Around the League - Regular Season Discussion (Redux)

[Fan Boy]

20 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Argonauts' RB Wilder Jr. likely out for Saturday's game vs. the Eskimos: https://www.cfl.ca/2017/10/12/wilder-jr-likely-saturdays-matchup-vs-esks/

That is going to hurt. I don't know if it sinks the Argos but they are definitely going to take on some water. That guy has been pretty good for them.

[blue_gold_84]

Just now, Fan Boy said:

That is going to hurt. I don't know if it sinks the Argos but they are definitely going to take on some water. That guy has been pretty good for them.

He absolutely shredded the Eskimos the last time they met. His absence will hurt, especially against a team in desperation mode to get some wins.

[SPuDS]

19 hours ago, mbrg said:

 

No one needed to chant Riders Suck because it was self-evident.  For real.  No one cared about them.  They weren't our rivals, they were insignificant.  They went something like 20 years without hosting a playoff game.  Prior to '88, they had won two Grey Cups in their history.  Averaged around 18,000 fans for most of those years.  They were the most sad-sack team imaginable.

Edmonton and BC were the teams that stood in the Bombers way on the road out of the West.  That's why they got the business.  Why people didn't sling grief at the Riders?  Maybe that's like asking why people don't critique Dancing Gabe's dance moves.  Who is the shine coming off of when that happens?

eloquently put and I am in 100% agreement lol.

[SPuDS]

12 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Yet, TSN & everyone associated with the media says Gable is a great blocker which is surprising. Not from what I've seen. He hung Collaros out to dry more than a few times. I've seen him miss blocks completely or be passive in pass pro. I always thought Gable was overrated. 

yea I was wondering about that too.. I know TSN loves to laud over a big name but Gable doesn't rank very high on my list of blocking backs.. not that I have watched him a ton but he didn't seem to be all that amazing at it for what I have seen..

[JuranBoldenRules]

Tracy fined for spear on hit to Nichols on play where fumble resulted.  Again, how did the flag not fly/MOS challenge that?  Kanneh also clubbed Nichols upside the head with his left arm before he stripped the ball with his right.  Nichols was in the pocket so full RTP rules applied.  Brutal and game-changing missed call.

Edited October 12, 2017 by JuranBoldenRules

[blue_gold_84]

Adrian Tracy is a dirtbag. Wasn't he the one who speared Willy in week 2 back in 2015?

Oh, and Tracy was also fined for that hit.

Edited October 12, 2017 by blue_gold_84
info added

[Sard]

41 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Tracy fined for spear on hit to Nichols on play where fumble resulted.  Again, how did the flag not fly/MOS challenge that?  Kanneh also clubbed Nichols upside the head with his left arm before he stripped the ball with his right.  Nichols was in the pocket so full RTP rules applied.  Brutal and game-changing missed call.

Would have been a waste of a challenge, the command centre would have reviewed the play because it was a turnover and didn't flag it, so they screwed up.

[shadybob]

Tracy is fined, but no surprise there. Guy is a dirty scumbag. 

[JuranBoldenRules]

16 minutes ago, Sard said:

Would have been a waste of a challenge, the command centre would have reviewed the play because it was a turnover and didn't flag it, so they screwed up.

Reviewed fumble/not but needed a challenge for RTP.  Only coaches can trigger penalty challenges.

[Jpan85]

I think it's a weird situation because it looked like he tried to challenge but it was after the commercial break.

[SpeedFlex27]

11 hours ago, Atomic said:

He was also asked to block more than any other back in the league over the last 2 years, with almost no threat of him running (often getting 5 carries or less per game).  It's a tough assignment and yeah, there are going to be misses.  I think he got a bit of a rough ride playing in an offence that was so pass-heavy for so long.

Looks like Jeremiah Massoli did as well.

[Chaosmonkey]

5 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Reviewed fumble/not but needed a challenge for RTP.  Only coaches can trigger penalty challenges.

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I thought when they did the auto-review for turnovers, that they could declare the turnover was caused by a UR penalty and overturn it without a coaches challenge?

[17to85]

10 hours ago, Chaosmonkey said:

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I thought when they did the auto-review for turnovers, that they could declare the turnover was caused by a UR penalty and overturn it without a coaches challenge?

I have in the past seen them call penalties on unrelated challenges but they may have changed that. The CFL has no consistency in how they do the challenge process. Been a giant clusterfuck since day 1. 

[Sard]

10 hours ago, Chaosmonkey said:

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I thought when they did the auto-review for turnovers, that they could declare the turnover was caused by a UR penalty and overturn it without a coaches challenge?

Agreed, because the RTP is what caused the fumble and turnover, so I feel like the only way to overturn the turnover call is to make the penalty call so the command centre should be allowed to make that call.  It would seem somewhat ridiculous (I know, it's not beyond them to be this way) for them to say to the ref "so, there was RTP on the play which caused the turnover, but because we aren't allowed to make that call unless the coach challenges it, the ruling stands and it's a turnover."

