I Hate Prevent Defenses

[Atomic]

8 hours ago, pigseye said:

I'd say we have a consensus then, it's players just screwing up, so why keep them? Why just replace them with better players that don't screw up or better yet start with players that don't screw up.

Excellent idea, we will just go to the Perfect Player store and pick up 44 of them.  Hell let's make it 50 just in case.  Why can't we just be like the other 8 teams whose players never screw up?

[JuranBoldenRules]

48 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Excellent idea, we will just go to the Perfect Player store and pick up 44 of them.  Hell let's make it 50 just in case.  Why can't we just be like the other 8 teams whose players never screw up?

Could just set all their ratings to 99. 

[pigseye]

1 hour ago, Atomic said:

Excellent idea, we will just go to the Perfect Player store and pick up 44 of them.  Hell let's make it 50 just in case.  Why can't we just be like the other 8 teams whose players never screw up?

Quit the theatrics, getting beat on a play is one thing, not knowing what you're doing out there is another entirely. If players don't know what they are supposed to do when the bullets start flying, is that really their fault?

[Atomic]

8 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Quit the theatrics, getting beat on a play is one thing, not knowing what you're doing out there is another entirely. If players don't know what they are supposed to do when the bullets start flying, is that really their fault?

They're 3-2.  Theatrics?  I think that's all on your end.  Incredibly, the team is not perfect.  Doesn't mean we start shipping out players, coaches, and management.  You don't build a juggernaut overnight and I don't know why you'd expect to go from a perennial loser to number one in the league over the course of two seasons.  It just doesn't work that way.

[pigseye]

1 minute ago, Atomic said:

They're 3-2.  Theatrics?  I think that's all on your end.  Incredibly, the team is not perfect.  Doesn't mean we start shipping out players, coaches, and management.  You don't build a juggernaut overnight and I don't know why you'd expect to go from a perennial loser to number one in the league over the course of two seasons.  It just doesn't work that way.

You're way off topic here now.

If you're going to pile on the players for making rookie mistakes, then the coaching staff shouldn't be let off the hook for sending them out their ill equipped for the situation, nor should management get a pass for putting the coaches in that pickle to begin with. There's enough blame to be spread around imo.

[Atomic]

Just now, pigseye said:

You're way off topic here now.

If you're going to pile on the players for making rookie mistakes, then the coaching staff shouldn't be let off the hook for sending them out their ill equipped for the situation, nor should management get a pass for putting the coaches in that pickle to begin with. There's enough blame to be spread around imo.

With Leggett, Fogg, and Johnson out, we were 3 deep into the secondary depth.  Realistically Carmichael, Walker, and Porter should have never seen the field yet.  Alexander should be confined to the field corner for now.  But multiple injuries in one position group have put the team in a tough spot.  How many other teams can start 3 rookies in the secondary and play mistake-free ball?  Your expectations are way off.

[SPuDS]

37 minutes ago, Atomic said:

With Leggett, Fogg, and Johnson out, we were 3 deep into the secondary depth.  Realistically Carmichael, Walker, and Porter should have never seen the field yet.  Alexander should be confined to the field corner for now.  But multiple injuries in one position group have put the team in a tough spot.  How many other teams can start 3 rookies in the secondary and play mistake-free ball?  Your expectations are way off.

great comment about Charmichael, Walker and Porter.  They all should be learning and watching at this point, not dodging bullets.  We've had to force them in and not surprisingly, we have had some Gaffes..

 

Dave Richie always said that you will lose at least one game a season due to a rookie starting.. so 3 in at starting roles, 4 technically.. we are due for 4 losses minimum, lol.   Its gonna happen, problems are going to pop up with knowing assignments, zones, where to line up, etc etc.  Can't be avoided as these guys are practically learning on the fly..

[blue_gold_84]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

You're way off topic here now.

If you're going to pile on the players for making rookie mistakes, then the coaching staff shouldn't be let off the hook for sending them out their ill equipped for the situation, nor should management get a pass for putting the coaches in that pickle to begin with. There's enough blame to be spread around imo.

You clearly don't understand the concept of rookie players. A single TC and pre-season won't magically get a rookie player up to snuff, regardless of the coach or the team. These players need to ease into their roles over time, and getting thrust into them due to injuries will show their inexperience.

Your logic, or lack thereof, is simply astounding.

[WBBFanWest]

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

You're way off topic here now.

If you're going to pile on the players for making rookie mistakes, then the coaching staff shouldn't be let off the hook for sending them out their ill equipped for the situation, nor should management get a pass for putting the coaches in that pickle to begin with. There's enough blame to be spread around imo.

