Can we beat calgary?

[kelownabomberfan]

I'd be showing the whole team these scenes from Miracle all week:

You don't defend them.  You attack them.  You take their game, and you shove it right back in their face.

We shut them down, because we can.  Today, we are the greatest football team in the world.  You were born to be football players, every one of you.  You were meant to be here today.  This is your time.  Their time is done, it's over.  I'm sick and tired of hearing what a great team Calgary has.  Screw em.  This is your time.  Now go out there and take it!

[TrueBlue4ever]

If you compare these teams on paper, not sure how well we match up. Offensively they have us beat in every area. Defensively, maybe closer, but other than interceptions, most stats are in Calgary's favour or even. And what they lose in INTs (22 for us vs. 7 for them) they make up for in pass knockdowns (35 for us vs. 53 for them). Special teams are actually a saw-off, for as brilliant as Medlock has been, Parades has been just as good if not a touch better. Their punting and kickoffs are better, our coverage is better.

The great unknown, and the hardest thing to predict which affects the vast majority of game outcomes, is turnovers. So we have a shot there, but Calgary just doesn't turn the ball over (#1 in the league, we are the only team close to them), so the very thing the Bombers have relied upon the most in this streak may not be available to us given how well they protect the ball. And Calgary is undefeated at home and win by an average of 15 points there.

The best bet is pressure on Mitchell (his completion rate drops 31% when pressured) but that o-line is easily the best in the CFL, fewest sacks allowed (13 in 12 games, 10 fewer than the next best and less than half the league average). So can we win? Of course, any given Sunday, etc. etc. And intangibles probably favour the Bombers (upstart team still feeling disrespected). But I say odds are long here.

AND THAT'S OK - here's why. This is not the game to win, because Calgary gets it's final 5 games against the East and will likely finish first in the West anyway, even if we beat them this week. But they have the bye in week 20, followed by the bye for the west semi-final if they are first, so that's a 3 week layoff (plus they could have first place wrapped up by week 16, so they would be in cruise mode for almost all of October) and if past Calgary teams are any harbinger, they plow through the regular season, and then stumble in the playoffs at home when rested or against a weaker opponent (2013, 2012, 2010, 2005). That may be our best road to glory (barring a tank job to finish 4th and get a crossover).

 

 

[LeBird]

1 hour ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

If you compare these teams on paper, not sure how well we match up. Offensively they have us beat in every area. Defensively, maybe closer, but other than interceptions, most stats are in Calgary's favour or even. And what they lose in INTs (22 for us vs. 7 for them) they make up for in pass knockdowns (35 for us vs. 53 for them). Special teams are actually a saw-off, for as brilliant as Medlock has been, Parades has been just as good if not a touch better. Their punting and kickoffs are better, our coverage is better.

The great unknown, and the hardest thing to predict which affects the vast majority of game outcomes, is turnovers. So we have a shot there, but Calgary just doesn't turn the ball over (#1 in the league, we are the only team close to them), so the very thing the Bombers have relied upon the most in this streak may not be available to us given how well they protect the ball. And Calgary is undefeated at home and win by an average of 15 points there.

The best bet is pressure on Mitchell (his completion rate drops 31% when pressured) but that o-line is easily the best in the CFL, fewest sacks allowed (13 in 12 games, 10 fewer than the next best and less than half the league average). So can we win? Of course, any given Sunday, etc. etc. And intangibles probably favour the Bombers (upstart team still feeling disrespected). But I say odds are long here.

AND THAT'S OK - here's why. This is not the game to win, because Calgary gets it's final 5 games against the East and will likely finish first in the West anyway, even if we beat them this week. But they have the bye in week 20, followed by the bye for the west semi-final if they are first, so that's a 3 week layoff (plus they could have first place wrapped up by week 16, so they would be in cruise mode for almost all of October) and if past Calgary teams are any harbinger, they plow through the regular season, and then stumble in the playoffs at home when rested or against a weaker opponent (2013, 2012, 2010, 2005). That may be our best road to glory (barring a tank job to finish 4th and get a crossover).

 

 

With all due respect I must call BS on that statement. This is the game to win and beat the snot out of them. Why? Because when we play them again they will not be so cocky and full of themselves. We will be there dancing in their head with them worrying about when and where the hit will come from. Long odds? sure, winning 7 in a row about starting 1-4...longer but it did happen. Stamps have been licked before.

