Week 10: Ottawa Here Friday - - O vs D

[Colin Unger]

1 minute ago, BBlink said:

I thought it was Lankford drawing in. Guess they figure they need someone to stretch the defense a bit

I’m actually more concerned about who will do the holding on field goals. Streveler ? 

[Booch]

Bennett is 

[BomberBall]

1 hour ago, Colin Unger said:

The problem with Gaitor is that he’s a spectator even when he’s starting in the secondary

Well, let's hope he keeps doing it from the sidelines.

[BomberBall]

1 hour ago, Colin Unger said:

The problem with Gaitor is that he’s a spectator even when he’s starting in the secondary

Well, let's hope he keeps doing it from the sidelines.

[Tracker]

It was confirmed this afternoon that Lankford is starting Friday. I like Lankford as a person, but Jeez, if he is the best receiver the Bombers can put out there, it's very sad.

[17to85]

13 minutes ago, Tracker said:

It was confirmed this afternoon that Lankford is starting Friday. I like Lankford as a person, but Jeez, if he is the best receiver the Bombers can put out there, it's very sad.

Well they already went to their depth to get Thompkins on there, Lankford coming on for another injury isn't really a damning indictment of things. Guy isn't fantastic as a receiver but he can play a little bit and to be honest they way they like to use him he is the most natural replacement for Dressler cause they'll likely have him run the same plays Dressler does. 

I know he's the resident whipping boy but it's a move that really isn't that surprising given how the receivers have been deployed this year. 

[JuranBoldenRules]

Lapo must have something ready for Lankford.  There's some hope.

The darkness in my heart tells me though that Lapo is always nuts for a guy who can "take the top off the defense" even if the guy can't run a route to save his life.  Lankford also has fumbleitis of late.  I hope to hell he doesn't return kicks.

[rebusrankin]

I bet they have Lankford returning kicks Friday.

[BBlink]

Send Lankford deep and hopefully he can pull the safety away. He can also run sweeps fairly effectively. He doesn't have to be a world beater, just a decent decoy half the time

[Jpan85]

Last time he played Ottawa Lankford went 74 yards to the house.

[SpeedFlex27]

5 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

Wow, an American that ignores facts and goes with his own opinion.  I'll bet that's never happened before...

I think he is a former Winnipegger living in Seattle. Or a Canadian. I know USABomberFan isn't American.

[SpeedFlex27]

Why not play Petermann? What's he have to do to show he should start?

[coach17]

1 hour ago, BBlink said:

Send Lankford deep and hopefully he can pull the safety away. He can also run sweeps fairly effectively. He doesn't have to be a world beater, just a decent decoy half the time

Langford going deep and stretching the field might just be the magic elixir this offence needs . All it takes is one successful or even near completion. When that happens it opens the intermediate stuff and gets the 7 or 8 out of the box making Harris way more effective too.

[Guest J5V]

22 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Why not play Petermann? What's he have to do to show he should start?

After his performance last game, I agree. Petermann has earned it, however, that's not the way O'Shea rolls.

[SpeedFlex27]

1 hour ago, J5V said:

After his performance last game, I agree. Petermann has earned it, however, that's not the way O'Shea rolls.

Lankford hasn't shown much when he's in there. Petermann is the heir apparent to Dressler maybe even as early as next season. He should be playing.

[Fatty Liver]

5 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Lapo must have something ready for Lankford.  There's some hope.

The darkness in my heart tells me though that Lapo is always nuts for a guy who can "take the top off the defense" even if the guy can't run a route to save his life.  Lankford also has fumbleitis of late.  I hope to hell he doesn't return kicks.

Your memory is short, 50 kick off returns last season, 1,223 total yds, 24.5 yd. avg.  Please elaborate on the countless fumbles he's given up in the two years he's been with the team.

 

[Brandon]

It's not like Nichols can't throw the ball to Demski, Adams,  Wolowhateversky, Thompkins, and Harris...

[USABomberfan]

15 hours ago, 17to85 said:

even if it's shown to be wrong? It's OK to say that Hall has stepped it up and got the D playing better. If you ignore what you see only to stick to your opinion you are just being ignorant. 

If it has to take him 4 years to do it and be given marching orders by O'Shea on what to fix, then he's no good.  Like I said before, it doesn't matter if we win the Grey Cup, I would fire him regardless.

[Booch]

12 hours ago, coach17 said:

Langford going deep and stretching the field might just be the magic elixir this offence needs . All it takes is one successful or even near completion. When that happens it opens the intermediate stuff and gets the 7 or 8 out of the box making Harris way more effective too.

thing is....we can send any receiver deep....it's just not s skill set exclusive to Lankford..I wish people would get off of this idea that we need a specific "guy" who can stretch a defense.

