How good is our offensive play calling?

[Goalie]

Considering most offences look pretty bad, including sasks who didn't score a td for 2 or 3 games up until the last second of the 3rd quarter against montreal, I'd say above average.

 

We are scoring points, we are putting up points, don't we lead the league in points scored? That has to mean something. I'm not really qualified to go on and on about the play calling and i don't think anyone really is, we aren't in the huddle so we really have no clue at all, wish people would stop pretending they do, but... just based on points scored, lack of 2 and outs, all that stuff and based on what other teams have done so far or havent done, you have teams who haven't scored offensive touchdowns in 2 or 3 straight games so we are above average. 

[blitzmore]

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

[gbill2004]

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

Problem with that strategy is it's not always sustainable as defenses can tailor their coverage based on the offensive personnel.

[blitzmore]

 

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

Problem with that strategy is it's not always sustainable as defenses can tailor their coverage based on the offensive personnel.

 

I fully realize that...I didn't say we had to do it every running play, just much more than we do now. 

[Tracker]

This is the preseason. Expect the 12-8 games to resume once the season starts. Boredom ensues and only the skimpy cheerleaders outfits maintain interest.

[BigBlue]

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

"he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same" ... to me this is the big deal ... run where you can do the most good ... don't have a philosophy that says you must balance the offense by running up the gut ... hit 'em where they ain't!

btw I believe we need to use the pass to set up the run ... not the other way round

[GCn20]

 

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

"he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same" ... to me this is the big deal ... run where you can do the most good ... don't have a philosophy that says you must balance the offense by running up the gut ... hit 'em where they ain't!

btw I believe we need to use the pass to set up the run ... not the other way round

 

 

Well that's a novel approach. You be sure to pass that along to our competitors.

[Jpan85]

He hasn't been that bad... It's light years better then what we have had since Berry.

I just wish he would push the ball deep more often and maybe bounce Grigsby out to the side more often.

https://twitter.com/cfllandry/status/501460287137284096

[SPuDS]

He hasn't been that bad... It's light years better then what we have had since Berry.

I just wish he would push the ball deep more often and maybe bounce Grigsby out to the side more often.

https://twitter.com/cfllandry/status/501460287137284096

And boom goes the dynamite.

[Brandon]

 

 

He hasn't been that bad... It's light years better then what we have had since Berry.

I just wish he would push the ball deep more often and maybe bounce Grigsby out to the side more often.

https://twitter.com/cfllandry/status/501460287137284096

And boom goes the dynamite.

 

 

And this proves my point exactly... the team is successful pushing it down the field yet in certain games they avoid the deep ball like the plague for some reason or another. 

[BigBlue]

I think we have the personnel on offence, our offensive line is adequate, Drew Willey is up to the job, so why was our offence so anemic against Montreal tonight?

 

Yes, Montreal has a decent defense but so does the Riders, the Stamps, the Eskimos and the Lions,,,,  I can only conclude we are not strategizing very well ...

 

Our running game is a little better but its not blowing anybody away ... and I doubt it will this year

 

My greater concern is that our passing game is way below its potential and capability

 

In my opinion, the problem is schemes, set-ups and play calling

 

MOS has got the team hanging in there but the biggest under achiever on the club is MB ,,, not sour grapes after a victory but a concern as we get ready ro take on our division rivals ,,,, we can't avoid change because we have a winning record

 

Just 13 first downs (10 in the 4th Q) tonight and less than 300 yards of offence

 

We are winning as a team but not as an offence

 

We have to get past Drew Willey and 4th Q heroics ,,, we need a regular 400 yards of O produced through all 4 Qs

 

Wake uo MB or we will go 3 & 6 in the second half of this so far great season

[TBURGESS]

Give Montreal some props for playing good defense, but didn't like the play calling or the execution tonight.  We need to play 4 full quarters next week if we want to win, not the last half of the 4th.

[Brandon]

So what do you suggest that we do differently?

[Goalie]

Why is everyone afraid of the riders really? we need to play 4 quarters to beat them? LOL, no we don't, we just can't turn the ball over against them and we should win..

 

I don't get it really, Yeah they are the defending grey cup champs but they have looked pretty average this season so far... 

 

Montreal gave them a run for their money last week, just like they gave us a run for our money this week, Riders did nothing for 3 quarters just like us and beat them in the 4th, just like us.. When we played SASK, we gave them the game off of turnovers, they didn't kill us, Heck i don't even think they scored an offensive touchdown against us... DId they?

 

People going on about Messam but for all the running messam did, the sask offence put up 4 friggin points.. Don't get this 'gotta play 4 quarters vs sask to win'... I understand what some mean but... I really don't get why sask is getting so much credit here from some people... THEY kind of aren't very good this year, They have got lucky, 

 

We barely beat montreal? Sure, sask barely beat them too, When we lost to sask, we beat ourselves, sask didn't do anything really..

 

Not sure why anyone would be afraid of SASK, they aint what they used to be. 

[17to85]

Don't turn the ball over 5 times to none and the riders are beatable. 

[Floyd]

MB is in a tricky spot now... he's gone conservative and teams now know that they can key in on Willy.  We never move the pocket, playaction seems to be used less and for the most part, our run game is not a big threat.  That being said, if Willy gets some chemistry with any receiver on the fade, a lot of our redzone problems disappear.

[Mark H.]

Why is everyone afraid of the riders really? we need to play 4 quarters to beat them? LOL, no we don't, we just can't turn the ball over against them and we should win..

 

I don't get it really, Yeah they are the defending grey cup champs but they have looked pretty average this season so far... 

 

Montreal gave them a run for their money last week, just like they gave us a run for our money this week, Riders did nothing for 3 quarters just like us and beat them in the 4th, just like us.. When we played SASK, we gave them the game off of turnovers, they didn't kill us, Heck i don't even think they scored an offensive touchdown against us... DId they?

 

People going on about Messam but for all the running messam did, the sask offence put up 4 friggin points.. Don't get this 'gotta play 4 quarters vs sask to win'... I understand what some mean but... I really don't get why sask is getting so much credit here from some people... THEY kind of aren't very good this year, They have got lucky, 

 

We barely beat montreal? Sure, sask barely beat them too, When we lost to sask, we beat ourselves, sask didn't do anything really..

 

Not sure why anyone would be afraid of SASK, they aint what they used to be. 

 

Those turnovers didn't just randomly happen.  They were net result of Willy being under pressure the entire game.  

[BigBlue]

If we consider how a backup QB would do running our offense ... how complex is it?

Straight forward or tons to learn?