What Changes do the Bombers Need this Off-season to Improve the Team?

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, sweep the leg said:

Nelson was here with Mike Kelly. Tim Burke was our DC for swaggerville.

lets bring back Tim Burke... ;-)

[Guest J5V]

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Once again people aren't being critical of the offense but come on, if Lapo stuck with Harris there was a chance to get a lead in that game, but no we come out throwing and have 2 completions and still punt the ball, then we pound Harris down their throats and stop using him in the redzone and kick a field goal rather than giving ourselves a shot at the touchdown. It's **** like that holds this team back more than anything. Lapo outsmarts himself and does the defensive coordinators job for him by stopping what's working before the D actually stops it. 

QFT. You really nailed it about Lapo and in Babble you might remember I was losing my mind at Lapo when he stopped running Harris. Benevedes must have heaved a huge sigh of relief when he saw us change tactics and take his D off the hook. We all knew Edmonton couldn't stop the run so what does Lapo do? Stops the run. I'm still beside myself about that and Lapo can head for the hills tomorrow for all I care. I am so sick of him doing that. He did it over and over again all season long. Fine line between genius and insanity and I think I know which side of it he's on.

[Guest J5V]

3 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

The offense generated nearly 500 yards of total offense on Sunday, and you want to blame the OC...? That was the team's best offensive performance in weeks. How was it "held back"?

The Eskimos, OTOH, had five straight possessions after the half and all five resulted in points scored. The defense, namely the man in charge of it, is what ultimately let the team down again in a second consecutive post-season.

Seriously, though this ongoing narrative of yours where LaPolice is constantly enemy #1 in your books - even when there is a mountain of evidence to the contrary - is bordering on weird.

It's not weird. He's absolutely right. I saw it, 17 saw it, and I'm sure plenty others saw it. Watch the game again and you'll see it too. We were ripping off 8 yards a carry and Edmonton had no answer. Why in the world would you stop running it? We could have run it down their throats all game. Instead we went to this dink and dunk BS where we completed 2 passes in a row and had to kick because we only got 8 yards. It was insane.

[Floyd]

17 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

Nelson was here with Mike Kelly. Tim Burke was our DC for swaggerville.

Nope - Nelson started swaggerville.

 

[Guest J5V]

2 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

So did the Eskimos. What's your point?

You're clearly getting emotional, so trying to have a rational discussion about the offense would be a fool's errand. The fact you called LaPolice a loser is evidence enough you lack impartiality on the topic.

Explain to me why it's a good idea to stop doing what is working and start doing what isn't because I'm just not seeing it. 

It's not just about scoring points. By running the ball and chewing up clock you're keeping the ball out of Reilly's hands, the very thing MOS was so afraid of that he felt compelled to gamble on third down and we all know how well that worked out. O'Shea should have realized what was happening and told Lapo to pull his head out of his ass and get back to running the ball. Between the two of them they stymied the offense and caused turnovers. Add Hall's D to the mix and you end up down 3 TDs in short order. The team deserved better. We all did. Total fail on the coaching.

[blue_gold_84]

4 minutes ago, J5V said:

It's not weird. He's absolutely right. I saw it, 17 saw it, and I'm sure plenty others saw it. Watch the game again and you'll see it too. We were ripping off 8 yards a carry and Edmonton had no answer. Why in the world would you stop running it? We could have run it down their throats all game. Instead we went to this dink and dunk BS where we completed 2 passes in a row and had to kick because we only got 8 yards. It was insane.

You should pay more attention and then you'll figure out why I said his narrative (as it pertains to his assertion the offense sucks and LaPolice is a loser who needs to be fired) is weird.

I watched the entire game in my seat at the stadium. I don't need to watch it again. Does the play-calling sometimes not make sense? Yes. I have said before he tends to overthink things, especially in the redzone. Does LaPolice need to work on improving his craft in the off-season? Absolutely. There's always room for improvement. Is he a shitty OC who needs to be replaced? No, and unequivocally so.

[17to85]

29 minutes ago, J5V said:

It's not weird. He's absolutely right. I saw it, 17 saw it, and I'm sure plenty others saw it. Watch the game again and you'll see it too. We were ripping off 8 yards a carry and Edmonton had no answer. Why in the world would you stop running it? We could have run it down their throats all game. Instead we went to this dink and dunk BS where we completed 2 passes in a row and had to kick because we only got 8 yards. It was insane.

and if we all go back to the game against edmonton in winnipeg earlier in the year he did the exact same ******* thing. Harris shoved right down to the redzone and then we stopped using him and kicked a field goal. 

