Game Day Thread- Week Three: Winnipeg @ Hamilton June 29, 2018

[Doublezero]

I was pretty disappointed with the play of Dressler and Leggett.

[do or die]

...and Loffler...

[Nickthesizz]

Keeping Hall should be a fireable offense for O'shea, I believe he is responsible for choosing his coordinators more-so than Walters. Walters needs to man up and get rid of Hall and in the offseason find O'shea's replacement. Enough is enough.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Gotmilt

[17to85]

Oshea is patient but he's not stupid. He won't let this continue for ever. That mic on him last night did show some frustration from him.

[Bigblue204]

Let's also remember it is only week 3. Missing the starting qb. I know, I know...same old hall. But it's better this happens now against the east than 14 weeks from now against the west. Hopefully changes occur. Its a long season. 

[rebusrankin]

On the one hand, 1-2 with a backup QB and us within range of BC/SASK and the crossover is comforting but the same old, same old with the D is maddening.

[17to85]

Nothing would have changed if we'd had Nichols there. The D still would have sunk themselves by not pressuring Masoli and not covering receivers. You can't win a game when the D gives up clock murdering drives time after time after time after time. 

[B-F-F-C]

46 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

On the one hand, 1-2 with a backup QB and us within range of BC/SASK and the crossover is comforting but the same old, same old with the D is maddening.

Agreed...I wish I could find the Winnipeg Sun article when it was announced that Hall was being brought back as the DC.  O'Shea was quoted and as best as I can remember, he said that the defensive system will improve and that he was going to be more involved this season and that we should expect a much different defensive scheme.  I thought at the time it was odd because on one hand he's showing faith in Hall in bringing him back but on the other hand he's bashing the system that he coaches.    

I  know Hall and O'shea are good friends but at some point in time the lightbulb has to go on and O'shea has to come to the realization that he's not going to win a Cup with Hall as the DC.  So is this going to be another wasted year or will O'Shea make the difficult decision to can Hall and try and salvage the season.  

You can win a Cup with this offence but the defence is the Achilles heal.  Every OC in the CFL knows how to beat it.  

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by B-F-F-C

[Nickthesizz]

2 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

Let's also remember it is only week 3. Missing the starting qb. I know, I know...same old hall. But it's better this happens now against the east than 14 weeks from now against the west. Hopefully changes occur. Its a long season. 

None of the things you mentioned are even relevant to what we're upset about so that excuse is garbage.

Streveler was fine, missed a couple throws, had a couple drops.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Gotmilt

[Bigblue204]

37 minutes ago, Gotmilt said:

None of the things you mentioned are even relevant to what we're upset about so that excuse is garbage.

Streveler was fine, missed a couple throws, had a couple drops.

146 yrds of passing is not fine. Not in modern day football....Especially with this D. Nichols brings a more consistent attack. I like the strevalation but this is still Nichols team. And it's still a better team with Nichols in the line up.

Not trying to make excuse. Just putting things into perspective. The D is still the bigger problem. But being that it's only week 3, there is lots of time for things to change.

[SpeedFlex27]

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Oshea is patient but he's not stupid. He won't let this continue for ever. 

Well,....Cough. Cough. 

[SpeedFlex27]

10 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

146 yrds of passing is not fine. Not in modern day football....Especially with this D. Nichols brings a more consistent attack. I like the strevalation but this is still Nichols team. And it's still a better team with Nichols in the line up.

Not trying to make excuse. Just putting things into perspective. The D is still the bigger problem. But being that it's only week 3, there is lots of time for things to change.

Streveler is a rookie. Last year he was playing at South Dakota State & had never seen Canadian football.  Dressler dropped at least 2 catchable balls early in the game that would have sustained drives although he did come back & made some nice catches later. No way I'm even mentioning Streveler as a reason we lost. I'm throwing everything at Ritchie Hall. 

[Bigblue204]

37 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Streveler is a rookie. Last year he was playing at South Dakota State & had never seen Canadian football.  Dressler dropped at least 2 catchable balls early in the game that would have sustained drives although he did come back & made some nice catches later. No way I'm even mentioning Streveler as a reason we lost. I'm throwing everything at Ritchie Hall. 