If you send any one deep on a post..corner..fade..whatever...a team will have a guy in coverage on him every time. And at this level (pro) Lankford isn't  some amazing speed talent where nobody can/will cover him. The thing thats negative in my opinion..and experience playing is that 9 times outta 10 Lankford going deep will not require...or have a team game plan to have over the top safety help on him and can focus it elsewhere as he is not a proven guy to make the tough catches...contested catches or win many 50/50 battles...whereas a Washington...Tompkins...even Simonese could/would

I know that at times we would tell a corner that this "field stretcher" is all yours and leave him at that until he shows he is getting beat, or if the free safety has read the play correctly and jumped the play as it was the first read and play went there...I think it's a waste of a chance to roster someone else and give our offence a diffident dynamic for teams to worry about as the season progresses...

[Tracker]

2 hours ago, Booch said:

thing is....we can send any receiver deep....it's just not s skill set exclusive to Lankford..I wish people would get off of this idea that we need a specific "guy" who can stretch a defense.

If you send any one deep on a post..corner..fade..whatever...a team will have a guy in coverage on him every time. And at this level (pro) Lankford isn't  some amazing speed talent where nobody can/will cover him. The thing thats negative in my opinion..and experience playing is that 9 times outta 10 Lankford going deep will not require...or have a team game plan to have over the top safety help on him and can focus it elsewhere as he is not a proven guy to make the tough catches...contested catches or win many 50/50 battles...whereas a Washington...Tompkins...even Simonese could/would

I know that at times we would tell a corner that this "field stretcher" is all yours and leave him at that until he shows he is getting beat, or if the free safety has read the play correctly and jumped the play as it was the first read and play went there...I think it's a waste of a chance to roster someone else and give our offence a diffident dynamic for teams to worry about as the season progresses...

A deep threat is not the threat if the receiver cannot (a) run good patterns,(b)  get open or (c) catch (and hold onto) the ball on a consistent basis. Lankford is fast, may or may not be quick and is questionable to go get the ball.

[Booch]

EXACTLY....You can send anyone deep...but if there is no real threat to make consistant plays...whats the point...all you do is draw away the db, and really....every play a db is responsible for something...I just think it's a waste and we could do a lot more with a real threat out there....and don't even go there about his return skills...we have been fine without them, and truthfully he isn't that good at kick-offs..if there isn't a clear seem or hole...he doesn't have the ability to make something out of nothing...and I question his ball security..any time he is in traffic i cringe.

This was the opportunity to get someone else in the line-up who we don't really know what they have to offer and if they are in the plans for the future...and we are missing the opportunity...we know what Lankford brings...and I would be hard pressed to see a line-up in the league where he would crack the active 46..and that says a lot right there

[WBBFanWest]

3 hours ago, USABomberfan said:

If it has to take him 4 years to do it and be given marching orders by O'Shea on what to fix, then he's no good.  Like I said before, it doesn't matter if we win the Grey Cup, I would fire him regardless.

Can you show us on this doll, where the bad defensive coordinator touched you?

[17to85]

3 hours ago, USABomberfan said:

If it has to take him 4 years to do it and be given marching orders by O'Shea on what to fix, then he's no good.  Like I said before, it doesn't matter if we win the Grey Cup, I would fire him regardless.

so pure pig headedness. I believe this is Halls last season here but not as a firing, more of a riding off into the sunset kinda thing. Gotta admit though that the D is playimg pretty well so what's the problem?

[Tracker]

2 hours ago, Booch said:

EXACTLY....You can send anyone deep...but if there is no real threat to make consistant plays...whats the point...all you do is draw away the db, and really....every play a db is responsible for something...I just think it's a waste and we could do a lot more with a real threat out there....and don't even go there about his return skills...we have been fine without them, and truthfully he isn't that good at kick-offs..if there isn't a clear seem or hole...he doesn't have the ability to make something out of nothing...and I question his ball security..any time he is in traffic i cringe.

This was the opportunity to get someone else in the line-up who we don't really know what they have to offer and if they are in the plans for the future...and we are missing the opportunity...we know what Lankford brings...and I would be hard pressed to see a line-up in the league where he would crack the active 46..and that says a lot right there

But he would be at least the #2 receiver in Regina. Or nose tackle.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Tracker

[Booch]

I don't include them in the grouping of other teams in the league because based on how they do things, and treat/use players...they don't really make any sense..so inclusion is just not warranted