Guest J5V Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 2 hours ago, Stickem said: Hypothermia must have set in at the stumps bench....they sure looked like they didn't want to be there....Us on the other hand seemed to relish in it...especially big Okpalaugo and Jeffcoat.........great game by those two.... Shout out to Nevis as well...best he's played all year...And what can you say about Andrew....he ground out He looked like he was hurting at the end of the game. Does anyone know if he's okay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBBFanWest Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, TBURGESS said: Didn't, not because we stopped them, but because our D put up 17 points. They would have if the score was close. Wouldn't be a win without someone throwing shade. If we won 99-3, the script would read something like "Don't expect us to score that much next time. We got lucky" Edited November 4, 2017 by WBBFanWest Goalie, Mark F, BigBlueFanatic and 4 others 3 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J5V Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 1 hour ago, TBURGESS said: Didn't, not because we stopped them, but because our D put up 17 points. They would have if the score was close. How did you like the 54 yard FG Medlock kicked with an ice-cold, soggy, pigskin on a snow covered, frozen field? Having kicked a few footballs I can tell you that was no small feat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 1 hour ago, TBURGESS said: Didn't, not because we stopped them, but because our D put up 17 points. They would have if the score was close. Why must there always be a ‘but’ from you after a Bomber victory? BigBlueFanatic, Noeller, SPuDS and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 2 hours ago, TBURGESS said: Didn't, not because we stopped them, but because our D put up 17 points. They would have if the score was close. Are you new to football cuz im assuming u must be unaware that the D scoring points counts also. Wanna-B-Fanboy, BigBlueFanatic, SPuDS and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 3 hours ago, J5V said: How did you like the 54 yard FG Medlock kicked with an ice-cold, soggy, pigskin on a snow covered, frozen field? Having kicked a few footballs I can tell you that was no small feat. Why do you have to insult Medlock's physiology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 2 hours ago, TBURGESS said: Didn't, not because we stopped them, but because our D put up 17 points. They would have if the score was close. So our D gets 7 turnovers, stops them on a third down gamble, puts up 17 points..... but we didn't stop them??? HUH??? BigBlueFanatic and SPuDS 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 Actually T Bor, you're right. If our offence, defence, and special teams didn't out perform the Stamps, there is no way we would have won that game. Wanna-B-Fanboy, BigBlueFanatic, SPuDS and 2 others 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doublezero Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 Buckley gave up 14 pts (one pick 6 and one failure to read blitz which led to a fumble recovery and TD by T.0) the rest was FGs by Medlock. Calgary also had at least one TD nullified by holding. So as much as I absolutely LOVE watching Bombers smack the Stamps - honestly it was just as much Calgary's poor play as it was Bombers dominating. They did play with more energy than Stamps, for sure. Had more to lose I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedFlex27 Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 4 hours ago, Stickem said: Hypothermia must have set in at the stumps bench....they sure looked like they didn't want to be there....Us on the other hand seemed to relish in it...especially big Okpalaugo and Jeffcoat.........great game by those two.... Shout out to Nevis as well...best he's played all year...And what can you say about Andrew....he ground out a ground game in that slippery stuff and watched his counterpart on the stamps slip ..slip...slide away and was totally ineffective...Harris deserved that record..especially in those conditions....Have to turn our attention to the Sask./Edm. game now ,to see who wants to face us or go chicken and head east....Like very much how we played that one....now can we string together 3 more....Man that would be nice and a long time coming Stamps figured all they had to do was show up. I was impressed how the Bombers handled the cold. And punched the Stamps in the mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedFlex27 Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Atomic said: Actually T Bor, you're right. If our offence, defence, and special teams didn't out perform the Stamps, there is no way we would have won that game. So much for the Stamps having the best offensive line. Did you see how Ian Wild just blew by LT Randy Richards on Buckley's sack & fumble? It wasn't even close. Edited November 4, 2017 by SpeedFlex27 Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 It's always fun around here. When we lose, everyone sucks. When we win everyone was great. I didn't say that we didn't deserve to win or that the points scored by the defense don't count or that it's easy to kick a 52 yard FG in the cold or that there was some sort of 'but' that we won. I simply said that our offense only scored 6 points and their offense only scored 3 points and they would have scored 6 if they'd taken an easy FG instead of going for it on 3rd down and folks tripped all over themselves making up things I didn't say. Par for the course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBBFanWest Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 1 hour ago, TBURGESS said: It's always fun around here. When we lose, everyone sucks. When we win everyone was great. I didn't say that we didn't deserve to win or that the points scored by the defense don't count or that it's easy to kick a 52 yard FG in the cold or that there was some sort of 'but' that we won. I simply said that our offense only scored 6 points and their offense only scored 3 points and they would have scored 6 if they'd taken an easy FG instead of going for it on 3rd down and folks tripped all over themselves making up things I didn't say. Par for the course. Translation: I said something to get a reaction. It got a reaction, then I pretend outrage because I got exactly what I was going for. Par for the course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, WBBFanWest said: Translation: I said something to get a reaction. It got a reaction, then I pretend outrage because I got exactly what I was going for. Par for the course. Translation: Yup, I make stuff up then complain about the stuff I made up. How dare you bring that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 Our D flat out won