Comprehensive Breakdown Of Bombers (Lack Of) D vs Stamps (via Bomber Buzz)

[Noeller]

https://bomberbuzz.com/2016/09/28/comprehensive-review-of-stamps-aerial-assault-of-blue-bombers-defense/

A good read, if you're into this sorta thing....

Edited September 28, 2016 by Noeller

[mbrg]

Your link sucks...

https://bomberbuzz.com/2016/09/28/comprehensive-review-of-stamps-aerial-assault-of-blue-bombers-defense/

You should be ashamed.

[Noeller]

Goddamnitsomuch....I never even realized I had the wrong link. I shall fix...

[Mike]

Eric's stuff is a good read, but his writing has become a lot less simplified. I rarely know what he's talking about anymore.

[Mike]

Quote

Though they’ll sometimes bring the nickel linebacker over and play straight man-to-man with a cheating safety giving help over the top as well (which, consequently, leaves the wide-side in cover-0, unless an extra safety – TJ Heath – is subbed in for a defensive lineman or inside linebacker – then cover-2), the Bombers will typically pattern-match 3-on-3 against trips in the boundary when the original play-call is either cover-1 or even cover-2.

for example

[Mr Dee]

I think I had an algebra teacher who explained things the same way.

But, I agree. I enjoy his analysis..most of the time.

[17to85]

all I took from it is that Dickenson stole Ritchie Halls lunch money, but we already knew that happened. 

[wbbfan]

1 hour ago, Mike said:

for example

Its because he tries to hammer american systems and terms into the canadian game. Pattern matching is the system developed in the US to counter a spread offense that will still run the ball. Especially running out of the same spread formations they pass from. Cover 2 / tampa 2 style defence leaves you with 2-3 deep against 4 routes, and means you cant crash the box on run plays. Pattern matching is a hybrid zone man cover. So a db has a zone, lines up over a wr, engages and covers through his zone and when they leave his zone a switch happens. Another db picks up and he grabs another target or fills a more traditional zone. Often the play doesnt run that long so if they dont have a target they will track a pass, a pass catcher, or play deep. Its especially meant for crossing routes, rub routes, and teams that will send more deep routes then you have deep cover. (think a wr over load blitz)

Up here we play our version in match zone. Its big against zone read patterns. Because of the number of pass catching targets to DBs that cover its not viable to regularly play cover 3+ unless your against the most aggressive deep pass offense ever. We play a kind of match zone with a soft over shell of dbs. We rotate the soft spot from side lines short, middle of the field, and corners. Down in the US they dont have to run those same empty spots on the field. 

 The specific situation hes talking about, The DL sub almost never happens save for late game late half situations some times. We do how ever have the package where we drop one lber for one db. We used it for a while early on with macho coming in. But it wasnt as a safety role, it was as a DHB. 

Edited September 28, 2016 by wbbfan

[JuranBoldenRules]

To me the coverages are almost irrelevant.  Whatever they are the receivers are going to make and find space, especially with the current way PI and illegal contact are called. Wasting a guy or two on a blitz when Calgary was always ready to match it just didn't make sense.  The DBs make reads and it's easy for receivers in combo routes to make room, that's why you need those guys who are blitzing to take up space especially in the middle of the field so those throws are much harder.  It didn't work at all, like even once in that first half.  To me that play calling needs to shift a lot earlier.

[Eternal optimist]

I understand calculus but not this football article... new appreciation for the CFL game.

