Game day thread: Winnipeg at snowy Calgary

[BigBlue]

On 11/5/2017 at 8:52 AM, Booch said:

Does anyone ever correlate one teams "bad" play which resulted in the other team winning may be a direct result of the play of the winning team making them look bad? 

 

WBBFAN said "Talent and skill are far from the first thing our coaching staff looks at. Its frequently over ridden by all kinds of other factors. At some point you need superior skill and talent to win. I would wager far more championships have been won based on talent and skill then character."

So is Michael O'Shea on the right path in terms of building a team with heart, loyalty and character? Was it the teams character that was responsible for Friday night's victory over Calgary?  Or did we just have better skill and talent on the field? O'Shea is in the exact opposite arena then Chris Jones who has put together a mongrels team of highly talented prima donnas. 

I know Friday night's game was just an exhibition game for the Stampeders but you can't use Bo Levi Mitchell's apparent ailing shoulder as an excuse to not show up. Maybe the Bombers do have more skill and talent than we give Walters credit for. Maybe that talent is why we beat Edmonton twice. Or maybe, just maybe, the O'Shea philosophy is in full gear.

Long story short, if we are going to beat Edmonton this Sunday what will be the main reason?

 

[Guest J5V]

24 minutes ago, BigBlue said:

WBBFAN said "Talent and skill are far from the first thing our coaching staff looks at. Its frequently over ridden by all kinds of other factors. At some point you need superior skill and talent to win. I would wager far more championships have been won based on talent and skill then character."

So is Michael O'Shea on the right path in terms of building a team with heart, loyalty and character? Was it the teams character that was responsible for Friday night's victory over Calgary?  Or did we just have better skill and talent on the field? O'Shea is in the exact opposite arena then Chris Jones who has put together a mongrels team of highly talented prima donnas. 

I know Friday night's game was just an exhibition game for the Stampeders but you can't use Bo Levi Mitchell's apparent ailing shoulder as an excuse to not show up. Maybe the Bombers do have more skill and talent than we give Walters credit for. Maybe that talent is why we beat Edmonton twice. Or maybe, just maybe, the O'Shea philosophy is in full gear.

Long story short, if we are going to beat Edmonton this Sunday what will be the main reason?

 

In my opinion it will come down to mental toughness. The team with the most mentally tough players will win.

[17to85]

34 minutes ago, BigBlue said:

if we are going to beat Edmonton this Sunday what will be the main reason?

As a team we score more points than they do. 

[Tracker]

Maybe we could slip Justin Sorenson something just before the game  to cause uncontrollable flatulence? Like a dozen bean burritos?

[Booch]

thing is too tho...this mailing it in thing is a bit of a myth/farce...as a player I have played in many a game which held no real significance at certain points in a year, and believe me guys don't want to just show up and loose and go through the motion...any team I was on with a player with an attitude like that would be carved from the herd and that would be that.

Athletes want to win regardless...especially professionals who lively-hood depend on it. So this notion that certain teams didnt come to play is laughable...especially at home.

I think Winnipeg showed they were tougher and didn't let the conditions hinder their play..Sure BLM was out, but so was Nichols,..Adams..Leggett..Westerman..Bond..Briggs.

Calgary had their starting offence and defensive lines in...running back...receivers save for Mcdaniel but he has been out a while , so it's not like it was a preseason game with nobodies and rookies...it was their A team and sure Singleton sat for better part of 3 quarters but he doesn't play on deference so not sure how that would made much of a difference  on that side of the ball where we actually shut a team down defensively. Another thing too, Buckley is much more evasive and mobile than BLM and you never know..with BLM in there we may have had more sacks ...

This isn't a blue koolaide rant, but take it for what it was in a November football game...some teams are not built for playing in this weather...see Calgary most years after their 15-3 seasons...they seem to fizzle out when the frost hits the pumpkins...Maybe this Bomber team is built to thrive in this less than adequate environment...and a ball hawking defence always seem to rise in this weather too...and it cant be denied the Bombers are a takeaway defense...Sunday will be interesting

[17to85]

Honestly the important take away from the Calgary game for me was how much the defensive line and linebackers owned the guys upfront for the Stamps. They were legitimately playing well against the Stamps starting OL group and that carries over no matter who is behind centre. Sure BLM probably does better in the face of pressure than a back up qb, but defensively it all starts by getting pressure from the guys up front. 

[mbrg]

On 11/4/2017 at 1:35 PM, TBURGESS said:

Our offense beat their offense 6 to 3 and they could have scored an additional FG instead of going for it on 3rd down.

Yes.

And?

 

Without a doubt, the biggest takeaway from Friday's game should be how the LeFevour vs Buckley matchup played out.