I agree completely.  I find it hard to believe that the Bombers are not able to have backups that come in and play every bit as good as the first stringers that they're replacing.  I don't understand why Walters is not trying to find top quality starters and then sign them for the price of a rookie backup.  I mean that's clearly what everyone else is doing because no other team ever suffers when a few of their starters go down.  And clearly, when one of these guys makes a mistake, O'Shea should be on the horn to Walters to get a replacement player in right now, because we all know that replacement players can just step in without any drop off whatsoever.  Of course, you're also correct that a coach should be able to take a player and program them so that they are perfect playmaking machines, and any coach that can't get rid of human error in his players on every single play is not worth the money we're paying them.  Pigs, you need to call the Bombers right now (I'd start off with Miller) and get them moving in the right direction immediately.  Let us know what he says.

[johnzo]

8 hours ago, Atomic said:

With Leggett, Fogg, and Johnson out, we were 3 deep into the secondary depth.  Realistically Carmichael, Walker, and Porter should have never seen the field yet.  Alexander should be confined to the field corner for now.  But multiple injuries in one position group have put the team in a tough spot.  How many other teams can start 3 rookies in the secondary and play mistake-free ball?  Your expectations are way off.

this post shouldn't merely be liked, it should be quoted and repeated for emphasis.

We are starting three rookies on our field side. Lulay threw 80% of his passes to the field against us. You're damn right those kids are gonna be scrambling.  As we get our dbs back from the sickbay, we'll tune the secondary back up and then we can figure out how our kids look when we mix them in with seasoned vets.

And in the meantime, Nichols has done a pretty great job of keeping us in these shootout games.

Edited August 2, 2017 by johnzo

[pigseye]

2 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

I agree completely.  I find it hard to believe that the Bombers are not able to have backups that come in and play every bit as good as the first stringers that they're replacing.  I don't understand why Walters is not trying to find top quality starters and then sign them for the price of a rookie backup.  I mean that's clearly what everyone else is doing because no other team ever suffers when a few of their starters go down.  And clearly, when one of these guys makes a mistake, O'Shea should be on the horn to Walters to get a replacement player in right now, because we all know that replacement players can just step in without any drop off whatsoever.  Of course, you're also correct that a coach should be able to take a player and program them so that they are perfect playmaking machines, and any coach that can't get rid of human error in his players on every single play is not worth the money we're paying them.  Pigs, you need to call the Bombers right now (I'd start off with Miller) and get them moving in the right direction immediately.  Let us know what he says.

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

There are many examples of Bomber players stepping in last season, raw, and earning starting roles, Loffler and Fogg primes examples last season, they were better than the starters they replaced. Calgary this year has played without their starting d-line without missing a beat, last year it was their o-line.

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

[WBBFanWest]

16 minutes ago, pigseye said:

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

There are many examples of Bomber players stepping in last season, raw, and earning starting roles, Loffler and Fogg primes examples last season, they were better than the starters they replaced. Calgary this year has played without their starting d-line without missing a beat, last year it was their o-line.

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

So did Miller laugh before he hung up on you?

[Jpan85]

46 minutes ago, pigseye said:

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

There are many examples of Bomber players stepping in last season, raw, and earning starting roles, Loffler and Fogg primes examples last season, they were better than the starters they replaced. Calgary this year has played without their starting d-line without missing a beat, last year it was their o-line.

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

Often Calgary has had a guy around a year plus before they crack the roster

[blue_gold_84]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

There are many examples of Bomber players stepping in last season, raw, and earning starting roles, Loffler and Fogg primes examples last season, they were better than the starters they replaced. Calgary this year has played without their starting d-line without missing a beat, last year it was their o-line.

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

Since when do two examples count as "many"...? Loffler was certainly the exception but that's it. Fogg started well but struggled on defense as the season went on. So, make that one legitimate example.

Try again, Mr. Peanut. You're way out to lunch here. Maybe read johnzo's post above you... Perhaps you'll get it.

Starters typically aren't made overnight, BTW.

[Floyd]

Calgary consistently develops players that can step in and perform - throughout their lineup... they have a ton of injuries this year.  What is the gap between the bombers and Calgary - is it the pockets of private ownership? 

One of the main things that I've seen is that guys are not cut before someone has stepped up and proved that they are better - i.e. Taylor Reed...  Burnett and Smith have have had tough years but weren't cut, now they have bounced back - nice to slot in Burnett when Mayo goes down instead of a raw rookie.

I think this is one of the challenges with the bomber regime - too many vets cut or left to walk - Adams, Bass, Burnett, Frederick, even Denmark... none of these guys were beat out or played their way off the team, Bombers just replaced them with guys new to the team - too much 'thinking'...  

