Winnipeg 5-5 @ Regina 5-4 Game Day

[Guest J5V]

2 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I wonder what Hall thinks of Loffler.  I feel like he's a huge hole in our D and our coverages are designed to cover for his lack of ability in coverage.  It doesn't work.  There's never any support over the top.  At best we go into quarters where in a deep route you are still giving up 1 on 1 matchups.  They have to cheat to the deep routes in their quarter of the field because there's nothing behind them.  Run a slant against that and it's 7-8 yards every time, especially when we blitz Bighill and JSK so much.  That's tough for DB's.   Every play is at best 50-50 if they make a perfect read and get decent position.  Then toss in PI and all that crap.

I wonder if Hall would even start Loffler if it were up to him.  I'd like to see what we could do with a legitimate safety.

I don't think Hall likes Loffler. These guys are going to cost him his job. Last year it was Hurl. Walters hasn't done Hall any favors and that leads to your other point. The worst news today may have been that Maurice Leggett would not be driving West.

 

[pigseye]

It's hard to build a great secondary without continuity. Randle is the only guy who has been around since MOS took over. We'd be better off playing experienced wash outs back there then replacing inexperienced guys every year, that's not on Hall. 

[Floyd]

24 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I wonder what Hall thinks of Loffler.  I feel like he's a huge hole in our D and our coverages are designed to cover for his lack of ability in coverage.  It doesn't work.  There's never any support over the top.  At best we go into quarters where in a deep route you are still giving up 1 on 1 matchups.  They have to cheat to the deep routes in their quarter of the field because there's nothing behind them.  Run a slant against that and it's 7-8 yards every time, especially when we blitz Bighill and JSK so much.  That's tough for DB's.   Every play is at best 50-50 if they make a perfect read and get decent position.  Then toss in PI and all that crap.

I wonder if Hall would even start Loffler if it were up to him.  I'd like to see what we could do with a legitimate safety.

We used this excuse with Hurl... and now somehow Sask is able to run a D with him now - although we should have kept the Harris-Hurl matchup going...  

But there's NEVER been over the top help in any Hall defence.... ever...

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, Floyd said:

We used this excuse with Hurl... and now somehow Sask is able to run a D with him now - although we should have kept the Harris-Hurl matchup going...  

But there's NEVER been over the top help in any Hall defence.... ever...

His Sask D's had some decent secondaries with pretty good safeties.  He likes to rotate guys between SAM, WIL and safety.

Hurl doesn't play a ton of snaps on Sask's D.  Between him, Judge and Edem they play one every down.

[Mr Dee]

And here I thought we played a pretty good game. Tight. 

Putting aside the hatred for the QB, Coaches, we lost that game on 2 plays. 

Punt return TD and a deflected pick.

14 points.

Otherwise we beat that Sask defence. We beat that Sask offence. We had the better game plan..from our Coaches. 

If we weren’t in the throws of a 3 game losing streak, most would feel, just on the game itself, that that was a pretty good game.

Bad result, but we had the game plan and mostly we had the execution. We would have taken that win on 2 plays if the roles were reversed, but not today.

Every team can lose in a game like today’s. It’s just a piss off that it happened to us at this time.

Two plays bring on more hysteria..

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

And here I thought we played a pretty good game. Tight. 

Putting aside the hatred for the QB, Coaches, we lost that game on 2 plays. 

Punt return TD and a deflected pick.

14 points.

Otherwise we beat that Sask defence. We beat that Sask offence. We had the better game plan..from our Coaches. 

If we weren’t in the throws of a 3 game losing streak, most would feel, just on the game itself, that that was a pretty good game.

Bad result, but we had the game plan and mostly we had the execution. We would have taken that win on 2 plays if the roles were reversed, but not today.

Every team can lose in a game like today’s. It’s just a piss off that it happened to us at this time.

Two plays bring on more hysteria..

6 points in a half.  Sask D dominated the 2nd half after Bombers eeked out a small lead in the first half with 2 critical errors.  That's not a pretty good game.

[pigseye]

Sad what some fans have come to expect the Bombers, almost, good try, get them next time, lol, it's really is a team for the casual fan, an outing and nothing more. 

[Floyd]

I'm sorry - Collaros sucks.  The D stopping him was not a huge deal...

Hall has NEVER had over the top safety help... that's why everyone in Sask hated him too. 

Hall has NEVER been able to stop drives in the last two minutes...

[3rd & 1]

1 hour ago, wpgallday1960 said:

Bombers had the better of the play.  The rest you can shove up your ****

The Bombers has the better of the play????

