Our D the last 4 games.

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, IC Khari said:

Do we have any spare D lineman to play cornerback?

Frederick had a baaaad game, took too many penalties and then he whiffed on the tackle that sealed the game.  I can hear Johnny snickering all the way from Hamilton.

[iso_55]

Yeah well if Johnny showed some courage he'd still be here so I don't care if he was traded or not. He can snicker all he wants. He's no better than that Rider DB who refused to tackle Bowman last year.

[Guest J5V]

5 hours ago, iso_55 said:

If we go 8-10  do we still keep MOS?

Not if *that* is what he gives us.

[Mark H.]

This the same D that won 7 games in a row. They give up a ton of yards but they 'were' getting turnovers. It's time for the O to step up and be the reason why we win once in a while. It's like a good hockey team winning in spite of the goalie having an off-night 

[Noeller]

Been a few off nights in a row now, unfortunately. We always said "what happens when they can't get 6 TOs" and this is what happens. They get 40 hung on em. I was overly harsh in posting last night but what I remember seeing was pretty damn bad for at least the 3rd week in a row, and this time we had no 4th quarter push back. 

[do or die]

This D-line is really trending in the wrong direction.......pass rush has vaporized into nothing, even when we rush 4.

[Dragon37]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

This the same D that won 7 games in a row. They give up a ton of yards but they 'were' getting turnovers. It's time for the O to step up and be the reason why we win once in a while. It's like a good hockey team winning in spite of the goalie having an off-night 

Um, the offense has produced plenty of yardage and points, especially in the last two games. The O gave the team a chance to win last week and the D couldn't hold for 20 SECONDS and this week when the D needed to lock down they folded like a cheap tent. When your D is giving up nearly or over 100 yards a quarter and taking terrible penalties you don't win many games. People made a big deal about the turnover ratio in the streak but fact is by the last few games of the streak that ratio was dropping and the Bombers were still putting up wins because the defense and special teams were producing. Now the defense has taken considerable steps back and the offense, which is not an all star blockbuster offense, cannot catch up. It's really simple defense simply cannot give up nearly a game's worth of scoring in the first half to give this team the best chance to win.

Yes the offense can improve but we have known that all year but let's not fool ourselves that our defense is this team because they have surrendered tons of yardage all year. The turnover ratio allowed people to turn a blind eye to our defensive shortcomings.

[Dragon37]

8 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Frederick had a baaaad game, took too many penalties and then he whiffed on the tackle that sealed the game.  I can hear Johnny snickering all the way from Hamilton.

Johnny was absolutely brutal. He can snicker all he wants but he is not that great a DB. Yeah he got some picks but he also got burned quite frequently and his play this year showed he was a flash in the pan.

[Mark H.]

18 minutes ago, Dragon37 said:

Um, the offense has produced plenty of yardage and points, especially in the last two games. The O gave the team a chance to win last week and the D couldn't hold for 20 SECONDS and this week when the D needed to lock down they folded like a cheap tent. When your D is giving up nearly or over 100 yards a quarter and taking terrible penalties you don't win many games. People made a big deal about the turnover ratio in the streak but fact is by the last few games of the streak that ratio was dropping and the Bombers were still putting up wins because the defense and special teams were producing. Now the defense has taken considerable steps back and the offense, which is not an all star blockbuster offense, cannot catch up. It's really simple defense simply cannot give up nearly a game's worth of scoring in the first half to give this team the best chance to win.

Yes the offense can improve but we have known that all year but let's not fool ourselves that our defense is this team because they have surrendered tons of yardage all year. The turnover ratio allowed people to turn a blind eye to our defensive shortcomings.

Agreed, except that you can't ignore the slow starts by the O and the lack of red zone production, which many raised during the streak. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tracker]

40 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Agreed, except that you can't ignore the slow starts by the O and the lack of red zone production, which many raised during the streak. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And we have consistently been the worst red-zone team in the league- does this fall at the feet of Mr. LaPolice?

[pigseye]

1 hour ago, do or die said:

This D-line is really trending in the wrong direction.......pass rush has vaporized into nothing, even when we rush 4.

Couldn't stop the run either (although the LB was duplicit).  

 

[Mark H.]

43 minutes ago, tracker said:

And we have consistently been the worst red-zone team in the league- does this fall at the feet of Mr. LaPolice?

Partly. But I think his play-calling is predicated on minimizing turnovers. I think if he ran an Esks or Stamps scheme with the players we have, there would be more turnovers. 

[Tracker]

4 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Partly. But I think his play-calling is predicated on minimizing turnovers. I think if he ran an Esks or Stamps scheme with the players we have, there would be more turnovers. 

Turnovers be damned- it comes down to winning. The biggest knock on LaPolice before was his painfully conservative play-calling. The appraoch you describe works well with a dominant defence to complement it, but our defence has sprung holes.

[Mark H.]