It's what Lapolice does. Takes routes short of the first down marker hoping someone lucks into getting yards and over thinks things and goes away from what's working to break tendency. He is his own worst enemy. 

[sweep the leg]

36 minutes ago, Floyd said:

Nope - Nelson started swaggerville.

 

True, but 2011 was the year it really took off.

[SPuDS]

24 minutes ago, J5V said:

It's not weird. He's absolutely right. I saw it, 17 saw it, and I'm sure plenty others saw it. Watch the game again and you'll see it too. We were ripping off 8 yards a carry and Edmonton had no answer. Why in the world would you stop running it? We could have run it down their throats all game. Instead we went to this dink and dunk BS where we completed 2 passes in a row and had to kick because we only got 8 yards. It was insane.

I have a really hard time believing he just decided... "yup, this is working, lets get away from it!"  I mean not only does that sound ridiculously stupid but it contradicts what an OC is supposed to be doing.. IE moving the ball and scoring points.  I truly doubt a guy who has been an OC and HC in this league for as long as he has came up with this brilliant plan to deviate away from what was working 'just because'.  Maybe he saw the D-line starting to key in on the run.  Maybe he saw the LBs were beginning to cheat.  Maybe Buck saw something but to assume it was Lapo being Lapo and just changing it because is asinine..

 

causation dictates change 99.9995 percent of the time.

[blue_gold_84]

7 minutes ago, J5V said:

Explain to me why it's a good idea to stop doing what is working and start doing what isn't because I'm just not seeing it. 

It's not just about scoring points. By running the ball and chewing up clock you're keeping the ball out of Reilly's hands, the very thing MOS was so afraid of that he felt compelled to gamble on third down and we all know how well that worked out. O'Shea should have realized what was happening and told Lapo to pull his head out of his ass and get back to running the ball. Between the two of them they stymied the offense and caused turnovers. Add Hall's D to the mix and you end up down 3 TDs in short order. The team deserved better. We all did. Total fail on the coaching.

It was 10-10 at halftime. So, what wasn't working?

On the Bombers first offensive possession in the third quarter: Harris carries for 3 yards and then Nichols throws to Coates for 4 yards. Then the botched fake punt happened, giving the Eskimos the ball at the W40. We all know what happened next time. 18-10 EDM. On their next offensive possession, the Bombers ran two passing plays and got the first down. Then Harris carried the ball for 17 yards and a first down, and then again for 3 yards (EDM got called for too many men - automatic first down). After LeFevour got sacked on the next play, Flanders carried the ball for 13 yards, which led to a FG. On their next possession, they ran 4 rushing plays and 2 passing plays, leading to another FG. By the end of the third quarter, it's 25-16 EDM.

After review: 15 plays on 3 possessions (9 rushes, 5 passes, 1 sack allowed) and 6 points (2 FGs) scored.

Not even five minutes into the fourth quarter, it s 39-16 EDM. I'm pretty sure the run game goes out the window being down 23 points with roughly 10 minutes to play.

[Floyd]

33 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

True, but 2011 was the year it really took off.

our d was really good in 2009...  2011 was when Mack started dismantling swaggerville

maybe 2012

Edited November 14, 2017 by Floyd

[DR. CFL]

The 500 yds is meaningless......280 yds  of it was in the 4 th quarter down by 23 points ...... Where were those yds when it mattered to the outcome of the game?

[17to85]

40 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

I have a really hard time believing he just decided... "yup, this is working, lets get away from it!"  I mean not only does that sound ridiculously stupid but it contradicts what an OC is supposed to be doing.. IE moving the ball and scoring points.  I truly doubt a guy who has been an OC and HC in this league for as long as he has came up with this brilliant plan to deviate away from what was working 'just because'.  Maybe he saw the D-line starting to key in on the run.  Maybe he saw the LBs were beginning to cheat.  Maybe Buck saw something but to assume it was Lapo being Lapo and just changing it because is asinine..

 

causation dictates change 99.9995 percent of the time.

