17to85

you know little people hate it when you bring up LMS. They swear up and down it doesn't exist despite every single one of them having a deep seeded jealousy of tall folks.

even if Goltz wasn't running and Simpson wasn't getting the ball a lot you could obviously see that the stamps D was worried about both of those things. There is no way they can't give Goltz another chance next week. Seeing what he was able to do should in theory allow them to make more consistent decisions with the offense and make it more effective. There was no time this year that I was as confident that the offense could do something than last night.

I'm suggesting that the qb position is such an issue that it's hard to properly judge the rest of the team. The good news however is that Goltz actually showed a hell of a lot of good things for a first start so he might wind up being a good enough option. For a guy in his first start he made pretty good decisions and showed he's got the arm to make some tough throws. Stick with him we might solve our own problem. Which unfortunately doesn't mean a lot when the defense has completely imploded.

I am just a big fan of the way Dickenson runs an offence. That guy was always a smart qb and that hasn't changed as an OC, he just knows how to make a defence look lost.

I agree, I asked during the game what Burkes infatuation with Anderson is cause I just don't see it. He's like Denmark but without as good hands.... Yet Denmark is in the doghouse for whatever reason and Anderson plays without fail despite not ever really doing a lot to really earn his place.

The play where Goltz threw an INT, the throw was rushed because of the pressure in the qbs face... that pressure came because Boatman was less useful than a pylon on that play. I'd be switching him and Morley out for whatever other american tackle we have around here and Swiston. That's the side of the line that seems to have the most problems so time to make changes there.

but that's the problem! the qb doesn't need time the receivers are that open! I mean just look at that first big play the stamps made, that receiver was never covered by anyone. Both of the tds the receivers were never covered either, the dbs were beaten clean the whole way. The zone they were playing gave all kinds of underneath room and then they missed tackles coming up to make the stop. There was no blanketing going on, just a hell of a lot of sloppy and downright blown coverages backed up with horrendous tackling.

yes Mack was fooled. Some fans loved the hire some hated it because they remembered running Lapo out of town years earlier when his offense with Khari Jones, Milt Stegall, Charles Roberts etc etc was really unimaginative and the only reason it worked was because Roberts and Sellers and Jones and Stegall could make plays with anything. Once we had Stegall and Roberts hurt the offense disappeared.

no one seems to listen... The Ottawa GM has flat out said that if they are taking a qb in the expansion draft it's going to be someone who is a sure thing otherwise they'd rather not give teams the chance to protect more of their roster players. They seem to think there's a qb who will be a FA they can pick up to be their starter and they've flat out said that's the route they want to explore first and foremost.

that's a little bit unfair last game. The stamps started off the 3rd quarter with a long scoring drive... then the bombers actually moved into field goal range but opted to go for a 3rd and 2 gamble rather than kick the field goal. Then the stamps went on another long scoring drive eating up a ton of time. Unless I'm forgetting something the Bombers next drive in the 3rd quarter had them again in field goal range when the 3rd quarter ended. DId they actually have more than those 2 drives in the 3rd quarter? Both of them made it into scoring territory so it's not nearly as bad last night as that "3 games without a 3rd quarter point" might indicate. If the offense had got more chances with the ball in the 3rd quarter I doubt we're even having this discussion, but the TOP was just so lopsided at that point because the defense couldn't stop anything even with the offense able to move the ball a bit.

anderson dropped a few passes tonight. I thought Edwards was OK except for a few where he did his giving up to try and draw the PI thing. Denmark didn't stand out much but I think a lot of that was the success of Kohlert and Etienne and to an extent Edwards. Just not enough passes thrown to get every receiver big numbers.

it's not the lack of blitzing, it's the lack of coverage. Even Burke says that much. he says they aren't playing man well enough to play man so they switch to zone and when they play zone they don't do any better.

To me the offense was reasonable considering it was a qb making his first start. NIght and day better than what we were getting with Pierce. The defense though... yikes that was rough. They started out OK being all over Cornish but then they started missing tackles and giving up too many soft yards underneath if they weren't totally gassing coverages. When the TOP is that lopsided because the defense in the 2nd and 3rd and most of the 4th quarters can't get off the field how do you expect the offense to roll up big yards of it's own?

but his reasoning for that is to do with the whole protecting Pierce scheme that they did... which brings in a whole other host of issues as to what brought on that change. To me the whole "must keep pierce upright" mentality is all part and parcel of the whole idea of sticking with Pierce. Pierce utterly failed in that new offense and when they went back to what he does well he got hurt... so the real mistake here was obviously sticking with Pierce.

well if you'd have taken the time to actually look around you'd see that no one is down on Goltz after his performance so stop trying to be a troll and pay attention. Defense sucked hard and that was the major issue. Listen to Burke post game comments, bad tackling, poor coverage exactly what most of us were saying during the game.

well tonight the big problem was some terrible tackling, a lot of breakdowns in the secondary and a whole lot of real loose coverage.

yeah, that's how bad Pierce was. Plus I think Goltz was decent tonight, the biggest problem tonight was starting in the 2nd quarter the defense could not get off the field and the offense didn't get a lot of chances. Dunno what the TOP stats were but I guarantee it was lopsided.

no I mean like the complete 180 for Toronto simply by adding Ricky Ray. (also of note how far Edmonton fell without Ray)

yeah well The defense crapping their pants the last 2 games doesn't absolve PIerce from his horrendous play. Hell I'd say Goltz starting all year we're 3-2 cause those first three games were lost because Pierce was horrendous.

Fired Ritchie then hired Daley... Fired Berry to hire Kelly... yeah Bauer had this thing about firing good coaches and replacing them with losers.

and if it doesn't someone start an intervention.

despite there being a ton of evidence throughout the CFL that says otherwise?

I gotta say,listening to the cjob pregame show with a nice cold beer is a hell of a way to spend a late friday afternoon. Game days are so much better when I'm not working.

but it was firing Berry that led to Kelly and that set the team back at least 3 years. Firing Ritchie and going to Daley set the team back... that's the main point here. You may think the next guy can't be worse... but he might be. He might do long term damage to the team, like Kelly did. If nothing else, Mack is not doing long term harm to the team and is steadily improving the depth in the organization. Even if he doesn't put them over the top we aren't hurting anything keeping him around and when they decide to move on at least he's left a solid foundation for the next person to build on. That's why I advocate patience in the situation we are in right now.

clicked here thinking it was the actual game day thread (my bad for not reading clearly)