[blue_gold_84]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Honestly the important take away from the Calgary game for me was how much the defensive line and linebackers owned the guys upfront for the Stamps. They were legitimately playing well against the Stamps starting OL group and that carries over no matter who is behind centre. Sure BLM probably does better in the face of pressure than a back up qb, but defensively it all starts by getting pressure from the guys up front. 

Agreed. I think last week's performance was a huge boost to the defense, the D-line in particular. They gotta be amped to replicate it, especially in front of what should be a loud and raucous crowd.

[TBURGESS]

Without a doubt, it was the Stamps giveaways, or our takeaways and special teams that beat the Stamps.  Folks want to focus on how great our defence was and ignore how bad the Stamps offense was.  BLM out was huge as it meant we could blitz at will and their backup QB's weren't going to pick it up. Add in the fact that their backup QB's were taking way to long to make their decisions and were telegraphing their throws and suddenly our defence looks great. Anyone think that BLM would have thrown the first pick 6 that set the tone for the game? 

Lefevour had a great completion percentage because he only threw the ball 10 yards and because our RB's/Receivers dug some low balls out of the dirt or snow. The fact that we were 10 points up in the 1st quarter meant that he didn't have to do any more than that, but lets not pretend that was a good offensive performance.

Folks want the story to be how great we played to beat the stamps and ignore that teams with nothing to play for often mail it in, especially after they get down by more than a TD. Toronto showed everyone what it looks like when a good team plays a team that mails it in when they destroyed BC 40-13 and it could have been worse if they had better red zone production.

We beat a disinterested team, in a snowstorm, against their backup QB's and others, when the offense didn't score a single TD and mistakes cost the Stamps at least 10 if not 17 points. 

[sweep the leg]

I'm with TBURGESS. Folks may want nice things, but the world is a dark and joyless place and everything is terrible.

[JCon]

13 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Without a doubt, it was the Stamps giveaways, or our takeaways and special teams that beat the Stamps.  Folks want to focus on how great our defence was and ignore how bad the Stamps offense was.  BLM out was huge as it meant we could blitz at will and their backup QB's weren't going to pick it up. Add in the fact that their backup QB's were taking way to long to make their decisions and were telegraphing their throws and suddenly our defence looks great. Anyone think that BLM would have thrown the first pick 6 that set the tone for the game? 

Lefevour had a great completion percentage because he only threw the ball 10 yards and because our RB's/Receivers dug some low balls out of the dirt or snow. The fact that we were 10 points up in the 1st quarter meant that he didn't have to do any more than that, but lets not pretend that was a good offensive performance.

Folks want the story to be how great we played to beat the stamps and ignore that teams with nothing to play for often mail it in, especially after they get down by more than a TD. Toronto showed everyone what it looks like when a good team plays a team that mails it in when they destroyed BC 40-13 and it could have been worse if they had better red zone production.

We beat a disinterested team, in a snowstorm, against their backup QB's and others, when the offense didn't score a single TD and mistakes cost the Stamps at least 10 if not 17 points. 

I heard the Bombers didn't even go to Calgary and Calgary just conceded the game. We just watched a hodge-podge of old clips and CGI.

[Mr Dee]

We just read another Winnipeg folk story. But this one is devoid of impartiality and originality. The analysis is flawed and one-sided..in the other direction. 

Same old, same old..

[blue_gold_84]

"The BC Lions mailed it in and the Calgary Stampeders were a disinterested team last week."

Hard for anyone to take a person seriously when he passes off his opinion as fact, much less agree with his horribly egotistical personal adage "being right never gets old."

[Mark F]

54 minutes ago, JCon said:

I heard the Bombers didn't even go to Calgary and Calgary just conceded the game. We just watched a hodge-podge of old clips and CGI.

I heard that the alien ufo's were briefly seen hovering over the Calgary bench, spraying some kind of chem trail tranquilizer spray  on the whole Calgary team.

Watching some of the extremely hard (and not dirty) hits Calgary D was laying out on the Bombers O, I don't think they were disinterested or not trying. There were some horrendous, Loffler style hits they were delivering.

And gang tackling on Harris. Taken down by three defenders a number of times.

Tburg is Joe Btfsplk 

Edited November 7, 2017 by Mark F

[SPuDS]

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Without a doubt, it was the Stamps giveaways, or our takeaways and special teams that beat the Stamps.  Folks want to focus on how great our defence was and ignore how bad the Stamps offense was.  BLM out was huge as it meant we could blitz at will and their backup QB's weren't going to pick it up. Add in the fact that their backup QB's were taking way to long to make their decisions and were telegraphing their throws and suddenly our defence looks great. Anyone think that BLM would have thrown the first pick 6 that set the tone for the game? 