Edited September 20, 2016 by LeBird

[Tracker]

4 hours ago, Noeller said:

If we were healthy, I might agree with you.... 

That, and I do not think that many will equate Nichols with Mitchell behind center. I don't think we have seen the best of Nichols, but he still has to make his bones.

[Fatty Liver]

Bakari Grant has been moved to the 6 game IR.  Every little bit helps.

[Noeller]

fwiw, apparently Heath was taking 1st team reps at HB today, but not sure who it was in place of...

[TrueBlue4ever]

2 hours ago, LeBird said:

With all due respect I must call BS on that statement. This is the game to win and beat the snot out of them. Why? Because when we play them again they will not be so cocky and full of themselves. We will be there dancing in their head with them worrying about when and where the hit will come from. Long odds? sure, winning 7 in a row about starting 1-4...longer but it did happen. Stamps have been licked before.

And this is exactly why I say a loss here is not so vital. I get that beating Calgary now will give the Bombers the belief that "we CAN beat these guys" (Calgary's players in 2001 pointed to the final regular season game in Winnipeg where they won to sneak into the playoffs as the springboard game that gave them confidence that they could compete with the big dogs), but let's face it, the 2001 Bombers lost that Grey Cup because they spent the week "sizing rings for their fingers" as many players on both sides of the ball later admitted - we lost that game due to overconfidence. So let Calgary have all the cockiness in the world. I doubt a win by us this weekend will put much fear into them, since they have already beaten us twice by 2 touchdowns each game, and the scores were not even truly reflective of how dominant they were both times.

Ah, I hear you saying "But this is a different team. They haven't faced us with Matt Nicholls at quarterback!" Just stop for a second, metaphorically remove yourself from the Province of Manitoba for the moment, and re-read that second sentence out loud. Full respect to Nicholls and the job he has done managing the team through this 7 game run, but does that phrase really strike fear into the hearts of the inhabitants of Cowtown, or anyone else outside the 204? As an analogy, Carson Palmer may be a very good QB who can rattle off 7 straight wins with the Arizona Cardinals, but Tom Brady is not going to be intimidated because Palmer is now playing in place of Kurt Warner.

There are ways to beat this Calgary team for sure, but if both teams are playing their best football at the same time on game day and make minimal mistakes, then Calgary is handsomely favoured in that scenario, and should be. I like our odds better flying under the radar, walking in there in November (which, as I said before, is a fairly solid lock for where the West Final is going to be played this year, even if we win this weekend, given that they get all East teams in the final 5 weeks, including 2 against Montreal), catching them on 3 weeks rest and with having played no meaningful football for the better part of a month and a half (I'm calling it now, Stampeders will have enough points to clinch first in the West by week 16), with bad weather possibly playing a part in shutting down their high-octane offense (Calgary in late November, odds are decent that is the case), and maybe they are fat, sassy and dozing while we are battle-tested, riding momentum, and scrappy after fighting BC for 2nd place down the stretch, with a playoff win under our belts in the West semi. That scenario has not been infrequent for Calgary teams in the past.

Not trying to bash the Bombers, cheering madly for a win, especially to solidify a run at second place and a home playoff date, and to keep the (pipe?)dream of first in the West alive, but cheer with the heart and bet with the head is the winning formula, and I'm not pushing all my chips in with the Blue and Gold this weekend, that bet is best saved when we are the final 2 at the table.

Edited September 20, 2016 by TrueBlue4ever

[Mr Dee]

One quick question. How long does it take you to give a minute speech? ?

 

[Tracker]

Beating Calgary is not as essential as playing well and competing right down to the last whistle. Being routed would be very bad for the team after all the successes.

[TrueBlue4ever]

19 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

One quick question. How long does it take you to give a minute speech? ?

 

60 seconds. But I'm not being timed here. (And just beating everyone to the punch, nor am I being paid by the word).

I do speak professionally for a living, however. No joke.

[sportmentary2012]

I want to believe they can beat Calgary but they are the class of the league and the Bombers, while on a remarkable win streak, are bound for a let down game where the breaks don't go their way. Nicolls has been solid and a key cog to their success but he has had a couple balls dropped that could have been critical turnovers and a couple of penalties that erased turnovers. I don't want to dwell on 'colda, shoulda and wouldas' but even Walby said the Bombers have had luck on their side during this streak. This doesn't diminish the streak but things are never as good or as bad as they look and their is a fine line between winning specifically in football where 3 or 4 plays can change the outcome of the game.

So can the Blue beat them; yes but   I doubt they will .