Nichols... 14 of 26 for 166 yards

Collaros... 18 of 30 for 250 yards

Harris... 15 carries 158 yards. 95%  in the 1st half. Shut down 2nd half

Thigpen... 5 Carries 55 yards and a 35 yard TD catch. All in the 2nd half  

I’m going to say the Bombers have taken the wrong game plan approach the last 3 games. They come out firing and show everything they have in the 1st half. Because they lead at the half. They continue with the exact same game plan in the 2nd half  

Ottawa, Calgary and Regina all shut down the Bombers in the second half. Nichols had all of 60 yards passing in the 2nd half and Harris ran for maybe 20 yards. 

Harris ran for big yards in the first half because the Riders defensive line were doing a poor job playing their gaps. You could see immediately in the 2nd half when Harris made his 1st run the Riders had made half time adjustments and were all of a sudden gap sound. 

Anyone saying the Bombers has the better of the play against SK are living on the ground in the 1st half. As Harris was running solid and he won the ground battle in the 1st half. The Riders played decent in the 1st half but won in all 3 phases in the 2nd half and that’s why the won the game. 

I don’t expect to see a Riders defence not being gap sound next week. If the Bombers want to get a split. They better play 60 minutes. Instead of showing everything they have in the 1st half. 

[Mr Dee]

6 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

6 points in a half.  Sask D dominated the 2nd half after Bombers eeked out a small lead in the first half with 2 critical errors.  That's not a pretty good game.

The results were indicated it wasn’t a good game, but it doesn’t wipe out the fact that we did have a good game plan, that without those two mistakes would have resulted in a win. 

But, still, two mistakes wipes out the fact that we played a tight game and, on equal ground, had them beat. 

Of course Saskatchewan wasn’t going to lie down and surrender, but it is nice to have a two TD cushion on 2 plays to play with.

I’m sure nobody’s more frustrated right now than the members of that Football club

[Floyd]

17 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

6 points in a half.  Sask D dominated the 2nd half after Bombers eeked out a small lead in the first half with 2 critical errors.  That's not a pretty good game.

Cmon... look at Sask's points in the first half - they didn't deserve to be in that game...

Garbage interception by Nichols... he should have been pulled after that

Brutal tackling and blocking that should have been penalties on a punt return... 

No one facet of the bombers deserves credit or blame.... and they all fell apart in the fourth quarter.

This is on coaching and nothing else.

[Guest J5V]

28 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

And here I thought we played a pretty good game. Tight. 

Putting aside the hatred for the QB, Coaches, we lost that game on 2 plays. 

Punt return TD and a deflected pick.

14 points.

Otherwise we beat that Sask defence. We beat that Sask offence. We had the better game plan..from our Coaches. 

If we weren’t in the throws of a 3 game losing streak, most would feel, just on the game itself, that that was a pretty good game.

Bad result, but we had the game plan and mostly we had the execution. We would have taken that win on 2 plays if the roles were reversed, but not today.

Every team can lose in a game like today’s. It’s just a piss off that it happened to us at this time.

Two plays bring on more hysteria..

Nichols threw into double coverage on the near pick-six. 

Sloppy tackling and missed lane assignment on the kick return coverage,

We were totally responsible for those two plays and for our loss today.

[Mr Dee]

5 minutes ago, J5V said:

Nichols threw into double coverage on the near pick-six. 

Doesn’t change the fact the ball was deflected to a Rider. Not good at all.

 

6 minutes ago, J5V said:

Sloppy tackling and missed lane assignment on the kick return coverage,

Can’t be denied.

But for those two plays we did well against a top-two defence in this league AND held their offence to limited yardage. Nobody’s going to shut out a team these days..

 

[JuranBoldenRules]

25 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

The results were indicated it wasn’t a good game, but it doesn’t wipe out the fact that we did have a good game plan, that without those two mistakes would have resulted in a win. 

But, still, two mistakes wipes out the fact that we played a tight game and, on equal ground, had them beat. 

Of course Saskatchewan wasn’t going to lie down and surrender, but it is nice to have a two TD cushion on 2 plays to play with.

I’m sure nobody’s more frustrated right now than the members of that Football club

Sorry but good game plan doesn't result in 6 points and a 100 yards of offense in a half.

Yes the 14 gave up on critical errors was the difference but that speaks to how pathetic the Riders O was in the first half.  I care less about the Riders and more about how the Bombers are playing.  It ain't pretty.

Like my mom said when I got a shitty mark on a test and I said "but the whole class did bad," I don't care about how they did, I care about what our team does.

