Jump to content

Around The League Regular Season Discussion


Noeller

Recommended Posts

I don't know if anyone mentioned this or not but I thought O'Shea really set the tone for Saturday's game in Calgary.

Promising drive, Willy getting the ball out quick, drive stalls. 52 yard field goal attempt for Medlock who is the best kicker in the CFL. Infact we're paying him big money to hit kicks constantly at this distance. 3rd and 10 and we decide to do a fake field goal. We get one yard on the play and O'Shea decides to use a pointless challenge on pass interference which fails miserably. Sets up Calgary in great field position to get the opening points of the game. These are the kind of sequences that kills a team and momentum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously with hindsight it's a terrible call but I like the aggressiveness of it. It was early in the game so you got all sorts of time to rebound if it doesn't work and if it does work you get some early momentum. The D falling apart over the course of the game was by far the biggest concern. Everyone is on the offence but I am less worried about them than the defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a lead for a bit. That play was a good one to try. It failed but Calgary was held to a fg. The fake fg try played no role in the loss at all. I agree about the D. Way more concerned. Ppl cab say that the reason they are on the field so long is cuz the O isn't but that's not really accurate.  They are on the field because they can't get a 2 and out. 

Edited by Goalie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the complaints on the Bombers is that we don't hang onto the ball on offence for any period of time. For the Bombers to fake that FG try is exactly the reason we hired a guy like MOS. Hes sneaky in that regard. It was a play that they practiced and we would have hung onto the ball for a while longer. It failed because Burnett was grabbed coming off the line, or else he had a ton of yardage. 

O'Shea was completely right to challenge that play. Again, it should have allowed us to hang onto the ball and perhaps even score. Too bad the officials didn't acknowledge that grab on Burnett as being enough to warrant a call. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Goalie said:

We had a lead for a bit. That play was a good one to try. It failed but Calgary was held to a fg. The fake fg try played no role in the loss at all. I agree about the D. Way more concerned. Ppl cab say that the reason they are on the field so long is cuz the O isn't but that's not really accurate.  They are on the field because they can't get a 2 and out. 

It's absolutely a cop out excuse, especially in that game. Even with a lopsided TOP a D doesn't get gassed by the 2nd quarter. The D was just flat out bad all on their own. There was one drive where the Stamps started under their own goal posts and marched for a touchdown. Think it was right after half too. No tired excuses there, just flat out terrible play by the unit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

It's absolutely a cop out excuse, especially in that game. Even with a lopsided TOP a D doesn't get gassed by the 2nd quarter. The D was just flat out bad all on their own. There was one drive where the Stamps started under their own goal posts and marched for a touchdown. Think it was right after half too. No tired excuses there, just flat out terrible play by the unit. 

Except there is this...

 

 

Marquay McDaniel on #Bombers: “Winnipeg just didn’t look like they had a lot of energy last night, really. Especially on defence.” #CFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Except there is this...

 

 

Marquay McDaniel on #Bombers: “Winnipeg just didn’t look like they had a lot of energy last night, really. Especially on defence.” #CFL

That sounds more like he's questioning their intensity, not a literal comment on their conditioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

That sounds more like he's questioning their intensity, not a literal comment on their conditioning.

I would agree with this. It's one thing to come out and look 'tired', it's quite another thing to always have to come out because your offence is not doing what they're paid to do...stay on the field for more than the mandatory 3 plays. Let's face it, the defence did not look good, at all, but, when the opposing offence is allowed to continually come back on the filed and use their entire playbook on us, that will lead to confusion, and derision. And yes, a good mix of running and passing will lead to a 'tired' defence, a lack of intensity or whatever you want to call it. 

How would you feel to have to run out back on the field after every 3 plays because your offence is so ineffective?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

One of the complaints on the Bombers is that we don't hang onto the ball on offence for any period of time. For the Bombers to fake that FG try is exactly the reason we hired a guy like MOS. Hes sneaky in that regard. It was a play that they practiced and we would have hung onto the ball for a while longer. It failed because Burnett was grabbed coming off the line, or else he had a ton of yardage. 

O'Shea was completely right to challenge that play. Again, it should have allowed us to hang onto the ball and perhaps even score. Too bad the officials didn't acknowledge that grab on Burnett as being enough to warrant a call. 

And when was the last time we properly executed a fake field goal/punt? 3rd and medium sure but 3rd and 10.. Not too sure about that one. There certainly wasn't enough of a hold to warrant pass interference on the play. The refs got it right. This sequence of events weren't enough to change the game because lets face it.. The Bombers pulled out a stinker but in a close football game this is the difference between a win and a loss and thats on O'Shea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

And when was the last time we properly executed a fake field goal/punt? 3rd and medium sure but 3rd and 10.. Not too sure about that one. There certainly wasn't enough of a hold to warrant pass interference on the play. The refs got it right. This sequence of events weren't enough to change the game because lets face it.. The Bombers pulled out a stinker but in a close football game this is the difference between a win and a loss and thats on O'Shea.

Which close football game are you referring to?  My memory fails me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

And when was the last time we properly executed a fake field goal/punt? 3rd and medium sure but 3rd and 10.. Not too sure about that one. There certainly wasn't enough of a hold to warrant pass interference on the play. The refs got it right. This sequence of events weren't enough to change the game because lets face it.. The Bombers pulled out a stinker but in a close football game this is the difference between a win and a loss and thats on O'Shea.

The great Jesse Briggs.  Unfortunately some responsible adult ruined his Wikipedia page by editing out the glory.

October 10th, 2015 game vs. the BC Lions, Jesse gained 11 yards on a 3rd and 10 fake punt run.

Edited by Throw Long Bannatyne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know I am rewatching the game from Friday, here's what Chris Cuthbert says right after the last touchdown the stamps got that quarter.... "The Stamps have only punted once in 6 possessions this half" 

Go on, process that and tell me that it's all because the D was tired because the offense didn't stay on the field long enough. Truthfully the offense wasn't even THAT bad, just that the D never got off the field to give the offence a chance to get things rolling. Willy was fine in that first half, but some drops and some shitty OL play ended a few drives prematurely on him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side, after the initial drive, the Bombers had the ball in 4 more possessions...and got 1 first down in the first half.

In comparison, when BC beat Calgary in week 1, they ran 68 plays. Not counting the marvellous 4th quarter, how many plays did the Bombers run in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarters?  - 28, including the last play in the half and 2 plays after the blocked punt. So - 25 in 10 possessions, including the opening drive. A few more 1st downs and Calgary doesn't even get the ball to score their 2nd TD.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

You know I am rewatching the game from Friday, here's what Chris Cuthbert says right after the last touchdown the stamps got that quarter.... "The Stamps have only punted once in 6 possessions this half" 

Go on, process that and tell me that it's all because the D was tired because the offense didn't stay on the field long enough. Truthfully the offense wasn't even THAT bad, just that the D never got off the field to give the offence a chance to get things rolling. Willy was fine in that first half, but some drops and some shitty OL play ended a few drives prematurely on him. 

BS on the offense wasn't that bad. Just over 100 yards in 3 quarters and a TD set up by a blocked FG. Willy was not fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...