blitzmore Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 So, if the Winnipeg Blue Bombers gave up a franchise-record number of sacks in 2014 -- and, at 70 and counting, they did -- does it logically follow then that the offensive line is also the worst in franchise history? Not so fast, says veteran left tackle Glenn January. "There are so many things that go into an offence that I really think it's unfair to point at one group and say, 'That's the cause of the problem.' "If you go back and look at the film, I think there's enough blame to go around for all of us." 'We run an offence that puts the the offensive linemen in one-on-one situations a lot more than other teams, so I don't think you can just look at the number of sacks and get a true picture of the situation we were handed this year' -- Glenn January Sure, no doubt. But 70 sacks? January remained defiant Wednesday. "The style of offence we run, there's a lot of emphasis on moving the ball down the field and running a lot of empty sets. "And that's also part of the reason Drew Willy is No. 2 in the league in passing right now. We run an offence that puts the offensive linemen in one-on-one situations a lot more than other teams, so I don't think you can just look at the number of sacks and get a true picture of the situation we were handed this year." January's longtime linemate, centre Steve Morley, said most fans don't realize CFL teams that have been celebrated for their offensive-line play -- the Saskatchewan Roughriders, most notably -- tend to be the teams that use maximum-protection schemes most often. How often? Morley said he sat down Friday to watch the Calgary Stampeders-Roughriders game in hopes he could learn something about blocking the ferocious Stamps pass rush in advance of his club playing in Calgary this Saturday in what will be Winnipeg's final game of the season. Morley said he quickly learned he was wasting his Friday night trying to derive lessons from watching what Saskatchewan was doing. "It was the fourth quarter and I was like, 'Wow, they haven't run one drop-back pass. They slid every protection so far.' "That's the exact opposite of the offence we're running here." Now, you'd expect January and Morley, as the longest-serving members of the Bombers offensive-line, to strenuously defend their work. And we'd love to tell you what the other Bombers O-line mainstay -- left guard Chris Greaves -- thinks about the situation, but he just kept repeating the same mantra Wednesday that all he does is what he's told. Over and over and over again. What was interesting is Bombers head coach Mike O'Shea essentially agreed with Morley and January that the blame for his team's pass-protection problems in 2014 went much deeper than the five men on the O-line. "Seventy sacks is a lot of sacks," said O'Shea, "...but it is much more complex than that -- than just pointing your finger at one element of the offence. There are sacks that happen every game for a variety of reasons... "There are elements to the offence that are extremely detailed that you need to follow." On top of all of that, it also bears reminding the right side of the offensive line has effectively been a revolving door all season with a steady stream of players auditioning at both the guard and tackle positions. The latest -- and final -- incarnation has rookie non-import Matthias Goossen playing at right guard and import Jace Daniels at right tackle. That was the same combination the Bombers used last weekend against the B.C. Lions. How'd that work out? Winnipeg gave up a franchise record 10 sacks in what was a must-win game at home that officially knocked the Bombers out of playoff contention. Quarterback Drew Willy conceded a lot of the blame last week rested on his shoulders on a night he was uncharacteristically indecisive and frequently hung on to the ball too long. Of the mainstay O-line triumvirate of January, Greaves and Morley, only January is set to become a free agent this off-season. He says he'd love to be back in Blue and Gold for what would be his seventh season. "I've made Winnipeg my home. It's been fantastic for me the last six years. And I'd like to eventually leave here as a winner." paul.wiecek@freepress.mb.ca Twitter: @PaulWiecek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. NotoriousBIG 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 And that is one of the reasons why many people thought the Bombers could do better than Marcel Bellefool at the position. If he gets Willy crippled by stubbornly sticking to a system that lets him take so many hits I'll never forgive him. James, Brandon Blue&Gold and pigseye 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance Doublezero 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 January's longtime linemate, centre Steve Morley, said most fans don't realize CFL teams that have been celebrated for their offensive-line play -- the Saskatchewan Roughriders, most notably -- tend to be the teams that use maximum-protection schemes most often. How often? Morley said he sat down Friday to watch the Calgary Stampeders-Roughriders game in hopes he could learn something about blocking the ferocious Stamps pass rush in advance of his club playing in Calgary this Saturday in what will be Winnipeg's final game of the season. Morley said he quickly learned he was wasting his Friday night trying to derive lessons from watching what Saskatchewan was doing. "It was the fourth quarter and I was like, 'Wow, they haven't run one drop-back pass. They slid every protection so far.' "That's the exact opposite of the offence we're running here." Those comments should give O-Shea some cause for concern, at the very least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KptKrunch Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance Well just to add, and I mentioned this in another thread, Cavillo was known for having a very quick release. Drew has to learn that as he doesn't have that yet. I've argued it before, and will do so again, an offensive line never gives up 10 sacks in a game. Their job is to give their QB time to throw the ball. On 8 of those sacks (or was it 7) Willy had over four steamboats to throw the ball and he didn't do it. If you want to 'blame' the line - you have to see a guy beat his block right at the start and put immediate pressure on the QB. That happened on B.C's first sack where Willy didn't get a chance to even plant his feet. That's how Cavillo was sacked - very rarely, when he got a chance to plant his feet, did he ever get sacked? No, he got rid of the ball. Drew will learn, and I do agree with what January is saying. It can be proved. Look at Justin Sorenson, remember him, our much maligned center from last year? He's doing just fine here in Edmonton since Ramsey went down with an injury about 7 games ago. What, did he 'just learn' his position, or is he put in a 'better' position (in terms of the schemes used here in Edmonton)? I'd bet on the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 arrow is pointing directly at Marcel........