[Mike]

1 hour ago, wbbfan said:

Its because he tries to hammer american systems and terms into the canadian game. Pattern matching is the system developed in the US to counter a spread offense that will still run the ball. Especially running out of the same spread formations they pass from. Cover 2 / tampa 2 style defence leaves you with 2-3 deep against 4 routes, and means you cant crash the box on run plays. Pattern matching is a hybrid zone man cover. So a db has a zone, lines up over a wr, engages and covers through his zone and when they leave his zone a switch happens. Another db picks up and he grabs another target or fills a more traditional zone. Often the play doesnt run that long so if they dont have a target they will track a pass, a pass catcher, or play deep. Its especially meant for crossing routes, rub routes, and teams that will send more deep routes then you have deep cover. (think a wr over load blitz)

Up here we play our version in match zone. Its big against zone read patterns. Because of the number of pass catching targets to DBs that cover its not viable to regularly play cover 3+ unless your against the most aggressive deep pass offense ever. We play a kind of match zone with a soft over shell of dbs. We rotate the soft spot from side lines short, middle of the field, and corners. Down in the US they dont have to run those same empty spots on the field. 

 The specific situation hes talking about, The DL sub almost never happens save for late game late half situations some times. We do how ever have the package where we drop one lber for one db. We used it for a while early on with macho coming in. But it wasnt as a safety role, it was as a DHB. 

So what you're telling me is that they were doing better than us because they were playing football better than we were playing football.

[17to85]

6 minutes ago, Mike said:

So what you're telling me is that they were doing better than us because they were playing football better than we were playing football.

Amazing how simple the game is sometimes eh. Hell they were talking about that on TSN, Claybrooks says he just believes that his 12 guys are better than the 12 on the other side so just go beat them. Dave Ritchie was the same kind of guy, just beat the man across from you. Sometimes I think coaches over complicate things and sometimes you just have to line up and do and win some matchups. 

[wbbfan]

4 hours ago, Mike said:

So what you're telling me is that they were doing better than us because they were playing football better than we were playing football.

Id say early on they had planned for our defense very very well and we didnt adjust well to that. They coached better and we didnt out play that coaching and execution or even come close to it. 

[wbbfan]

4 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Amazing how simple the game is sometimes eh. Hell they were talking about that on TSN, Claybrooks says he just believes that his 12 guys are better than the 12 on the other side so just go beat them. Dave Ritchie was the same kind of guy, just beat the man across from you. Sometimes I think coaches over complicate things and sometimes you just have to line up and do and win some matchups. 

Id say coaching in football has a bigger impact on the product on the field then any other sport. Soo many moving pieces and different ways go about doing things. Even more so in this modern era of football. One need only look at the size of a play book these days to see that. But at the end of the day its still 100% dependent on execution. its the same system we've run all year. its still at its heart football, and these guys have played it most of their lives. Some times a team is just better, and some times a team just plays better. Insert confounding richieism here.

[Fatty Liver]

4 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Amazing how simple the game is sometimes eh. Hell they were talking about that on TSN, Claybrooks says he just believes that his 12 guys are better than the 12 on the other side so just go beat them. Dave Ritchie was the same kind of guy, just beat the man across from you. Sometimes I think coaches over complicate things and sometimes you just have to line up and do and win some matchups. 

It's not that simple, it doesn't matter what kind of athlete and competitor they are if the scheme confuses them and they track the wrong receiver.  Calgary did a masterful job of exploiting Bomber tendencies in the first half, half-time adjustments and McDaniel's injury helped the Bombers contain the Stamps in the second half.

[pigseye]

He sums it up pretty nicely in lay-mans terms,

Quote

Aside from not completely packing it in at halftime, there’s still not much for the Bombers’ defense, who’d been outstanding over the summer, to be proud of from this game. While they were undeniably out-schemed, even worse was the way they were out-played on the field. Sure, Richie Hall called an incredibly heavy dose of man-coverage and, at times, put his players in positions to fail, but the Bombers’ defensive backs have proven to be capable of holding their own in these match-ups at least somewhat. The defensive line, meanwhile, has no excuse for their performance. The Stamps’ offensive line simply outclassed them. Fortunately that doesn’t mean this otherwise rather stingy front-four can’t bounce back.

and I'd say that he nailed it.

[Guest J5V]

19 hours ago, pigseye said:

He sums it up pretty nicely in lay-mans terms,

and I'd say that he nailed it.

and welcome back Cole.