Mike O'Shea's style vs Kent Austin.   Something inside of me wants to see Mike O'Shea lose it during the game and just go off on the team.  Kent Austin's team is up by a wide margin and his offence turns the ball over a couple of times.   He gets the entire offence on the bench and just tears a strip off them. 

 

Mike O'Shea just stands on the sidelines with that same old grin.  I'm not a fan of Kent Austin but he's a damn good coach that gets everything out of his players.      

 

 

As bad as our O-line looked today (and they were BAD) they looked adequate last game, with the possible exception of Picard.

How can they deteriorate so fast? It has to be laid at the feet of the relevant coaches.

Because BCs defence is nothing to write home about. We SHOULD look good (or at least competent) against BC - they aren't a very good team.

As bad as our O-line looked today (and they were BAD) they looked adequate last game, with the possible exception of Picard. 

How can they deteriorate so fast? It has to be laid at the feet of the relevant coaches.

 

Hamilton has a way better DL in terms of outright talent and they'll send anybody on a blitz.  BC didn't really send more than LB's.  I don't like that they are leaving it on Picard to guess as to who Hamilton is sending, just block it up from the inside out and give Willy a chance instead of rolling the dice.

Austin is an experienced coach MOS is still a former player trying to learn how to be a HC.....at what expense to the team?

Why do we always hire guys like that? Why is it always the Bombers who have to train guys like O'Shea in the first place. Oh yeah,we're cheap. 

What drives me mad is the shot of the Bombers bench after the first Q with players hanging their heads and looking despondent with 3/4 of the game left to play.  I would prefer they look either motivated or scared of losing their jobs. 

 

They need a coach or some vet. players with the ability to motivate and kick them out of their stupor.  If the Bombers have to bring back Casey Creehan solely as head cheerleader and all-around ass kicker I'm all in favour.

I get tired of the cheap excuse. Perhaps it is the result of inexperienced people hiring inexperienced people who the hire more inexperienced people. This started at the top of the a Bomber food chain and worked it's way down the line.

 

If Muamba and/or Wild are still here, this thread probably doesn't exist

 

They play guard?

 

Or we just got beat by a better team. Over analyzing is fun but sometimes you just lose to a better team. Hamilton Is better than we are and everyone at the start of the year knew it. They got our number.

We are honestly what a 9-9, third place team if Willy is healthy? We have a defence with some nice pieces, pretty good back 5, solid lbers in Bass and Randle, good DE in Westerman that seems like they are developing and improving. We have an OL that seems poor. Seems like Bryant is good, Chungh is a nice piece, Daniels is ok and the other two spots, yeah not so much. Poor ST coaching, poor OC.

As someone else posted- how exactly are the Hamilton players, position for position than the current Bombers? The difference is slight until you get to the coaching and it is becoming increasingly clear (at least to me) that is the difference. If that is true, then we are in for a long and sad season.

Hamilton has several elite high end players. Their O isn't that impressive but that D is fierce for sure. What they do have tho is consistency in their coaching ranks. Steinaurer been there a while so has Austin. O'shea 2nd season. Halls first. That matters.

I get tired of the cheap excuse. Perhaps it is the result of inexperienced people hiring inexperienced people who the hire more inexperienced people. This started at the top of the a Bomber food chain and worked it's way down the line.

 

Its the grey cup drought... Bombers ALWAYS go overboard...

 

Taman - I'm rebuilding the team for Doug Berry and then firing him.

Bauer - I'm hiring an old buddy and giving him complete power!  We're cutting all our vets!

Kelly - I running an offence with no shotgun formation because I'm a genius

Mack - I have US connections, we're going to build a team based only on that

Miller - I'm hiring a rookie GM and then a rookie coach to help our rookie QB

Walters - I have great CIS connections, we're going to start 8 Cdns or more!

 

I was excited because Bellefuile was a 'safe' hire... just didn't realize how safe.

Funny. Cuz to Me our standout players this game were willy. He was solid. Westerman a Canadian. Bass a rookie. Hurl had a good game too. Adams a rookie. These guys all played quite well. People may not like to hear it but you need to learn to crawl before you can walk and walk before you run. Looks to me like we are starting to walk a bit. Next step is to run. The D played well today. O moved the ball. People always go on about the negatives but outside of the first 5 minutes of the game the team played well. D stepped up. O moved the ball. First 5 was awful but for 55 minutes the team played well. Adams hurt cotton hurt. Willy hurt. They showed resiliency and never folded. 28 points off turnovers.