[Fatty Liver]

It took the D most of the game to shut down the Argos and Lefevour from marching the ball so I expect to see more of the same from the Stamps.  If the O can keep up in point production they have a shot but if they're at all slow off the mark it could be over by the end of the 3rd Q.

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

It took the D most of the game to shut down the Argos and Lefevour from marching the ball so I expect to see more of the same from the Stamps.  If the O can keep up in point production they have a shot but if they're at all slow off the mark it could be over by the end of the 3rd Q.

With all due respect to LaPolice, Nichols et al, it is going to be a lot easier to stay close to the Stamps by our defence throttling the Calgary offence rather that trying to play run-and-gun with them. We will need a low-scoring game. Say 17-12, with (a lot of) luck, in our favour.

[Fatty Liver]

38 minutes ago, tracker said:

With all due respect to LaPolice, Nichols et al, it is going to be a lot easier to stay close to the Stamps by our defence throttling the Calgary offence rather that trying to play run-and-gun with them. We will need a low-scoring game. Say 17-12, with (a lot of) luck, in our favour.

I like the plan but just not sure they can shut down the Stamps so thoroughly.  At minimum Paredes and Medlock would be racking up the points from the 50.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

We only need to beat them in Nov.

[Blueandgold]

We'll give Calgary a good fight and lose, then go and kick their ass in the West Final.

[iso_55]

13 hours ago, Noeller said:

If we were healthy, I might agree with you.... 

Bakari Grant 6 gamed today...

[Goalie]

If we can limit Messam I think the game will be close. We have played Calgary twice back when Willy started.... and I don't think we looked that bad. I think the problem at that time was the O. I think the O is improved since then. I think we probably have a pretty good chance this Saturday.  Will we win? Who knows. But I wouldn't be surprised if we do beat them. I also wouldn't be surprised if we didn't.  You would think the pressure would be more on Calgary this game... games there. Stamps are rolling. Bombers historically don't do well at Mcmahon. A win would shock the world. 

Time for the D to step up and for the O to show that we are legit. I think we are already legit but.... I don't think many people around the league really respect the bombers. Time to go out and get that respect 

[White Out]

One huge advantage we have against Calgary we didn't earlier and last year is Willy won't be tossing bone headed interceptions 

[Goalie]

8 minutes ago, White Out said:

One huge advantage we have against Calgary we didn't earlier and last year is Willy won't be tossing bone headed interceptions 

That was a factor. It got him pulled and that was his last time on field as a bomber. I was at that game. The O did **** all until Nichols came in. Call it garbage time but... he brought a spark willy didn't 

[Bigblue204]

Stop Messam and double McDaniel on 2nd downs.

I'd also like to point out that the bombers are NOT getting gifted with turnovers. They are creating them, and forcing them. So this talk about how CGY won't "give" up turnovers is garbage. They did when they played them earlier and since then the D has only gotten better at it. The bomber D will FORCE turnovers and the they will win.

[Mark H.]

The Bombers D gives up the yards and forces turnovers. They do tend to give up significant YAC, hope they can tighten that up. 

[Tracker]

I suggest that comparing offenses and defences is not the best measures of how well the teams match up. I think rating the offenses against their opposing defences is probably better. So: Calgary offence against the Bomber defence- small edge to the Stamps, mostly due to Messam. Bomber offence vs Calgary defence- big edge to Calgary due in large part to the continuing turnover in the Bomber receiving corps. Special teams are a saw-off. It all seems to add up to a 10 point Calgary win.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, Bigblue204 said:

Stop Messam and double McDaniel on 2nd downs.

I'd also like to point out that the bombers are NOT getting gifted with turnovers. They are creating them, and forcing them. So this talk about how CGY won't "give" up turnovers is garbage. They did when they played them earlier and since then the D has only gotten better at it. The bomber D will FORCE turnovers and the they will win.

but some teams take more care of the ball and don't let the other team get those take aways. Calgary is one such team. It's a two way street, the Bombers take advantage but Calgary doesn't give teams as many chances to take the ball away. I mean the Stamps certainly aren't going to make risky gambles in dumb situations on 3rd down as one example.

[Fatty Liver]

2 hours ago, Mark H. said:

The Bombers D gives up the yards and forces turnovers. They do tend to give up significant YAC, hope they can tighten that up. 

Having Wild back would make a huge difference, Burnett is good but he was guilty of both poor tackling and over-running numerous plays against the Argos.