Just was thinking about this not long ago.  Seems lately the recipe SSK wants to use to beat us is draws to Messam to pick up the yards on the drives, especially the game-winning ones.  Now, probably to make their running game a non-factor, O is going to have to force them to play catchup in a deficit and make Durant have to throw the ball 80% of the time, but if it came to making sure Messam is not a factor, I say load the box on him or run blitz him even to make sure he can't even get going back there.

Messam isn't even on the field all the time, he's not even their number 1 back, ford or allen is, i think it's ford but who really knows. Went No because, really, just make the tackle, execute the play, be in the right spot and it doesn't really matter who is back there. Funny thing is, Sask didn't really have much yards running against us last game up until that final drive, we actually did pretty well vs the run last game. That last drive was where sask gained all there rushing yards though not all but...

 

Sask had 160 yards rushing, 4 of those yards were when sunseri was in the game

 

Durant had 3 for 28.. all those were on the last drive

 

Allen had 7 for 38, 15 of that 38 was on the last drive when he scored

 

Ford had 7 for 26, wasn't really used on that last drive was he?

 

Messam had 6 runs for 64 yards.. Probably 20 on the last drive

 

You take away the riders last drive and the bombers actually did pretty well vs the run. 

Depends on the situation.

The problem with that is the Riders can still exploit you through the air.  It would be different if they were a pure one-dimensional team, with no receiving threat.  Even then I would be hesitant to load up the middle.  9 up front means only 3 in coverage. 

Load seven... 8 or 9 will give Dressler a career game

Find guys who can finish tackles is my answer

get the Hebert and let him take out Messam. #clothslinetackle

Better solution: run up the score in the first half so they're passing the ball then entire 2nd half trying to catch up. Seriously beating those assholes 52-0 is too good for them. 

Make it 53-0.

There's no reason to put 8 or 9 in the box unless the Riders do, and when they did the Bombers had the guys responsible for the eligibles who stayed in tight for the Riders to block in the box.

 

Need to tackle better.  If you just put 9 guys in the box, Durant is going to take a quick drop and put a ball up in the air for a wide-open guy to snag for a big play.

Throw a 10 pin ball at 5 pin, pins and the ball wins.

Personally I love the 8 or 9 guys in the box strategy for the Bombers.

    

I'd say you show a stacked box, and then have the option to fall back into zone coverage.

I like a zone blitz too.

Yup, even if the Riders do have Taj Smith, Dressler, Getzlaf, and Bagg, make Durant throw every drive and expose him to the pass rush.  He may get some big plays but that also causes turnovers.

According to Darren Bauming the Bombers will be playing a double MLB set with Kuale and Kromah to contend with the run.  Interested to see how this works out.

According to Darren Bauming the Bombers will be playing a double MLB set with Kuale and Kromah to contend with the run.  Interested to see how this works out.

The bombers have used a double MLB set with Wild and Kuale (or Kromah the one game he was in) a ton this year, that isn't news. 

Plugin a jumbo tackle and real MLB'er and problem solved. If Etch is going to be so inflexible then O'Shea needs to step in.

Yup, even if the Riders do have Taj Smith, Dressler, Getzlaf, and Bagg, make Durant throw every drive and expose him to the pass rush.  He may get some big plays but that also causes turnovers.

That's basically what I saw last game, 4 man rush with everyone else giving 10 yard cushions giving up the short stuff. Until the 4th quarter when Demond brain cramped and Sask went jumbo and stuffed it down our throats.

Plugin a jumbo tackle and real MLB'er and problem solved. If Etch is going to be so inflexible then O'Shea needs to step in.

use a formation that doesn't give teams running options and problem solved no need to worry about size... 

 

As long as Etchevary is here we are going to be a team that has a weakness against the run that's just the way it is. Been his MO the entire time. You knew what you were getting when you hired him we just have to live with it and hope that it works in the long run. 

Lotta people know just enough about football to show that they don't know of anything about football...

Plugin a jumbo tackle and real MLB'er and problem solved. If Etch is going to be so inflexible then O'Shea needs to step in.

use a formation that doesn't give teams running options and problem solved no need to worry about size... 

 

As long as Etchevary is here we are going to be a team that has a weakness against the run that's just the way it is. Been his MO the entire time. You knew what you were getting when you hired him we just have to live with it and hope that it works in the long run.

We made personnel changes on both special teams and offense, no reason it can't be done on defense too. If it's just Etch being Etch, then O'Shea needs to tune him in.

 

 

Plugin a jumbo tackle and real MLB'er and problem solved. If Etch is going to be so inflexible then O'Shea needs to step in.

use a formation that doesn't give teams running options and problem solved no need to worry about size... 

 

As long as Etchevary is here we are going to be a team that has a weakness against the run that's just the way it is. Been his MO the entire time. You knew what you were getting when you hired him we just have to live with it and hope that it works in the long run.

 

We made personnel changes on both special teams and offense, no reason it can't be done on defense too. If it's just Etch being Etch, then O'Shea needs to tune him in.

 

That's exactly the point though, it doesn't matter what type of player you have when the scheme says "let them run, we care about pressure on the qb and stopping the pass only" 

 

Why would O'Shea tune the guy in? He's doing exactly what we knew he was going to do when he was hired. 

Plugin a jumbo tackle and real MLB'er and problem solved. If Etch is going to be so inflexible then O'Shea needs to step in.

use a formation that doesn't give teams running options and problem solved no need to worry about size... 

 

As long as Etchevary is here we are going to be a team that has a weakness against the run that's just the way it is. Been his MO the entire time. You knew what you were getting when you hired him we just have to live with it and hope that it works in the long run.

We made personnel changes on both special teams and offense, no reason it can't be done on defense too. If it's just Etch being Etch, then O'Shea needs to tune him in.

That's exactly the point though, it doesn't matter what type of player you have when the scheme says "let them run, we care about pressure on the qb and stopping the pass only" 

 

Why would O'Shea tune the guy in? He's doing exactly what we knew he was going to do when he was hired.

You have simplified it to a point that it's no longer accurate.

O'Shea wasn't concerned about the size of his defence because he felt they would be quick enough to slip tackles and make plays. The scheme calls for gap cancellation but only if the first part about being quick enough to slip tackles applies. They are tied at the hip. If you're players aren't quick enough to slip tackles and fill the gaps, you're getting the ball stuffed down your throat. At that time, it becomes obvious you need to make personnel changes, a big man, can be just as quick as a smaller man and also has the advantage of absorbing tackles still filling the gap.

Either way you slice it, you can't have one without the other.

If we had the same personnel playing under Stubler, I fully believe that this defence would be better...  Etch's schemes are proven to have 'gaps'...

 

That being said, under Stubler, Kuale and Dunn would still be the weak links... and to a lesser extent Bucknor and Thomas

 

Etch was the best of 'what's left' - no sense going over it again and again

If we had the same personnel playing under Stubler, I fully believe that this defence would be better...  Etch's schemes are proven to have 'gaps'...

 

That being said, under Stubler, Kuale and Dunn would still be the weak links... and to a lesser extent Bucknor and Thomas

 

Etch was the best of 'what's left' - no sense going over it again and again

No defence will work with without the right personnel in it, Etch's included.

even with the right people Etchevarys D would still be weak to the run. The CFL field is too big to take everything away, there are always gaps for a team that can give their qb time. Etch just tries to take away one and gamble that teams can't run consistently enough to beat you.