 

Also, O'Shea would have waited for the result of the review before throwing a challenge, so to say that he waited too long after the play to be allowed to do so doesn't make sense either... if he throws it right away, it's wasted because the play is under review already, but if he waits until the review is complete, he's no longer allowed to challenge because it's too long after the play?  If that's the case, they need to change the rule to be reasonable.

[Fatty Liver]

36 minutes ago, Sard said:

Agreed, because the RTP is what caused the fumble and turnover, so I feel like the only way to overturn the turnover call is to make the penalty call so the command centre should be allowed to make that call.  It would seem somewhat ridiculous (I know, it's not beyond them to be this way) for them to say to the ref "so, there was RTP on the play which caused the turnover, but because we aren't allowed to make that call unless the coach challenges it, the ruling stands and it's a turnover."

 

Also, O'Shea would have waited for the result of the review before throwing a challenge, so to say that he waited too long after the play to be allowed to do so doesn't make sense either... if he throws it right away, it's wasted because the play is under review already, but if he waits until the review is complete, he's no longer allowed to challenge because it's too long after the play?  If that's the case, they need to change the rule to be reasonable.

On Monday's Coach's Show O'Shea stated that he discussed RTP with the officials on the sideline and they declared it to be incidental contact, so he didn't want to waste his challenge.  Now it appears with the fine to Tracy they have changed their minds yet again.

Edited October 13, 2017 by Throw Long Bannatyne

[Sard]

14 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

On Monday's Coach's Show O'Shea stated that he discussed RTP with the officials on the sideline and they declared it to be incidental contact, so he didn't want to waste his challenge.  Now it appears with the fine to Tracy they have changed their minds yet again.

That's kinda BS... contact to the head is contact to the head, incidental or not.  The fact that there was a subsequent fine just makes it that much worse that they called it wrong in the game.

[yogi]

On 10/11/2017 at 2:56 PM, mbrg said:

Prior to '88, they had won two Grey Cups in their history.

Geeze, if you're going to tear them down at least get your stats right. Prior to '89 they had won one Grey cup in their 79 year history.

[Bigblue204]

2 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

On Monday's Coach's Show O'Shea stated that he discussed RTP with the officials on the sideline and they declared it to be incidental contact, so he didn't want to waste his challenge.  Now it appears with the fine to Tracy they have changed their minds yet again.

ugh...that explanation doesn't hold up. Contacting the head is a penalty by accident or not!!!!!  GOD DAMN IT CFL!!!!! I wouldn't be so annoyed if I couldn't remember complaining about inconsistent REFS 10 years ago. I know the stats show it's gotten better, but it's still aggravating as ****!!!! especially around big game changing plays like that. 

[mbrg]

2 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

On Monday's Coach's Show O'Shea stated that he discussed RTP with the officials on the sideline and they declared it to be incidental contact, so he didn't want to waste his challenge.  Now it appears with the fine to Tracy they have changed their minds yet again.

What does incidental contact even mean in this case?  They use that term when what they are trying to say is unintentional, and lack of intent is not relevant when it comes to roughing the passer.  If you believe there is intent, you can take it to the next level and eject the player from the game.  Lack of intent does not negate the call.

What they might be trying to say, and in typical CFL style doing it poorly, is that the contact is insignificant.  I'd be fine with that.  It's subjective, but so is pass interference and several other calls the refs have to make every game.  A few years ago they'd call roughing the passer if a DL's hand brushed the QB's helmet on the way by, or if he touched his foot (cause that's below the knee).  It was pathetic.  Another example of the CFL overreacting to an incident and pushing the pendulum waaaay too far in the other direction without any thought to the possible and obvious flaws.  Y'know, that thing they do regularly.  Those penalties were stupid and awful, and I don't want them called.

If the ref was trying to express to OShea that he didn't feel the contact was worth calling, as in insignificant, that would make sense.  It would just mean he got the call wrong and isn't a very good ref, which is run-of-the-mill CFL stuff.

[mbrg]

2 hours ago, yogi said:

Geeze, if you're going to tear them down at least get your stats right. Prior to '89 they had won one Grey cup in their 79 year history.

I COVERED THIS ALREADY!!!

GARWSH!!!

[blue_gold_84]

With the RedBlacks win in Regina, the Ti-Cats are officially eliminated from playoff contention.

[Dr. Blue]

13 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

With the RedBlacks win in Regina, the Ti-Cats are officially eliminated from playoff contention.

Had the Ti-Cats made the playoffs, I believe they would have made it all the way to the Grey Cup.

[Noeller]

Just now, Dr. Blue said:

Had the Ti-Cats made the playoffs, I believe they would have made it all the way to the Grey Cup.

Selfishly I'm glad they're done for the year... 

[Dr. Blue]

Just now, Noeller said:

Selfishly I'm glad they're done for the year... 

Me too!

[kelownabomberfan]

On 10/14/2017 at 11:27 AM, Dr. Blue said:

Had the Ti-Cats made the playoffs, I believe they would have made it all the way to the Grey Cup.

just think how well they would have done with Art Briles on staff....

Anyway, what a dramatic improvement in that team.  I totally underestimated Masoli.  He looks like the real deal.