JuranBoldenRules

All fits together. All works for or against each other. None of it worked tonight.

More than 2/3 of passing yards when trailing 3 scores or more.

Yet we start at the 40 yard line and kick a FG.

Well 2 TDs tonight were on 1st and goal situations that the D walked into from a big return and a brutal INT. If we're looking at a D in terms of points given up, they don't look nearly as bad as if you look at yards. I think you could start a What to Do About the O thread too because they've been horribly inconsistent and comatose for long stretches of many games which has a pretty negative effect on the whole team. This D isn't built to carry the team like say our 2011 one was.

It's like free training for the CFL. The Americans are meh, missing the Canadians hurts a bit but less when it's guys that are rookies anyway. If they are smart they won't sit on PR's too long because Gray would make the same or more up here even as a rook.

Disagree on Loffler. He spends a lot of time in man coverage or in match zones where he ends up in man coverage. He likes to play closer to the line and is a ball chasing kind of player. He doesn't spend a lot of time between the tackles, he comes into the box sometimes, but he makes a lot of bad decisions on ball carriers and coverages.

Nichols was horrible until garbage time IMO. That early INT was the turning point, just couldn't happen, especially like that, maybe on a throw trying to push it deep.

Move Loffler to LB. He'd be a better WIL than anyone we have and his performance at safety is mediocre IMO. He makes some hits but also makes some pretty big mistakes. YAC against us is huge and he's a big part of it, mostly due to lack of footspeed and poor angles, he'd be better closer to the LOS IMO, and that's where he plays mostly anyway, where he tends to end up. We are basically playing with a secondary short a player by Loffler's tendencies and our scheme. Need more from a lot of guys. To me Knox is off the roster, might be by injury anyway. Hurl needs to play a role to fulfill the ratio but we can't have a useless WIL beside him too. Scheme to hold guys in the middle of the field, always have guys playing a deep half from the seam out (meaning their priority is middle not sideline, more aggressive cover 2) and increase the difficulty of throws for opposing QB's. The softest part of our coverage is smack dab down the seam right in front of QB's, way too easy.

Split in Regina. Rubber match in Winnipeg

Thorpe would have been useful on O. Deep ball isn't happening, need the misdirection and YAC.

There's a couple pretty long EMU highlight tapes for Mulumba kicking around. Most plays he's playing defensive end with a hand in the dirt.

Worst part of TSN is how they pick a storyline for each game and just cannot move off it no matter what actually happens in the game.

Good at collecting data, but he makes up obscure ways of synthesizing and analyzing it that aren't recognized or used by anyone else and are often missing some key information or context. I like it when he sticks to more core stats with controls that but still stuff the CFL doesn't necessarily publish.

Yep let him get paid and practice there. Save us a roster spot and hopefully we get him in a year or two when he's really ready to play.

In 2006. Was a boost that season.

Mulumba is an edge rusher, since he's been out of college he's mostly played for 3-4 teams so he's labeled "LB." It would be a pretty big leap to play MLB in the CFL for a guy who hasn't played that position in his life. Westerman was "LB" in the states too. Terrell Sinkfield was cut by the Vikings. There's a type of player we could use RFN. Huge upgrade on our returners, has been playing DB for the Vikes and pretty impactful offensive player up here previously.

Thought I was at RiderFans reading this. Embarrassing.

Tackle or end they all use the same stances and most often rush guys are lining up in a 4 point now.

There's two more coming in the next three years...Oliviera and Jamal Lyles, not really from Winnipeg but at U of M.

What's a tackle stance?

I doubt they'd add a DI on offence in pretty much any circumstance. That's a guy who's going to stand on the sidelines a lot. Keep in mind Medlock is an import who occupies a DI, so you basically have 2 on offence, 2 on D. Don't see that changing unless there is some fairly extreme injury circumstance.

It makes Lankford less useful because we need guys who can produce first downs not one big play in half a season. Very similar to the McDuffie situation last year that limited our offence except that McDuffie brought more value as a returner. Our average start off kickoffs is below league average despite Lankford's personal average which tells you we are being kicked deep because he isn't viewed as a threat. And Lankford has mostly played slot when he gets in on offence. Watch the games. The only receiver Nichols is off-target with is Lankford. Given that accuracy is not an issue on the other 95% of his throws to the same spots on the field (talking 10-19 yard and 0-9 yard throws) that seems like a route issue to me, a receiver problem. Thorpe is a weapon on offence. Lankford has one plus attribute in straight line speed and is limited otherwise. His kickoff returns don't outweigh that. Offence is all about being multiple and having guys that are versatile in what they can do because if it's not there defending is very easy.

Wrong.

Lankford makes way more sense IMO. Not worried about kickoffs and he has zero chemistry with Nichols. He's catching less than half his targets and that's by far the lowest of all Bomber receivers.

Bond got two votes as a tackle in the original...I think they updated it. Tells you about the voters.