But he does just decide to do that. He is anticipating an adjustment by the D, but all he winds up doing is solving their problem for them. He will not do things until the other team proves they can stop it. He does something, assumes the D will adjust and tries to out pace their adjustments. It drives me ******* bonkers.

[Booch]

you have to remember too that the OC may radio in a couple plays to use, based on look and scheme being presented pre-snap and the QB has the choice to choose or audible from it.

A run play may have been called but Nichols may have seen differently and changed the call based on what he saw, or how the defense set up...we will never know and it's pretty tough to point fingers one way or the other...

 

[17to85]

All I know is Harris was criminally under used in the redzone and I am going to go ahead and put that on the OC rather than the qb. Nichols doesn't come across as a glory hog to me wanting to pass all the TDs in. 

[Fatty Liver]

33 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

All I know is Harris was criminally under used in the redzone and I am going to go ahead and put that on the OC rather than the qb. Nichols doesn't come across as a glory hog to me wanting to pass all the TDs in. 

Problem is, in the red-zone if Harris is stuffed they're often looking at 2nd and 13, seen that plenty of times in the past.

[Judd]

39 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

All I know is Harris was criminally under used in the redzone and I am going to go ahead and put that on the OC rather than the qb. Nichols doesn't come across as a glory hog to me wanting to pass all the TDs in. 

Agreed. Lapo went all mad scientist when everyone and their dog saw Harris crushing them. If I was Harris I'd be pissed.

[Goalie]

21 hours ago, DR. CFL said:

The 500 yds is meaningless......280 yds  of it was in the 4 th quarter down by 23 points ...... Where were those yds when it mattered to the outcome of the game?

Not to be that guy but... We have seen it numerous times this season.. The game isnt over until there are zeros on the clock.... Some might call it garbage time but i bet people were calling the montreal game earlier garbage time also... Yet we came back to win. 

 

[JCon]

I think one thing we need to change going forward is leaving Lefevour (or whoever our short-yardage QB is next year) in after getting a short-yardage first down. It worked a few times early on because they stretched the field, forcing the short-yardage defensive players into unfamiliar (or uncomfortable) defensive coverages.

Later the Bombers, instead of capitalizing on the mismatch, seem to run the ball right into the opponents best run stoppers. That would put Nichols into a second and long situation too often. It also seemed to happen frequently in the red zone, giving the offence only one shot to make a first down or go for the end zone.

But I'm happy Lapo will be back.

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by JCon

[Goalie]

23 hours ago, Floyd said:

Nope - Nelson started swaggerville.

 

I thought i heard that the former DL coach was the main guy behind Swaggerville... Coach Harris. RIP. 

[blue_gold_84]

31 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Not to be that guy but... We have seen it numerous times this season.. The game isnt over until there are zeros on the clock.... Some might call it garbage time but i bet people were calling the montreal game earlier garbage time also... Yet we came back to win. 

 

Agreed. There were still eight minutes left in the fourth quarter when the Bombers made it a 15-point deficit, anyway. The garbage time angle makes no sense, especially in a playoff game.

[17to85]

50 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Problem is, in the red-zone if Harris is stuffed they're often looking at 2nd and 13, seen that plenty of times in the past.

So we wind up kicking a field goal like they do anyway? At least if Harris gets stuffed you know you let your best player try and get you the yards you need. 

[Marshall]

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

So we wind up kicking a field goal like they do anyway? At least if Harris gets stuffed you know you let your best player try and get you the yards you need. 

 A healthy mix of Harris, Flanders, Fevour, Harris, Flanders, Fevour, Harris, Flanders, Fevour,  to bang it in...and maybe the odd play action roll out pass from Nichols. 

[Mr Dee]

Why don’t we just break it down to the most simplest terms, and forget about the coordinators for now?

If you had to look at what aspect of the team was a bigger failure, offence or defence, just based on the results, which would it be?

Its not complicated.

[Guest J5V]

3 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Why don’t we just break it down to the most simplest terms, and forget about the coordinators for now?

If you had to look at what aspect of the team was a bigger failure, offence or defence, just based on the results, which would it be?

Its not complicated.

I doesn't matter what we think. O'Shea said he was happy with the D except for the part about all the yardage surrendered, and tape needs to be looked at to see why that is. Then he'll decide on what to do like he did about Hurl, Carmichael, Thorpe, etc.