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted October 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It might also explain why our offensive line guru coach has not been able to improve the play of the oline much if at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Sadly, it is starting to sound like there is a sizable and growing discontent with the coaching currently used by the club. However, given O'Shea's demonstrated determination to keep on with the same old, I am not optimistic about significant change to come. I just hope that he is not as rigid as he has shown himself to be thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Blue Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Not really buying what January's selling here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted October 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Not really buying what January's selling here. Why not? Do you think he's lying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlue Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Line coaches must be frustrated ... top rated at teaching blocking and looking like ... well you know Bell* knows there are rolling pockets, play action schemes and a dozen other ways to play this wide field game Its like being redcoats in the revolutionary war lining up like pigeons to be shot by the guerilla revolutionaries disgusted regret here at Bell* ... a total inflexible conservative who knows little about war tactics or strategy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance So why can't we do that? Seems easy enough to implement to me than an empty set, one on one OL blocking schemes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance I think focussing on the max protect idea is wrong.. the real concerning things to me would be the lack of moving the pocket, the lack of slide protections all that kind of thing. When you basically tell the OL to just catch the incoming rushers (which is the impression I get from the article) you're just making it harder on your OL and easier on the guys rushing the qb. Change it up, throw the D off balance. That seems like a big part of the problem with the offense lately to be honest, no one is fooled they know exactly what is coming. Was a problem with Bellefeuille in all his other stops too. He was very vanilla and it was predictable and easier to stop if the talent didn't just out skill their opponents. Brandon Blue&Gold 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan007 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I've pointed this exact thing out a while ago and everyone told me that "oh no, it's more the offensive line coach and the ability of the players", which obviously does have an impact. But my logic was, we've upgraded our Oline coach, we have a better team, you'd think we have less sacks then last year. Hence I'm going back to the thinking that I was correct all along and that MB is the big problem here. I've never liked him, I've never wanted him on this team. I'd have rather had Khari then MB, if that would have been possible. I believe there is some truth in what January is stating. MB is the offensive problem on this team. He is nothing but mediocre, to less then mediocre and we need to find a better OC next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 The most discouraging aspect of any offence is the unwillingness or inability, to adapt to what is happening by other teams in defending us. Earlier, we had game plans that attached teams and Willy fit that bill nicely. Obviously, teams are not going to let us do that all year. They changed what they were doing…we didn't, at least not quickly enough. We were left behind. We competed, and our defence kept us in some games, but we made too many mistakes and had too many turnovers. We continued on a trend downwards. We made minor roster changes in the hope? that they would help solve some issues. Whomever was totally in charge of all the decisions regarding the direction the offence went, failed, and failed miserably. Leaving Willy totally in one spot, even when he demonstrated he could move and throw, was inexcusable. It seems to me not enough was done to counter what other teams were doing and made it way too easy to attack us. 10 sacks in one game says it all. I know one thing, I wouldn't hesitate to play MB in a chess game. Fatty Liver 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I've pointed this exact thing out a while ago and everyone told me that "oh no, it's more the offensive line coach and the ability of the players", which obviously does have an impact. But my logic was, we've upgraded our Oline coach, we have a better team, you'd think we have less sacks then last year. Hence I'm going back to the thinking that I was correct all along and that MB is the big problem here. I've never liked him, I've never wanted him on this team. I'd have rather had Khari then MB, if that would have been possible. I believe there is some truth in what January is stating. MB is the offensive problem on this team. He is nothing but mediocre, to less then mediocre and we need to find a better OC next year. I forget exactly when it happened but at the start of the year I thought the OL was doing a pretty decent job, but there was a change in teams strategies against the Bombers, they started to just blitz all the time and it always got enough pressure on the qb to disrupt him. We didn't really do anything to slow it down. Teams just kept coming and coming and coming with pressure. Once you get into that area your offense is sunk. You need to be able to slow down a blitz and the Bombers didn't make the adjustment to do that. USABomberfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voodoochylde Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I've pointed this exact thing out a while ago and everyone told me that "oh no, it's more the offensive line