Lefevour had a great completion percentage because he only threw the ball 10 yards and because our RB's/Receivers dug some low balls out of the dirt or snow. The fact that we were 10 points up in the 1st quarter meant that he didn't have to do any more than that, but lets not pretend that was a good offensive performance.

Folks want the story to be how great we played to beat the stamps and ignore that teams with nothing to play for often mail it in, especially after they get down by more than a TD. Toronto showed everyone what it looks like when a good team plays a team that mails it in when they destroyed BC 40-13 and it could have been worse if they had better red zone production.

We beat a disinterested team, in a snowstorm, against their backup QB's and others, when the offense didn't score a single TD and mistakes cost the Stamps at least 10 if not 17 points. 

oh, but the fact we were dealing with the exact same elements, missing players and adversity.. irrelevant! that we put up such a fight against a team that contrary to your own belief, did want to win the game and not go out on a 3 game losing streak, seems to not matter to you. 

 

never change burg, its nice that you are such an opposite side to the story... every. damn. time.

 

[JCon]

3 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

never change burg, its nice that you are such an opposite side to the story... every. damn. time.

Someone has to try to puncture the tires of the bandwagon.

[SPuDS]

1 minute ago, JCon said:

Someone has to try to puncture the tires of the bandwagon.

ya this is true..  I imagine in roman times, Burg would be the midget that rode in the chariots with the generals whispering into their ears "fame is fleeting, victories don't last forever... etc" 

[TBURGESS]

When one team needs to win and the other team couldn't care less, the team that needs the win often wins, especially when they get up by more than a TD. Most folks can see that BC mailed it in, but can't see that Calgary did. Some are even saying that pro teams don't ever mail in a game. 

Can't take me seriously, but have to post something derogatory every single time I post. 

 

[WBBFanWest]

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Without a doubt, it was the Stamps giveaways, or our takeaways and special teams that beat the Stamps.  Folks want to focus on how great our defence was and ignore how bad the Stamps offense was.  BLM out was huge as it meant we could blitz at will and their backup QB's weren't going to pick it up. Add in the fact that their backup QB's were taking way to long to make their decisions and were telegraphing their throws and suddenly our defence looks great. Anyone think that BLM would have thrown the first pick 6 that set the tone for the game? 

Lefevour had a great completion percentage because he only threw the ball 10 yards and because our RB's/Receivers dug some low balls out of the dirt or snow. The fact that we were 10 points up in the 1st quarter meant that he didn't have to do any more than that, but lets not pretend that was a good offensive performance.

Folks want the story to be how great we played to beat the stamps and ignore that teams with nothing to play for often mail it in, especially after they get down by more than a TD. Toronto showed everyone what it looks like when a good team plays a team that mails it in when they destroyed BC 40-13 and it could have been worse if they had better red zone production.

We beat a disinterested team, in a snowstorm, against their backup QB's and others, when the offense didn't score a single TD and mistakes cost the Stamps at least 10 if not 17 points. 

Contrarian is contrary.  That shtick just never ever gets old...

[SPuDS]

4 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

When one team needs to win and the other team couldn't care less, the team that needs the win often wins, especially when they get up by more than a TD. Most folks can see that BC mailed it in, but can't see that Calgary did. Some are even saying that pro teams don't ever mail in a game. 

Can't take me seriously, but have to post something derogatory every single time I post. 

 

hmm.. lets see.. everytime I post something, people laugh and poke holes in it.  wonder why that is... could it be what I'm posting is erroneous or lacking in substance?  Naah.. must be everyone else.

[bearpants]

33 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

When one team needs to win and the other team couldn't care less, the team that needs the win often wins, especially when they get up by more than a TD. Most folks can see that BC mailed it in, but can't see that Calgary did. Some are even saying that pro teams don't ever mail in a game. 

Can't take me seriously, but have to post something derogatory every single time I post. 

 

no offense (b/c I usually like most your posts) but if Booch says pros rarely, if ever, "mail it in"... I trust his opinion more than yours on that topic...

[Tracker]

4 hours ago, mbrg said:

Yes.  And?

Without a doubt, the biggest takeaway from Friday's game should be how the LeFevour vs Buckley matchup played out.

All of which means exactly squat. The only thing that was relevant was that the Bombers left Calgary with the two points.

[bearpants]

3 minutes ago, tracker said:

All of which means exactly squat. The only thing that was relevant was that the Bombers left Calgary with the two points.

you need to turn your sarcasm meter up just a few notches... 

[blue_gold_84]

58 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Can't take me seriously, but have to post something derogatory every single time I post. 

 

Yeah, not quite. The hubris is strong.

[TBURGESS]

6 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Yeah, not quite. The hubris is strong.

Oh look! There it is again. I post, you post. Starting to get creepy bud.