[DR. CFL]

Throwing for 166 yds passing with 31 on one play isn’t going to win you many games in this league. Great first half by Harris but as usual when you can’t pass and the other team adjusts and shuts down the run  in the second half. This team has not shown it can adjust at the half.....blame whomever you like.....it is an established pattern.

[Mr Dee]

34 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Sorry but good game plan doesn't result in 6 points and a 100 yards of offense in a half.

Yes the 14 gave up on critical errors was the difference but that speaks to how pathetic the Riders O was in the first half.  I care less about the Riders and more about how the Bombers are playing.  It ain't 

So, you don’t give credit to the Bomber D for the lousy Rider O?

Interesting.

[Guest J5V]

36 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Doesn’t change the fact the ball was deflected to a Rider. Not good at all.

Can’t be denied.

But for those two plays we did well against a top-two defence in this league AND held their offence to limited yardage. Nobody’s going to shut out a team these days..

Ball can't be deflected to a Rider if it's not thrown there. Throwing into double coverage is also not a good idea. 

Isn't it fair to say there are usually a few big plays that turn a game? You can't dismiss them. I'm sure the Riders could argue if it wasn't for a few key plays they would have won much handier. Slippery slope.

[Mr Dee]

5 minutes ago, J5V said:

Ball can't be deflected to a Rider if it's not thrown there. Throwing into double coverage is also not a good idea. 

Isn't it fair to say there are usually a few big plays that turn a game? You can't dismiss them. I'm sure the Riders could argue if it wasn't for a few key plays they would have won much handier. Slippery slope.

A loss is a loss, no matter what, but I’m talking about how we approached that game. We had a good plan. How can anyone overlook that?

[Floyd]

Just now, Mr Dee said:

A loss is a loss, no matter what, but I’m talking about how we approached that game. We had a good plan. How can anyone overlook that?

I would have agreed with this in the first half... but we also cannot overlook the lack of adjustments or maybe 'overthinking' the adjustments heading into the second half...

It is the primary ongoing problem with this team...  never mind the implosions in the last three minutes...

[JuranBoldenRules]

8 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

So, you don’t give credit to the Bomber D for the lousy Rider O?

Interesting.

I do to an extent.  Sask dropped 2 passes in the first half that would have put them into FG range.  Any offense that doesn't score a point in a half played poorly.  That's a pretty reasonable assumption to make IMO.

The Riders offense is also lousy based on a track record of more than half a season against the entire league.

[Goalie]

Refs need to flag riders D more.. They tend to lead with the helmet on every tackle and 2 times in particular should have been flagged... Nichols slide and then Harris in the 4th.. 2 very late hits that targetted the head

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

A loss is a loss, no matter what, but I’m talking about how we approached that game. We had a good plan. How can anyone overlook that?

Sort of like having a plan to get to work but no plan to get home, so you sleep on the sidewalk instead.

The defensive gameplan was fine, the early offensive plan was good, but it doesn't count for **** if you go two quarters with basically no functional offense.

[Floyd]

7 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Sort of like having a plan to get to work but no plan to get home, so you sleep on the sidewalk instead.

The defensive gameplan was fine, the early offensive plan was good, but it doesn't count for **** if you go two quarters with basically no functional offense.

Defensive gameplan is the same as the offensive gameplan... its good in the first half and then the wheels come off.

You cannot keep excusing a scheme that consistently gives up multiple 25+ yard gains each game...  doesn't matter if they are 'tired' or not.

Collaros did literally nothing to wear out the bomber D - he is one of the worst and most predictable QBs in the league

Richie Hall was 'gifted' a sadsack like Collaros and still let him win.  The end.

[Guest J5V]

6 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

A loss is a loss, no matter what, but I’m talking about how we approached that game. We had a good plan. How can anyone overlook that?

We did. We often do. Then at halftime we joke about how this is where we lose it because the other team will make personnel and stategy adjustments that we just can't/won't. 

For example, and I'm taking this from what other posters have maybe suggested, but what if Streveler had come in to start the second half with a completely different offensive strategy written on his forearm. Would Jones' D have been ready for something like that (a mobile QB that could run the ball and throw deep with accuracy whilst utilizing backs like Harris and Lafrance)? I think it would have completely discombobulated the Riders and changed the entire outcome of the game and everyone would be talking about how innovative and creative the Bombers were.

[do or die]

Game was there in crunch time again........ BUT. Bombers simply vaporized on both sides of the ball..... again.  Nobody making a clutch play when needed.....