TBieber Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 Bombers have a league worst 4.5 YPC on first down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 Teams seem to have been averaging 65-70 yards rushing against BC's D... I hope Grigsby gets at least that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBieber Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Teams seem to have been averaging 65-70 yards rushing against BC's D... I hope Grigsby gets at least that They are 8th in yards per game against at 122... but no 100 yard backs allowed yet. Quite interesting. Lots of QB yards, as was the case last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Why did you leave out the week 4 numbers from your numerical chart? It completely discredits your point. Grigsby is NOT on a downward trend, as you state. The chart should look like this: Week 1 - 139 yards Week 2 - 112 yards Week 3 - 59 yards Week 4 - 100 yards I guess if you don't like context, it discredits my point. Numbers are just numbers without context. The context of Grigsby's numbers in week 4 is that 37 of his 100 came on plays that Edmonton basically handed to him because they were in prevent defense in the final 25 seconds of a half. So 63 yards. If you want to go further in depth, let's look at what he did with his carries. On first down, he had carries of 4, 3, 6, 7, 1, 1, 4 ... that's 7 first down carries and he's averaging 3.4 yards a carry. He didn't have a single carry over 13 yards. On top of that, if you REALLY want to get technical about it, 11 of his receiving yards were on a play where the blocker actually got called for holding, but there were 23 seconds left in the game and Edmonton just declined the penalty. So there you have it. 100 yards, 3.4 yards a carry on first down and 48 of his 50 receiving yards were gifted to us by Edmonton by prevent defense or declined penalties because they couldn't be bothered - on top of all of that, he was also targeted 11 times as a receiver, hauled in only 5 and his mental error on one of them cost us more points than we scored all game. So yeah. Keep telling me how his performance is not trending downward. MB called two running plays in the first half against Ottawa - Grigsby got his 60 yards in one half Montreal was completely loading the box - Grigsby had a blocking role for most of that game... MB completely abandoned the running game halfway through the 3rd quarter Willy was throwing like crap in the Edm game plus a few of the throws that Grigsby 'missed' were Willy avoiding a sack - Grigsby might be our only guy who made catches that game - everyone was off Your memory is failing you. Grigsby had 6 carries (23 yards) in the first half of that game. 8 in the second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Why did you leave out the week 4 numbers from your numerical chart? It completely discredits your point. Grigsby is NOT on a downward trend, as you state. The chart should look like this: Week 1 - 139 yards Week 2 - 112 yards Week 3 - 59 yards Week 4 - 100 yards I guess if you don't like context, it discredits my point. Numbers are just numbers without context. The context of Grigsby's numbers in week 4 is that 37 of his 100 came on plays that Edmonton basically handed to him because they were in prevent defense in the final 25 seconds of a half. So 63 yards. If you want to go further in depth, let's look at what he did with his carries. On first down, he had carries of 4, 3, 6, 7, 1, 1, 4 ... that's 7 first down carries and he's averaging 3.4 yards a carry. He didn't have a single carry over 13 yards. On top of that, if you REALLY want to get technical about it, 11 of his receiving yards were on a play where the blocker actually got called for holding, but there were 23 seconds left in the game and Edmonton just declined the penalty. So there you have it. 100 yards, 3.4 yards a carry on first down and 48 of his 50 receiving yards were gifted to us by Edmonton by prevent defense or declined penalties because they couldn't be bothered - on top of all of that, he was also targeted 11 times as a receiver, hauled in only 5 and his mental error on one of them cost us more points than we scored all game. So yeah. Keep telling me how his performance is not trending downward. MB called two running plays in the first half against Ottawa - Grigsby got his 60 yards in one half Montreal was completely loading the box - Grigsby had a blocking role for most of that game... MB completely abandoned the running game halfway through the 3rd quarter Willy was throwing like crap in the Edm game plus a few of the throws that Grigsby 'missed' were Willy avoiding a sack - Grigsby might be our only guy who made catches that game - everyone was off Your memory is failing you. Grigsby had 6 carries (23 yards) in the first half of that game. 8 in the second. Fair enough... I didn't remember us doing that much in the first half Still, point remains the same - grigsby deserves a few more games before we replace him just for fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Perfect Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 At this point, Grigsby hasn't done anything that Cotton has already done himself at the position when we've seen him play. The same cannot be said for Grigsby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 At this point, Grigsby hasn't done anything that Cotton has already done himself at the position when we've seen him play. The same cannot be said for Grigsby. Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 If we don't scheme and block better on O.....may not matter that much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dascow Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Let's not forget that the offencive line was a complete mess against Edmonton. They were having some serious issues. When you couple that with the most predictable play calling north of the 49th, you get the kind of running game we saw last week. I can't put the lack of production in the running game all on Grigsby's sholders. Let's also keep in mind that Andrew Harris, the leading rusher in the CFL, rushed for only 37 yards with a 3.4avg against Edmonton and against Montreal he only rushed for 26 yards with a 3.7 avg. Grigsby's style of running almost reminds me of Fred Reed's style of running. (I think Grigsby is a little bit shiftyer.) He'll run for 2 yards, 2 yards, 2 yards, then break one off for 15. That being said, I do like Cotton better and would like to see him in there...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearpants Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Anyone that followed pre-season even a LITTLE bit knew that Cotton was our #1 back, without question. Grigsby only started Week 1 by virtue of being the healthiest guy, and only in relative terms because he was hurt too. Would really like to see Cotton get some #1 reps, just to see if pre-season was legit. You make a good point here... if everyone was healthy the depth likely woulda been 1) Cotton 2) Ford .... leaving Grigsby to take a PR spot or be let loose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Perfect Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 At this point, Grigsby hasn't done anything that Cotton has already done himself at the position when we've seen him play. The same cannot be said for Grigsby. TITTIES!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Can she be our new running back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.O.A.B. Posted July 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Can she be our new running back? She's the C and everybody else is a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Can she be our new running back? No. Obviously, her center of gravity is too high (top-heavy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now