 

[17to85]

2 hours ago, pigseye said:

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

There are many examples of Bomber players stepping in last season, raw, and earning starting roles, Loffler and Fogg primes examples last season, they were better than the starters they replaced. Calgary this year has played without their starting d-line without missing a beat, last year it was their o-line.

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

Fogg was getting lit up at the start of last year, or had you forgotten that? And Loffler didn't start until later in the season which further backs up the point that it's better to let rookies season for a bit as backups before they get handed the starting role. 

[WBBFanWest]

2 hours ago, pigseye said:

More theatrics from the peanut gallery.

 

If your backups will never be starters, wth are they even on the roster to begin with?

 

Guess you've never heard of special teams players?  Or ageing vets, not quite 100% of what they used to be but still good enough for spot duty?  Not everyone on a roster is there because they are pegged as a starter.  There, was that theatrical enough for you, Mr Peanut?

[pigseye]

3 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

Often Calgary has had a guy around a year plus before they crack the roster

Calgary started 2 rookies on the o-line in 2014 when they won the cup.

[pigseye]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Fogg was getting lit up at the start of last year, or had you forgotten that? And Loffler didn't start until later in the season which further backs up the point that it's better to let rookies season for a bit as backups before they get handed the starting role. 

Thought Loffler started game 2 and Fogg was an impact player, 79 tackles 10th in the league, 1st in punt return average, 5th in the league in picks, he more than made up for any struggles he had contributing on teams, he is exactly the kind of backup you want seasoning.

 

[Jpan85]

9 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Calgary started 2 rookies on the o-line in 2014 when they won the cup.

They did not. Levertu was only rookie ol on roster and did not start.

 

[17to85]

47 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Thought Loffler started game 2 and Fogg was an impact player, 79 tackles 10th in the league, 1st in punt return average, 5th in the league in picks, he more than made up for any struggles he had contributing on teams, he is exactly the kind of backup you want seasoning.

 

Intertubes say Loffler got into the starting lineup in week 6. As for Dogg, he definitely had struggles early in the year. Even Carmichael is on pace for over 60 tackles this year. So in summary stop trying to misremember things to back up your silly incorrect point.

[Old Bomber Fan]

I believe several here have the right idea. While our backups should be ready to step up when a starter is injured, and that may be the case in some instances, it still remains that the defence is giving up far too many yards. Frankly I don't care what Montreal, Saskatchewan, Calgary or BC does simply put our defense ranks near the last in most categories. The fact that even Hall admits he doesn't like the yardage given.....but he will take it if we win.... well that say a lot. I agree prevent defenses work if the other team makes mistakes....can't hold onto a short pass or is stopped running on second and long....AKA Blue Bombers.... but they have to make the mistake we don't have to make them make one. It is quite simple actually on defense I believe you have to make the other team make mistakes and if you are giving them yards to make first downs then you are in trouble....AKA Montreal last game. As for back ups well if they are as good as the starters there should be no speed bumps to hurdle, but if the scheme is incorrect it doesn't really matter starter or backup there will be issue.

[pigseye]

3 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

They did not. Levertu was only rookie ol on roster and did not start.

 

I'll take your word on that one but I was sure they were decimated with injuries that year and had to start 2 rookies most of the year including the GC game. 

[pigseye]

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Intertubes say Loffler got into the starting lineup in week 6. As for Dogg, he definitely had struggles early in the year. Even Carmichael is on pace for over 60 tackles this year. So in summary stop trying to misremember things to back up your silly incorrect point.

So 5 weeks of riding the pine for Loffler makes all the difference? If you say so.

So you leave out Foggs other accomplishments, you can do better than that can't you, and where did you find anything about Fogg struggling to start the year? The secondary came together when Loffler took over at safety not because Fogg suddenly figured out how to play.

 

[pigseye]

28 minutes ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

I believe several here have the right idea. While our backups should be ready to step up when a starter is injured, and that may be the case in some instances, it still remains that the defence is giving up far too many yards. Frankly I don't care what Montreal, Saskatchewan, Calgary or BC does simply put our defense ranks near the last in most categories. The fact that even Hall admits he doesn't like the yardage given.....but he will take it if we win.... well that say a lot. I agree prevent defenses work if the other team makes mistakes....can't hold onto a short pass or is stopped running on second and long....AKA Blue Bombers.... but they have to make the mistake we don't have to make them make one. It is quite simple actually on defense I believe you have to make the other team make mistakes and if you are giving them yards to make first downs then you are in trouble....AKA Montreal last game. As for back ups well if they are as good as the starters there should be no speed bumps to hurdle, but if the scheme is incorrect it doesn't really matter starter or backup there will be issue.

Finally someone with some common sense on this site, all hope is not yet lost.