The offence didn't play well enough that is just a fact. Unless people think 290 total yards is good for a cfl team. Saying that, I'm not blaming streveler. I think he's played as well as anyone expected. Better even. Just pointing out that this is a different team with Nichols under centre. And that it's still early enough for changes to be made on D. None of that is wrong and is backed up by stats.

Saying both sides of the ball played poorly isn't putting the blame on one side of the ball or one player. It's just what happened.

I'm more worried about the D than anything. But it's still early. Still reason for optimism for me. I don't care if their is none for others.

[Nickthesizz]

46 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

146 yrds of passing is not fine. Not in modern day football....Especially with this D. Nichols brings a more consistent attack. I like the strevalation but this is still Nichols team. And it's still a better team with Nichols in the line up.

Not trying to make excuse. Just putting things into perspective. The D is still the bigger problem. But being that it's only week 3, there is lots of time for things to change.

You don't like Streveler, if you did this would be chalked up to one bad game and a learning experience against one of the best defences in the league. He threw a couple bad passes and had a couple drops from good recievers that killed drives. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

You're instead changing the narrative of blame from a defence who was STATISTICALLY the worst defence in an astounding number of areas last year and probably already this year as well to an offence that has put up over 30 points in the first 2 games.

[Bigblue204]

1 minute ago, Gotmilt said:

You don't like Streveler, if you did this would be chalked up to one bad game and a learning experience against one of the best defences in the league. He threw a couple bad passes and had a couple drops from good recievers that killed drives. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

You're instead changing the narrative of blame from a defence who was STATISTICALLY the worst defence in an astounding number of areas last year and probably already this year as well to an offence that has put up over 30 points in the first 2 games.

[SpeedFlex27]

4 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

The offence didn't play well enough that is just a fact. Unless people think 290 total yards is good for a cfl team. Saying that, I'm not blaming streveler. I think he's played as well as anyone expected. Better even. Just pointing out that this is a different team with Nichols under centre. And that it's still early enough for changes to be made on D. None of that is wrong and is backed up by stats.

Saying both sides of the ball played poorly isn't putting the blame on one side of the ball or one player. It's just what happened.

I'm more worried about the D than anything. But it's still early. Still reason for optimism for me. I don't care if their is none for others.

I'd be optimistic about our defense if I knew MOS would do something. If he wouldn't fire Hall in the off season, I'd doubt he'd do that now even as the losses & yards pile up against that unit. 

[Nickthesizz]

2 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Oh you’re the village idiot I get it

[Bigblue204]

3 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I'd be optimistic about our defense if I knew MOS would do something. If he wouldn't fire Hall in the off season, I'd doubt he'd do that now even as the losses & yards pile up against that unit. 

Yeah I don't see a firing happening either. My hope is that play calling will change....which right now I feel is also a bit unlikely. Maybe MOS can convince him to be more aggressive.

[17to85]

Play calling on D? How about the entire game plan was **** from snap one? The damage was done in the week leading up not so much on game day. Bombers went in with the 100% wrong idea and it blew up in their faces.

[LeBird]

6 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Oshea is patient but he's not stupid. He won't let this continue for ever. That mic on him last night did show some frustration from him.

You're right, O'Shea is not stupid but man is he ever boneheaded!

[Goalie]

4 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

146 yrds of passing is not fine. Not in modern day football....Especially with this D. Nichols brings a more consistent attack. I like the strevalation but this is still Nichols team. And it's still a better team with Nichols in the line up.

Not trying to make excuse. Just putting things into perspective. The D is still the bigger problem. But being that it's only week 3, there is lots of time for things to change.

You wanna know what's actually not fine? 

Asking our 23 yr old rookie QB to come out and put up 40 points a week so we can win. Thats whats not fine. In 2 of 3 games this year our D has given up over 1000 yards and almost 70 points.. 

 

So.. What you are expecting is for the rook to put up a bunch of points a game? Cuz... Normally when your starter goes down, you ask your D to step up cuz aint nobody can expect a green rookie to put up 40 a week just to maybe win. D needed to step up, they haven't and they haven't since Hall has been here. 

Streveler Nichols BLM Reilly Ray... You cant expect any of them to win consistently when they have to score 40 to do so. The D hasn't helped 1 bit yet.. No pick 6's no points scored by the D at all, they are passive, they are soft, they are basically a Hall D. 

