play-vs-montreal/

Hes partly right. Cover 2 would be fine, if bighill wasnt being sent on a QB contain none blitz. If he was playing a middle zone at the goal line instead, like a robber under 2, or in US terms the tampa-2 cover 2 system, you can pick up all 3 on their breaks. I do think bump and run is the best option in the red zone as timing routes and double moves are never going to be covered perfectly and all you need is a small angle to get that pass in. 

Imo, thats also a perfect situation to either go 30 front or drop willy back deep. 3 man fronts dont get the immediate pressure of an edge rush, but they do a better job of preventing really long pockets. With 2 guys rushing inside gaps and drake on the nose some one will come free. You often see hail mary situations fail, with a 30 front sacking the qb after the 3.5 second range.

The bump throws off any timing routes, the second level of secondary help makes the qb wait for a second move / long pattern, mean while the pocket is being pushed back on his lap. If Im gonna send a man, id rather send a Dhb from the blind side and rotate coverage or roll a LB/drop willy under where the db is coming from. 

11 minutes ago, MC said:

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  

The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  

The one thing about the current head coach is that he has successfully taken the bullet for the players' failures.  Some people would say that is a sign of leadership.

no. We almost certainly will lose atleast one more game this year, and no one will be fired because of it. 

Lol. no. passions of the fan base, and patience from fans has little to no effect on management. If it did, hall would have been fired 37 times since he was hired here. This is mos and co's 6th year here. With far more disappointing play off performances then not. Thats a long time to have this much rope, and win 1 play off game. 

He has, and it is. But taking bullets for players doesnt help when you continually put them in positions to be shot at. 

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Huge O'Shea fan here, but he has his faults and one of them that always baffles me is the overly respectful way he wants to coach his football team against opponents. When O'Shea played, he was one of the most ruthless players you could imagine and there wasn't much he wouldn't do to win the game. Now that he coaches, it's like if he had his way, he'd go into the opponents locker room and hand out orange slices at halftime. 

If your team comes into the locker room at halftime with that kind of league and you have a young QB full of attitude, you don't stifle that with this "hold your horses, fellas" stuff, you tell them to get out there and stay focused but step on their throat and make them remember what kind of football team you are. It's ridiculous. You can blame it on the players all you want, but it's not a coincidence that this stuff has continually happened whether it was Drew Willy, Matt Nichols or Chris Streveler under centre. We get a lead, we get cautious and polite and we blow it. It's sad and quite frankly, it's the exact type of stuff that makes me believe we aren't going to win a championship unless O'Shea changes his stance on this stuff. Winners play to win and if they come into a locker room at halftime up three scores, they want to end the game up six scores. Punish the other team.

Don't even get me started on LaPolice. The guy goes ultra conservative with any kind of comfortable lead and then seems to panics his way into calling stupid gimmick **** to get back on track. Brilliant offensive mind, but man does he struggle with game script and he always has. Does not put his players in a position to succeed once they get up on an opponent. It's gross that it keeps happening over and over. Beyond frustrating.

I appreciate this post, but I'm still remembering about a year or so ago, when you said "I'm so over this regime" (Miller/Walters/Osh)........   I respect that opinions can change, as situations change....all good. I just chuckled at the time you originally said it. 

37 minutes ago, MC said:

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  

The one thing about the current head coach is that he has successfully taken the bullet for the players' failures.  Some people would say that is a sign of leadership.

Strongly disagree. The turnovers happened due to really, really bad hires by the board and GMs and the lack of good players coming into the team. The frustration of the fans were and are a reflection of that incompetence. O'Shea may or may not be the coach to finally lead the team to the Grey Cup final, but the polarized thinking of many in this forum, that it's either O'Shea or a return to the Dark Ages does not help. If it comes down to Walters firing O'Shea, the same intelligence and diligence that Walters has shown in building the team would also guide him in finding a good replacement for O'Shea.

