Tackle: To stop the forward progress of (the ball carrier) by seizing them and knocking them to the ground. This is accomplished by wrapping your arms around the carrier as you are contacting same with a force that is greater than the forward force used by the carrier.

 

There are different means of tackling. The Python Tackle is extremely effective but must be applied to a carrier who is standing still near some type of fixture, preferably a tree. It will render the carrier totally immobile but it might take a quarter of so to complete.

 

The Howe Tackle was once used with great effectiveness in the corners by the man who perfected the tackle in the game of hockey. This type of tackle though it did not take down the carrier of the puck rendered him useless. Redefined, holding now carries a two minute penalty.

 

The Fly-by Tackle is in some organization used on a regular basis in an attempt to take down the carrier by using the least amount of effort as is possible. It has always been considered very ineffective but might be accepted as normal. Most teams in the modern game have discouraged its use by benching the users.

 

Tackling as defined by Etch: strip the ball, don't worry about bringing the runner down.

I don't think i can blame etch for the players on the field completely missing guys when they had the chance to bring the guy down, can blame etch for schemes, for the wacky formations he uses but be pretty difficult to  blame him for the inability of our players to tackle last night, there has been 2 games so far where our guys looked like they just totally forgot how to tackle, last night was one of them. That's not on the DC, that's on the players and i'm not a etch fan either. The edmonton game earlier in the season was the other, guess maybe the bright side to that is the week after they played bc in bc and beat them and didn't really miss any tackles. Hopefully history repeats itself next week vs Edmonton. 

The tackling on this team resembles a player trying to do his best to get out of the way of the opposition. Kind of wave at the guy, fall down and hope you can grab an ankle. Laying a solid hit on the opposition player (running backs for sure) is out of the question. The 'steamrolled' look is what I picture our guys as having. Sad says indeed in Bomberland AGAIN and it's back to fundamentals, or at least it bloody well better be. Signed Disgusted.

Perhaps you can blame ETCH a wee bit, since it's pretty apparent some of the guys on the field shouldn't be on the field. Our guys do seem smaller than other teams defensive players, I like our DB's, they are all  very good, I like  Turner on the DL but he needs some help, The rest tho? Way too small, they honestly look like smurfs out there compared to other teams. So perhaps you can blame ETCH for the inability to tackle since he apparently likes to go with the smaller quicker guys instead of the normal sized guys who can tackle. 

 

See when you think about it, we got 7 DB's on the field, the 4 actual db's, the safety and 2 linebackers in dunn and sherman. I get that most teams like to play a converted DB at one of the linebacking spots but 2? That is an etch problem there for sure.

IMO this comes down to the size of our linebackers ( too small and light ), the weakness of our Canadian talent on defense, and our injuries. Wild has missed a bunch of games now, and we just haven't been the same. Looks like Kuale is done for a while, that look on his face last night after he was hurt said it all....We have to get bigger in the line backers for sure, there's no getting around that.

it's not like guys were being run over when tackling so I don't buy the size argument. The problem as I saw it was that guys took bad angles and tried to do too much arm tackling. You clean up the technique and a lot of those problems disappear. 

There's the "how to" and the "how not to" .

 

Can you guess where the Bombers slot in?

Yes the big 58 yarder was Leggett getting too aggressive and letting Williams get to the outside instead of forcing him back to the inside. Etch preaches speed to keep the ball carrier from getting to space. Force him back to the middle where you have lots of help to tackle. Williams was getting to the outside way to often.

Etch needs to go. Despite what some "anonymous" GM told Penton (*cough* Taman *cough*),  Etch's schemes on D are embarrassing. 

 

Its the same crap year after year with that clown -- win a few games as teams are caught off guard, then die a slow and miserable death as other coaches wise up and start annally pounding the ball.

 

You can blame Kuale all you want. He is a problem but not THE problem and not THE ONLY problem.  

Yes the big 58 yarder was Leggett getting too aggressive and letting Williams get to the outside instead of forcing him back to the inside. Etch preaches speed to keep the ball carrier from getting to space. Force him back to the middle where you have lots of help to tackle. Williams was getting to the outside way to often.

Leggett was looking for the qb all day on that play. He keeps contain on the RB it's stopped in the backfield, instead the back got outside and it was a huge gain. You gotta play smart and make the plays when you have a chance to make them. 

That alignment was a sell out, 9 defenders, including your safety, all on the los. The chances of something going terribly wrong were a lot higher than anything good coming out of it.

That alignment was a sell out, 9 defenders, including your safety, all on the los. The chances of something going terribly wrong were a lot higher than anything good coming out of it.

Have to agree with this particular one for sure, when i saw 9 games on the line there i thought Interesting, this should be interesting but then i noticed they were all leaning towards the one side, leaving the other side completely exposed, sure enough Ottawa saw it and ran a reverse of some kind to the side of the field where the guys weren't leaning, big gain. No chance to  really stop it, Guess leggett did have a chance there and leggett is a pretty good tackler most times but one miss and that guy was gone for a big one. 

That alignment was a sell out, 9 defenders, including your safety, all on the los. The chances of something going terribly wrong were a lot higher than anything good coming out of it.

High risk high reward has been the Etch MO all year, fact is that with some better reading of the play by Leggett it was a loss of yards on the play. I am all for a more traditional defensive mentality here, but bottom line regardless of what is called the players still have to execute. 

Playing Pall and Richardson together seems inexcusable...  looked like we were fielding four Cdns on D even though we didn't have to

 

Oshea and Etch are guilty of over-estimating our current talent

I don't know if they are guilty of over-estimating our current talent, i'm just not sure they have any other options, gotta think if they had other options, guys like richardson and pall wouldn't be on the field. Think it's a  depth issue and that particular one is a canadian depth issue, something we all knew would be a problem this year, especially when guys like lucas and newman got hurt b4 the real bullets started flying. 

I don't think i can blame etch for the players on the field completely missing guys when they had the chance to bring the guy down, can blame etch for schemes, for the wacky formations he uses but be pretty difficult to  blame him for the inability of our players to tackle last night, there has been 2 games so far where our guys looked like they just totally forgot how to tackle, last night was one of them. That's not on the DC, that's on the players and i'm not a etch fan either. The edmonton game earlier in the season was the other, guess maybe the bright side to that is the week after they played bc in bc and beat them and didn't really miss any tackles. Hopefully history repeats itself next week vs Edmonton.

Here's a recipe for disaster, players not executing form tackling/blocking AND coaches not getting their players in the right places to be successful.

The gloom and doom predictions about the effect Etch's schemes would have on the defence have come to pass. I. for one, am sick and tired of the "high risk, high reward" defence which has devolved into "high risk, high loss". Etcheverry is not going to change his philosophy, and if the talent level is not there, neither are the results. O'Shea had better figure out whether or not he wants to live and die with this style of defence.

I would really like to see Etch's defence in action if he had the very best players. 

 

Probably be fun to watch and confusing as hell. 

 

But ... we don't have that. And this is the CFL. So scheme for the talent you have, you egomaniac.