Its an Archaic way of looking at things, Bighill? Hurl? Doesn't make a difference, Hall has him blitzing every other play. Square pegs Round holes.. D has a ton of talent but are being put in a position to fail. 

Missed tackles? On the player... But when guys are 10 yards open play after play after play, thats on the DC. 

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by Goalie

[Bigblue204]

59 minutes ago, Goalie said:

You wanna know what's actually not fine? 

Asking our 23 yr old rookie QB to come out and put up 40 points a week so we can win. Thats whats not fine. In 2 of 3 games this year our D has given up over 1000 yards and almost 70 points..

So.. What you are expecting is for the rook to put up a bunch of points a game? Cuz... Normally when your starter goes down, you ask your D to step up cuz aint nobody can expect a green rookie to put up 40 a week just to maybe win. D needed to step up, they haven't and they haven't since Hall has been here. 

Streveler Nichols BLM Reilly Ray... You cant expect any of them to win consistently when they have to score 40 to do so. The D hasn't helped 1 bit yet.. No pick 6's no points scored by the D at all, they are passive, they are soft, they are basically a Hall D. 

Its an Archaic way of looking at things, Bighill? Hurl? Doesn't make a difference, Hall has him blitzing every other play. Square pegs Round holes.. D has a ton of talent but are being put in a position to fail. 

Missed tackles? On the player... But when guys are 10 yards open play after play after play, thats on the DC. 

 

Take a deep breath and read the entire post before you respond.

1) they needed 32 points to win.

2) where did I say I thought Streveler needed to put up 40 points a week?

3) Nichols regularly put up 30+ points last year, which is generally good enough to win.

4) AGAIN, pointing out that both sides of the ball didn't play well is not an excuse for the defense. under 300 yrds total O is not good, rookie QB or not.

5) Am I expecting Streveler to consistently go out there and put up big numbers? No. I never said that. I've never thought that. The guy has been amazing, but is still very green and is bound to struggle. Which is why the D has to play better.

6) How many times should I repeat that I think the Defence is the bigger problem? 4 times? 5? 6?

7) Why is there such an issue with saying the offence played poorly? Do people read that and see "the defence played lights out!! Streveler can go **** himself?" reading comprehension is important. The D played horribly. The O didn't help by also playing bad. That's it. That's all I'm ******* saying. The stats and score support that.

to recap my last like 5 ******* posts. The D sucked. The O also struggled, which isn't a surprise considering the circumstances. Nichols is better than Streveler and will be more consistent. It's early, there's still time to change the D.

How in the **** can anyone read that and think I'm blaming any one side of the ball over the other? Let alone the Offence over the Defence?

[Goalie]

So to recap.. You expect the rook to be as good as the how many years in the league Vet? The rookie uses his legs.. His numbers are kind of similar to Nichols.. 7 TD passes in 3 games.. Several rushing.. The O has put up points.. The D cant stop the other team tho. Odd hill to die on, guess you are right and everyone else is wrong tho.

You are comparing a rookie to a veteran. I didnt read your whole post tho cuz your first few lines says all i really needed to know

Edited July 1, 2018 by Goalie

[Bigblue204]

9 minutes ago, Goalie said:

So to recap.. You expect the rook to be as good as the how many years in the league Vet? The rookie uses his legs.. His numbers are kind of similar to Nichols.. 7 TD passes in 3 games.. Several rushing.. The O has put up points.. The D cant stop the other team tho. Odd hill to die on, guess you are right and everyone else is wrong tho.

Where did I say that? Where did I say streveler needs to be as good as Nichols and that the reason the team lost is only because of the O? Where? Quote me. The O put up 10 last night. Not good enough. Understandable considering the circumstances though.

Do you understand what those words mean when they are put together?

Edited July 1, 2018 by Bigblue204

[Goalie]

3 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Where did I say that? Where did I say streveler needs to be as good as Nichols and that the reason the team lost is only because of the O? Where? Quote me. The O put up 10 last night. Not good enough. Understandable considering the circumstances though.

Do you understand what those words mean when they are put together?

Its cute how you get so angered by somebody elses opinion. By saying we would win if Nichols played is pretty much saying the Ds play was fine and thats the part that makes no sense. IMO we lose yesterday when with Nichols. How does Nichols make the D play better exactly?