1 hour ago, MC said:

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  

The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  

Oh please, this is the third time we've had Paul Lapolice as the teams offensive coordinator. These aren't new concerns here, in fact he has been fired from this very team twice before because of his play calling problems. 

How many years of the 30 has Lapo been OC here? He owns a big piece of that record it seems to me. 

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Oh please, this is the third time we've had Paul Lapolice as the teams offensive coordinator. These aren't new concerns here, in fact he has been fired from this very team twice before because of his play calling problems. 

How many years of the 30 has Lapo been OC here? He owns a big piece of that record it seems to me. 

5 (6 counting this year).

4 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Prevent defense. 

 

Hes partly right. Cover 2 would be fine, if bighill wasnt being sent on a QB contain none blitz. If he was playing a middle zone at the goal line instead, like a robber under 2, or in US terms the tampa-2 cover 2 system, you can pick up all 3 on their breaks. I do think bump and run is the best option in the red zone as timing routes and double moves are never going to be covered perfectly and all you need is a small angle to get that pass in. 

Imo, thats also a perfect situation to either go 30 front or drop willy back deep. 3 man fronts dont get the immediate pressure of an edge rush, but they do a better job of preventing really long pockets. With 2 guys rushing inside gaps and drake on the nose some one will come free. You often see hail mary situations fail, with a 30 front sacking the qb after the 3.5 second range.

The bump throws off any timing routes, the second level of secondary help makes the qb wait for a second move / long pattern, mean while the pocket is being pushed back on his lap. If Im gonna send a man, id rather send a Dhb from the blind side and rotate coverage or roll a LB/drop willy under where the db is coming from. 

This drove me crazy. I was yelling at the tv...why the **** is he playing contain with seconds left on the clock?? I can understand not want VAJ to just walk into the endzone. But he was legit playing it basically on the line of scrimmage. Should have been deeper.

23 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

5 (6 counting this year).

so not counting his time as head coach? Cause his passive tendencies showed up there too. Guy has been part of like 9 years of futility. 

5 hours ago, MC said:

Lose one game and everyone has to go.  

The lack of patience from the fan base - and the board - is the very reason we have gone almost three decades between cup wins.  

The one thing about the current head coach is that he has successfully taken the bullet for the players' failures.  Some people would say that is a sign of leadership.

Lack of patience.....this is now what the 5 th year of the patient plan.....l

2 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

This drove me crazy. I was yelling at the tv...why the **** is he playing contain with seconds left on the clock?? I can understand not want VAJ to just walk into the endzone. But he was legit playing it basically on the line of scrimmage. Should have been deeper.

Yep. If he was playing a medium zone around the goal line he would have still been able to spy vaj. not like he was gonna look to run that one in either. The prevent defense prevented the win again. 

I can only say the same thing we have been saying for years, we need better import receivers and we need 4 of them on the field all the time. This shouldn't be hard given we start a national at RB?

What happened to the days of starting Milt, Simon, Bruce, Armstrong, Edwards, Bryant etc. We used to be able to throw out 4 nationals that would scare the pants of the other team, now we don't even start one that can do that.

Streveler is good enough to get it done but man he needs some great receivers to throw the ball to. 

This isn't a knock on our Canuck receivers either. 

Personally, I don’t believe we can make that assessment under LaPolice’s tenure with this particular team. 

Ball control and run based. Not a receiver’s dream destination.

 

5 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Personally, I don’t believe we can make that assessment under LaPolice’s tenure with this particular team. 

Ball control and run based. Not a receiver’s dream destination.

 

If you believe Lawler it's about " W's "

 

Edited September 29, 20196 yr by NorthernSkunk

3 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

Personally, I don’t believe we can make that assessment under LaPolice’s tenure with this particular team. 

Ball control and run based. Not a receiver’s dream destination.

Agree. I think with Streveler and an OC that leans towards a more vertical, balanced attack we can be deadly on offense and really maximize the talents of guys like AH.