that game, in every aspect. Only reason we didn't blow them out earlier, was an pretty inept offense, pivoted by a 3rd string QB at best. Tracker and Sard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, do or die said: Our D flat out won that game, in every aspect. Only reason we didn't blow them out earlier, was an pretty inept offense, pivoted by a 3rd string QB at best. I don't know if anyone else saw this, but just behind the Bomber bench a member of the secondary stamped out the message "Save Richie's job!" in the snow. Edited November 5, 2017 by Throw Long Bannatyne WildPath 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booch Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 Does anyone ever correlate one teams "bad" play which resulted in the other team winning may be a direct result of the play of the winning team making them look bad? Sard, Noeller and johnzo 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardCoreBlue Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Booch said: Does anyone ever correlate one teams "bad" play which resulted in the other team winning may be a direct result of the play of the winning team making them look bad? Depends on the play. That is, evaluate each play to make that determination you are raising. Edited November 5, 2017 by HardCoreBlue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 ........Spoiler alert ? This content contains personal observations... ??I’m beginning to think that that our defence was built specifically for this type of game. The weather conditions fed right into the kind of game that the Bombers are strong at. Plenty of pressure up front, plug the running gaps, cover the deep threat and hover in position to get the turnover. Well executed. ??Love Westerman, but Okpalaugo and Jeffcoat looked dynamic out there, and, they were having a ball. Plus 5 sacks. ??Superb effort by Andrew Harris, but nothing else is to be expected by him.. ??The big guy (Messam) couldn’t get the proper leverage to do anything out there, and we were all over him. Not built for those conditions. ??Scary first thoughts. On the initial kicks, Fogg seemed to have more trouble foot wise than Finch...but that did change. ??When did I know we would win? Right after the pick six.. ??7 works for me. As in 7 sacks and 7 turnovers.. Calgary had allowed only 23 sacks in the last 17 games... ??QB efficiency Winnipeg 88% Calgary 34.7% ??41 defensive tackles for the Blue. One more than Singleton normally gets ? CFL- The CFL has provided in-depth penalty information since 2009 breaking them down by Offence, Defence and Special Teams. The Bombers have committed just 17 penalties on Special Teams coverage and return units in 2017 and that is by far the lowest since recording began in 2009 Calgary - They have scored just 3 offensive TDs in their last 45 drives. Winnipeg - They have scored just 4 offensive TDs in their last 52 drives. Winnipeg’s possession time increased by 10 minutes this last game against Calgary. (22 to 32) ??You have to ask...would LaPo seriously consider working for Reed? LaPo doesn’t like turnover(s) ??Not a bad effort by #33.. ??Decent game by LeFevour, but still not convinced Davis couldn’t have done the same.. Sard, Fatty Liver and Tracker 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J5V Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 17 minutes ago, Mr Dee said: ........Spoiler alert ? This content contains personal observations... ??I’m beginning to think that that our defence was built specifically for this type of game. The weather conditions fed right into the kind of game that the Bombers are strong at. Plenty of pressure up front, plug the running gaps, cover the deep threat and hover in position to get the turnover. Well executed. Agree. The weather conditions made it hard for the Stamps to beat us with the kind of plays we seem most vulnerable to. Even if BLM had played I doubt the result would have changed much. I am much more concerned with Edmonton and specifically Reilly's ability to burn us though. He ain't Buckley and his receivers are very good at coming down with those jump balls. Edmonton's O-line looked very good against the Riders and easily moved them off the line of scrimmage. I hope Nevis is okay and I wish Westerman was ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 If they hire Bellefeuille... that would be epic Tracker, Mark H., trueBlue83 and 2 others 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eternal optimist Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 21 hours ago, Doublezero said: Buckley gave up 14 pts (one pick 6 and one failure to read blitz which led to a fumble recovery and TD by T.0) the rest was FGs by Medlock. Calgary also had at least one TD nullified by holding. So as much as I absolutely LOVE watching Bombers smack the Stamps - honestly it was just as much Calgary's poor play as it was Bombers dominating. They did play with more energy than Stamps, for sure. Had more to lose I guess. Paul Wiecek, is that you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueBlue83 Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Brandon said: If they hire Bellefeuille... that would be epic Would his first order of business be to make Brian Brohm his starting QB?? Edited November 5, 2017 by trueBlue83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Catan's Ghost Posted November 5, 2017 Report Share Posted November 5, 2017 On 11/4/2017 at 12:16 PM, Stickem said: Hypothermia must have set in at the stumps bench....they sure looked like they didn't want to be there....Us on the other hand seemed to relish in it...especially big Okpalaugo and Jeffcoat.........great game by those two.... Shout out to Nevis as well...best he's played all year...And what can you say about Andrew....he ground out a ground game in that slippery stuff and watched his counterpart on the stamps slip ..slip...slide away and was totally ineffective...Harris deserved that record..especially in those conditions....Have to turn our attention to the Sask./Edm. game now ,to see who wants to face us or go chicken and head east....Like very much how we played that one....now can we string together 3 more....Man that would be nice and a long time coming The Calgary equipment guy should be slapped upside the head, or worse. Not only does the wrong footwear make you ineffective, it can be freaking dangerous. Messam could have easily torn something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue_gold_84 Posted November 6, 2017 Report Share Posted November 6, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, trueBlue83 said: Would his first order of business be to make Brian Brohm his starting QB?? Nah, he'd back up Jason Boltus. Edited November 6, 2017 by blue_gold_84 Atomic 1 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