3 minutes ago, tracker said:

Turnovers be damned- it comes down to winning. The biggest knock on LaPolice before was his painfully conservative play-calling. The appraoch you describe works well with a dominant defence to complement it, but our defence has sprung holes.

TBH I don't expect him to change anything. I expect next week to be 'more of the same and let's hope it works'

[LeBird]

We have given up over 900 yards of offence in the last two weeks. It makes winning much tougher when that happens. I guess it's pointless to yell but if we are to hope for any success later in the year when it's for all the marbles we just have to get much better.

[Stickem]

22 minutes ago, LeBird said:

We have given up over 900 yards of offence in the last two weeks. It makes winning much tougher when that happens. I guess it's pointless to yell but if we are to hope for any success later in the year when it's for all the marbles we just have to get much better.

Why is it we seem to fall to pieces (seemingly) towards the end of the season...Does Mikey heap praise on our players after a winning streak and then say....'hey we did good guys...you can relax now' cuz that's what seems to happen...Certainly we have a few key injuries...but every team has those.....It seems the intensity has diminished for some reason...especially on D.. We never had a heckuva lot on offence anyway so that ain't it...Maybe Harris being out and taking his leadership qualities off the field is hurting us more than we know....Then on the other hand we never had him the last two seasons when we seemed to go into the 'season ending funk'..???I don't get it...I hope I'm wrong and we can shift gears and get back on the track...Otherwise it'll be a repeat of a repeat we've seen too many times in the recent past.

[Dragon37]

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Agreed, except that you can't ignore the slow starts by the O and the lack of red zone production, which many raised during the streak. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, I cannot. Though the red zone production improved last couple of games it needs to be better. Both O and D need to be better.

One thing they have to improve in the off-season is receiver size. I believe I have been saying it for a few years though.

[blueandgoldguy]

I wouldn't expect the offense to ever carry this team.  Not with Matt Nicholls at the helm.  He is the 7th or 8th best QB in the league and he will not get better.  A game manager, nothing more.  Lapo will not open up the offense as a person of Nicholls abilities will not get you the results of a Collaros, Reilly or Mitchell.

[Dragon37]

2 hours ago, tracker said:

Turnovers be damned- it comes down to winning. The biggest knock on LaPolice before was his painfully conservative play-calling. The appraoch you describe works well with a dominant defence to complement it, but our defence has sprung holes.

LaPo is no more conservative than any other OC. They all run similar offenses. They could push it deep more but that would require more running they ran five running plays in the first half alone. You can't be successful pushing the ball anywhere when you run that kind of predictable offense. Edmonton was having zero success until they got White going. That gave Reilly more time and the receivers got open. While the Winnipeg O just dropped back and hoped for the best. You also need a consistent deep threat and we do not have that.

 

[Dragon37]

4 minutes ago, blueandgoldguy said:

I wouldn't expect the offense to ever carry this team.  Not with Matt Nicholls at the helm.  He is the 7th or 8th best QB in the league and he will not get better.  A game manager, nothing more.  Lapo will not open up the offense as a person of Nicholls abilities will not get you the results of a Collaros, Reilly or Mitchell.

He threw for over 300 yards and is perfectly capable of doing game in and game out, like any QB though you need to have a full toolbox and Nichols doesn't. Mitchell is every bit the game manger too, take a look at his efficiency rating. Game managers get good ratings. Mitchell, Reilly, and Collaros have at least two high level receivers to throw the ball to Winnipeg a few that are close but they are small and light and that require precision passing which you do not usually get for 60 minutes. I will give you though that Nichols is not good at passing on the move like the three you mention. Nichols also tries passing back across his body on the move too often and bounces it as a result.

IMHO Nichols can compete at a very high level but the team around him is going to have to improve first.

[blue_gold_84]

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Agreed, except that you can't ignore the slow starts by the O and the lack of red zone production, which many raised during the streak. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They didn't start slow last night. They got a TD on their second possession. The Eskimos then get ball and proceeded to march up the field and score. That's on the defense.

[blueandgoldguy]

Just now, Dragon37 said:

He threw for over 300 yards and is perfectly capable of doing game in and game out, like any QB though you need to have a full toolbox and Nichols doesn't. Mitchell is every bit the game manger too, take a look at his efficiency rating. Game managers get good ratings. Mitchell, Reilly, and Collaros have at least two high level receivers to throw the ball to Winnipeg a few that are close but they are small and light and that require precision passing which you do not usually get for 60 minutes. I will give you though that Nichols is not good at passing on the move like the three you mention. Nichols also tries passing back across his body on the move too often and bounces it as a result.