coach and the ability of the players", which obviously does have an impact. But my logic was, we've upgraded our Oline coach, we have a better team, you'd think we have less sacks then last year. Hence I'm going back to the thinking that I was correct all along and that MB is the big problem here. I've never liked him, I've never wanted him on this team. I'd have rather had Khari then MB, if that would have been possible. I believe there is some truth in what January is stating. MB is the offensive problem on this team. He is nothing but mediocre, to less then mediocre and we need to find a better OC next year. I absolutely believe this to be true. I think, it was after last game, Bob Irving noted that our offense doesn't seem to have any safety valves built into it. The one example that was used was with respect to running backs assisting in pass protection and how in most offenses, they'd chip and then release out into the flats to present a target. Both he, and Doug Brown, noticed that hasn't been the case with the Bomber offense. Now, whether that's the result of a guy not knowing what his assignment is or a fundamental issue with the scheme we are running .. I don't know .. I'm not privy to that information. But I tend to think that, if a quarterback like Anthony Calvillo (a guy with a reasonably quick release and who could read a defense) struggled in the system .. and his line struggled to keep him upright .. that there are probably fundamental issues with that system and how it translates to your protection schemes. All that said, there were more than just offensive scheme issues at play last game and any time a QB takes a sack .. there's more than just bad line play (or QB play) that caused it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USABomberfan Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 This is what I was saying and implying in that 3 RB set protection thread I had brought up. At times our OL has been beaten by a 4 on 5 matchup or less, but teams have run plenty of blitzes on us where either a RB was not there to pick up a guy, a safety valve to check into, or that one extra blocker that could've been used to buy that extra second. In this league, you're gonna get plenty of rushes coming at you, but that one extra second can make a difference. As other threads have stated, Willy acknowledging that he didn't get the ball out when he should've speaks to why there were 10 sacks given up last game, many of which the O-line did what it was supposed to do. But I do think this highlights areas of where Bellefeuille has not made adjustments against the blitzes or pressure. Make no mistake, the guy has put some offenses together that have made big plays and have put on high scoring games even, but looking back at it, protection issues certainly were visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR. CFL Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Enough of the blame game. We apparently hired the best o line coach on the planet and sent the worst one to Calgary? What's wrong with that picture. Be it poor talent, poor schemes, poor coaching, poor play calling.....enough the end result? Poor production, poor protection and poor football. The big thinkers, Miller, Walters, and O'Shea watched it and our responsible for it and not it's time to see how they plan on fixing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Enough of the blame game. We apparently hired the best o line coach on the planet and sent the worst one to Calgary? What's wrong with that picture. Be it poor talent, poor schemes, poor coaching, poor play calling.....enough the end result? Poor production, poor protection and poor football. The big thinkers, Miller, Walters, and O'Shea watched it and our responsible for it and not it's time to see how they plan on fixing it. I thought you said enough of the blame game? blitzmore and USABomberfan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coach17 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Great discussion! One thing I've noticed as the year has gone on is how well opposing defences have been adapting to our weaknesses. Any scheme is a good one when it works, however once the weaknesses are exposed it becomes very easy to shut down pretty much any type of offence. Calvillo got shut down by pressure and bumping his receivers off the line, Saskatchewans running attack gets shut down when you pile the line and turn the back inside, same as Calgary. However the good offences are able to counter and change up with a different look or scheme. For some reason we haven't done that until we changed up QB and RB against Calgary, then our Coordinator had to get more flexible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Funny this is that in the first few games this year, it seemed that we were able to do the half-time adjustments to the other teams' offenses and defenses, but not at all since. Worse yet, this has been a hallmark of the team's futility for years. The more things change, the more they remain the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigseye Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance Don't forget the Super Slots. Mark H. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's been discussed before, but it's exactly what happened to Montreal in 2007. Their OL looked like crap under MB's scheme and Calvillo got brutalized. They changed coaches and put in better protection schemes and all of a sudden they had the best OL in the league. IMO our OL has less talent last season yet looked better. The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance I think focussing on the max protect idea is wrong.. the real concerning things to me would be the lack of moving the pocket, the lack of slide protections all that kind of thing. When you basically tell the OL to just catch the incoming rushers (which is the impression I get from the article) you're just making it harder on your OL and easier on the guys rushing the qb. Change it up, throw the D off balance. That seems like a big part of the problem with the offense lately to be honest, no one is fooled they know exactly what is coming. Was a problem with Bellefeuille in all his other stops too. He was very vanilla and it was predictable and easier to stop if the talent didn't just out skill their opponents. Well yes...I know they weren't running only max protect schemes...but it undoubtedly was their base offense. 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