We have a 2nd year head coach....with some weak sisters on his staff...

Hamilton has several elite high end players. Their O isn't that impressive but that D is fierce for sure. What they do have tho is consistency in their coaching ranks. Steinaurer been there a while so has Austin. O'shea 2nd season. Halls first. That matters.

Maybe as a Bomber, but Hall has been both a head coach and defensive coach for awhile now, has he not?  And O'Shea has  been an assistant coach before.

Hamilton has several elite high end players. Their O isn't that impressive but that D is fierce for sure. What they do have tho is consistency in their coaching ranks. Steinaurer been there a while so has Austin. O'shea 2nd season. Halls first. That matters.

Maybe as a Bomber, but Hall has been both a head coach and defensive coach for awhile now, has he not? And O'Shea has been an assistant coach before.

First as a bomber tho. The D played well today for the most part abs have seemingly gotten better the last few weeks. We didn't lose cuz of the D. We lost because of 28 points off turnovers. The D Is coming together it seems. The O has some issues tho. Not sure you understand what consistency on a coaching staff means. Fire coaches year after year and this is what happens really but the D has and did play well tonight. They really only gave up 1 td tonight. The rest were a direct or in direct result of turnovers.

The scores where Hamilton got the ball on turnovers were so easy that the defence should have been embarassed. If the defence was on its game, we could have gotten away with giving up field goals. The  defence finally got its act together in the second half but it was too little, too late.

Lol. Blaming the D. Man. Pointless to argue with people after losses really. 28 points off turnovers. 2 pick 6 and 2 basically Hamilton was in the redzone. How do you blame the D really.

Just cause O'Shea doesn't have every capillary in his face burst when he gives someone **** doesn't mean he doesn't give someone ****. Pretty much everytime someone takes a UR or otherwise stupid 15 yarder or when Stoudermire does his stupid crap, O'Shea gives them ****.

I've never seen it.

Look closer and you will. He's always the first guy to meet the player on the sideline. Not sure how you can't see it at times honestly.

Don't know why people won't just admit that Hamilton has very good D personnel and who have a Coach who is prepared to use them in a capacity that suits their talents.

They used that superior quality to completely bam-boozle an average O-line, coached by an average OC. We still don't have an answer to those maniacal blitzes, and I don't think too many teams will.

As to our defence, they were fine..for the most part. Like Goalie said, is it the D's fault we practically gave them 21 pts?

But make no mistake, Hamilton beat us and are the better team...for now.

(We did beat them in the 2nd half though haha 8-7)

Yup, we beat em in the second half. They capitalized on turnovers, we didn't. Points off of turnovers 28, Us Zero.

15 maybe 19 first downs. Hard to see on the phone exactly. 280 passing. 54 rushing. 2 interceptions.

Those numbers aren't that impressive at all. Those are Hamiltons numbers. D played well.

15 maybe 19 first downs. Hard to see on the phone exactly. 280 passing. 54 rushing. 2 interceptions.

Those numbers aren't that impressive at all. Those are Hamiltons numbers. D played well.

 

You left out the three TD passes...

 

Once you realize that Ham offence barely had the ball in the first quarter, those are good numbers.

 

Two of our sacks were only because Collaros was looking end zone in the last minute of the half

3 td passes yup. Only one was not a direct result of a turnover tho.

Really gonna say ya but 2 of them were...

Really?? Isn't that like saying it was 38-8 but... 28 of those points were off turnovers so really it was 10-8

3 td passes yup. Only one was not a direct result of a turnover tho.

Really gonna say ya but 2 of them were...

Really?? Isn't that like saying it was 38-8 but... 28 of those points were off turnovers so really it was 10-8

I am sort of saying that. But not exactly. To be clearer, the score embarrassed us.that was due to them capitalizing on our mistakes. Good teams do that.

 

15 maybe 19 first downs. Hard to see on the phone exactly. 280 passing. 54 rushing. 2 interceptions.

Those numbers aren't that impressive at all. Those are Hamiltons numbers. D played well.

 

You left out the three TD passes...

 

Once you realize that Ham offence barely had the ball in the first quarter, those are good numbers.

 

Two of our sacks were only because Collaros was looking end zone in the last minute of the half

 

 

Where was Hamilton on the field when those plays happened?  Pretty sure they weren't reaching the endzone, even if they could have pulled Michael Bishop off his couch for those two plays.