IMHO Nichols can compete at a very high level but the team around him is going to have to improve first.

with the league being so pass heavy now and the rules slanted towards the offense with the chintzy PI calls 300 yards passing is no longer a big deal.  I think Nicholls relied on turnovers to get field goals and TDs more than those other QBs - for reference, check out how often those other teams' defenses get them turnovers compared to the Bombers.  Nicholls is also less likely to drive the field 70+ yards for a TD compared to those other QBs.  He is also more likely to fail in the red zone than those other QBs settling for field goals instead.  I'm pretty sure Nicholls relies on more YAC than the other QBS given the conservative nature of the offense

The likes of Reilly and Mitchell are a step above Nicholls when it comes to the long ball.  They can hit their receiver in full stride with him only having to slow down minimally if at all.  Nicholls can do this, just not as often.  Sometimes he badly underthrows the ball - see his poorly underthrown ball to Dressler last week.  Dressler slowed down, turned around and came to a complete stop and the ball was still behind him and intercepted.  Guys like Mitchell and Reilly are less likely to make that kind of terrible throw if at all.

 

[TBURGESS]

1 hour ago, Stickem said:

Why is it we seem to fall to pieces (seemingly) towards the end of the season...Does Mikey heap praise on our players after a winning streak and then say....'hey we did good guys...you can relax now' cuz that's what seems to happen...Certainly we have a few key injuries...but every team has those.....It seems the intensity has diminished for some reason...especially on D.. We never had a heckuva lot on offence anyway so that ain't it...Maybe Harris being out and taking his leadership qualities off the field is hurting us more than we know....Then on the other hand we never had him the last two seasons when we seemed to go into the 'season ending funk'..???I don't get it...I hope I'm wrong and we can shift gears and get back on the track...Otherwise it'll be a repeat of a repeat we've seen too many times in the recent past.

More likely it's that we are playing better teams now than we did during the 7 game streak. Beating Calgary or even Edmonton is way harder than beating Regina, Toronto or Montreal.

[Dragon37]

52 minutes ago, blueandgoldguy said:

with the league being so pass heavy now and the rules slanted towards the offense with the chintzy PI calls 300 yards passing is no longer a big deal.  I think Nicholls relied on turnovers to get field goals and TDs more than those other QBs - for reference, check out how often those other teams' defenses get them turnovers compared to the Bombers.  Nicholls is also less likely to drive the field 70+ yards for a TD compared to those other QBs.  He is also more likely to fail in the red zone than those other QBs settling for field goals instead.  I'm pretty sure Nicholls relies on more YAC than the other QBS given the conservative nature of the offense

The likes of Reilly and Mitchell are a step above Nicholls when it comes to the long ball.  They can hit their receiver in full stride with him only having to slow down minimally if at all.  Nicholls can do this, just not as often.  Sometimes he badly underthrows the ball - see his poorly underthrown ball to Dressler last week.  Dressler slowed down, turned around and came to a complete stop and the ball was still behind him and intercepted.  Guys like Mitchell and Reilly are less likely to make that kind of terrible throw if at all.

 

So, obviously, the mistakes Nichols makes are all his fault and make him less of a QB while any other team's QB is better regardless. I have seen Reilly, Mitchell, Collaros, and so on all whiff passes and struggle and I do not think any less of them. What Mitchell, Reilly, and Collaros have around them though is a vastly better set of receivers, OL (though ours is much better now), and RBs.  I don't know how you can deny that those other QBs have all been helped tremendously by having lots of weapons. Look what happened to Collaros last week (didn't look too great with no tools to use).

By no means do I think that Nichols a hall of famer  or anything like that but he is far more than just a seat filler. He has produced more wins than losses in his short starting career.

BTW the ONLY QBs regularly throwing 300 YD games are Reilly and Mitchell so your claim that 300 yd games are not a big deal really doesn't hold much water. Oh and I would think all QBs rely on YAC yards and good receivers to make them (look) good.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Dragon37

[Old Bomber Fan]

Just a quick comment on our offense, actually two points; 1. Lapo has and always will be a conservative OC with little regard for the intermediate or long pass but content with the 3-7 yard pass. Whether he had Collaros or Reilly or Mitchell as our QB they would be relegated to the same offense. He has been doing it for years going back to when he was in Winnipeg. Oh and his first year here he inherited Worman's offense and players which resulted in a very successful year. Each year after until he was fired that offense went downhill because he changed it to what we have today. And 2. why does it seem that our receivers are always standing still waiting for the ball. Our two passing TDs last game one to Dressler and one to Denmark were things of beauty where the ball was thrown to a spot and the receiver ran to it without breaking stride. That is what Edmonton does; that is what Calgary does; in fact that is what most consistent and explosive offensives do. Our is the 3 -7 yard go to a spot and wait for me to throw it to you type of offense. I have been saying it for some time and Lapo hasn't really learned anything from his stint with TSN at least it sure doesn't show in his play calling. NOW with that said you have to wonder about the reads and route running of the QB and receivers because many times last night there was Dressler and Smith within 10 yards of one another. I get the layering but not that close together on the field. Frankly not impressed with either of these guys and still question why Nichols continues to throw to Dressler in double and triple coverage. Sorry for the ramble but just very frustrated with the offense......then again we could talk about our pathetic defense that cost us 2 games back to back.