3 stars plus HH turn overs eat us raw

[Noeller]

50 minutes ago, Brandon said:

On the radio this morning Bauming suggested that they left him in to give Nichols a chance to show that when the team needs him that he can pull through with a game winning drive at the end of the game.   

It made me think of all the times that Calvillo (or any of the other greats) would march down the field and take control of the offense and pull through at the end of the game.   It would be nice to know that Nichols can do this more often then not.   

Yesterday was the 2 year anniversary of the Als game at IGF where Nichols rallied 'em with 2 minutes left in the game. We definitely know he can do it. When he's "your guy", you give him the benefit of the doubt and let him try and work it out.

[Goalie]

I think the game plan was the real problem. Sure Nichols had his worst game since the Banjo Bowl but the fact we only ran 12 times when we were down by like 14 with 3.5 quarters left didnt help. 

I wonder what the thought process was to throw 50 times against a team who is last or 2nd last against the run went like.. 

Osh: Hamilton sucks against the run

Lapo: noted, but lets not run and throw it all game

Osh: there is supposed to be gale force winds tho 

Lapo: lets beat them with the passing game tho. 

Edited July 29, 2019 by Goalie

[17to85]

2 hours ago, Goalie said:

I think the game plan was the real problem. Sure Nichols had his worst game since the Banjo Bowl but the fact we only ran 12 times when we were down by like 14 with 3.5 quarters left didnt help. 

I wonder what the thought process was to throw 50 times against a team who is last or 2nd last against the run went like.. 

Osh: Hamilton sucks against the run

Lapo: noted, but lets not run and throw it all game

Osh: there is supposed to be gale force winds tho 

Lapo: lets beat them with the passing game tho. 

Lapo : "They're going to expect us to run the ball at them, if we don't run and pass instead they'll never know what hit em! God I'm so smart and clever"

[Mark F]

2 hours ago, Goalie said:

I wonder what the thought process was to throw 50 times against a team who is last or 2nd last against the run went like.. 

 

 As some people say, they seem to overthink it.

"Balanced attack, who needs it. "

[do or die]

47 pass attempts.  8 rushes by Harris.  Stupid.

[Tracker]

3 hours ago, Brandon said:

On the radio this morning Bauming suggested that they left him in to give Nichols a chance to show that when the team needs him that he can pull through with a game winning drive at the end of the game.   

It made me think of all the times that Calvillo (or any of the other greats) would march down the field and take control of the offense and pull through at the end of the game.   It would be nice to know that Nichols can do this more often then not.   

Nichols has done this a few times, but not consistently. That is what is making many fans crazy.

[17to85]

1 minute ago, Tracker said:

Nichols has done this a few times, but not consistently. That is what is making many fans crazy.

He hasn't had to do it much the past few seasons... 

What this comes down to is the people who don't believe in Nichols. They are always looking for some standard he must meet for them to be happy, which is always just out of reach, or if he does it, well it's only once, do it again.

There are athletes out there that I view the same way, but Nichols is fine for what he is. He's a game manager and he does enough to win more games than he loses. You can absolutely win with a guy like that. If all that mattered was having a top teir qb who can win games all on their own then BC wouldn't be so pathetic as they are. 

[Floyd]

28 minutes ago, do or die said:

47 pass attempts.  8 rushes by Harris.  Stupid.

Really bizarre - Harris was a big part of our TD drive and by the 4th quarter... non-existent

[Tracker]

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

He hasn't had to do it much the past few seasons... 

What this comes down to is the people who don't believe in Nichols. They are always looking for some standard he must meet for them to be happy, which is always just out of reach, or if he does it, well it's only once, do it again.

There are athletes out there that I view the same way, but Nichols is fine for what he is. He's a game manager and he does enough to win more games than he loses. You can absolutely win with a guy like that. If all that mattered was having a top teir qb who can win games all on their own then BC wouldn't be so pathetic as they are. 

Agree to an extent- Nichols does not have to be an all-star if the defence plays as well as it has for the most part this season, but as last Labour Day and Friday showed, Nichols can throw the game away all by himself.

[17to85]

33 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Agree to an extent- Nichols does not have to be an all-star if the defence plays as well as it has for the most part this season, but as last Labour Day and Friday showed, Nichols can throw the game away all by himself.

2 examples hardly defines a guy. Especially when last Friday also had some fumbles unrelated to Nichols compounding the issue.

[Floyd]

5 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

2 examples hardly defines a guy. Especially when last Friday also had some fumbles unrelated to Nichols compounding the issue.

Im not piling on... but the first and last INTs by Nichols were game killers - the other fumbles were really shitty but the D bailed us out

Both Nichols airballs put us down by two scores - changed the way the game was called...

[17to85]

5 minutes ago, Floyd said:

Im not piling on... but the first and last INTs by Nichols were game killers - the other fumbles were really shitty but the D bailed us out

Both Nichols airballs put us down by two scores - changed the way the game was called...

Yes but the fumbles on returns cost them 6 points right? Momentum killers is what they were. I ain't absolving Nichols cause you are right, those ints were massive problems too, however it wasn't all him.

[Guest J5V]

55 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Agree to an extent- Nichols does not have to be an all-star if the defence plays as well as it has for the most part this season, but as last Labour Day and Friday showed, Nichols can throw the game away all by himself.

In the banjo bowl it could be argued that Nichols was injured. What happened against Hamilton happened to the healthy, lighter, in shape and at the top of his game Nichols. 

[Booch]

Lapos game plan was totally the problem.. he always overthinks things..tries to be one up on people when it's not needed and everytime we suffer for it...you cant expect a team that plays a certain way to switch totally over to something different and not expect errors.. hiccups.. flaws

He needs to just go with what's working..add wrinkles to it until teams prove they can beat it..then work different philosophies in.

That's always been an issue with him

[Floyd]

Basically...

if Nichols doesn't float his passes on all but one drive, we win or if Nelson is returning and we get decent field position/no fumbles, we win

...no one would be talking about Lapo's one dimensional game planning

 

[17to85]

1 hour ago, Floyd said:

Basically...

if Nichols doesn't float his passes on all but one drive, we win or if Nelson is returning and we get decent field position/no fumbles, we win

...no one would be talking about Lapo's one dimensional game planning

 

I would cause to not come out and pound the ball against a poor run defense, given that doing just that is this team's strength is just outright stupidity. Especially when the other team loses their starting qb!

[Goalie]

13 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I would cause to not come out and pound the ball against a poor run defense, given that doing just that is this team's strength is just outright stupidity. Especially when the other team loses their starting qb!

Especially in to the strong wind

[Floyd]

21 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I would cause to not come out and pound the ball against a poor run defense, given that doing just that is this team's strength is just outright stupidity. Especially when the other team loses their starting qb!

The first shovel pass was essentially a run play and then Nichols threw an INT and we were down two scores...  even then our attack was reasonable. 

I don't think Lapo intentional game planned to get pass happy - look at our TD drive - it was balanced.

In order of 'what killed us'... Lapo's game planning is kind of third priority after Nichols INTs and our crappy return game/field position

We can't deny that Nichols was completely shattered after that last INT...  he needs a huge bounce back game against TO

 

[Bigblue204]

6 hours ago, Goalie said:

I think the game plan was the real problem. Sure Nichols had his worst game since the Banjo Bowl but the fact we only ran 12 times when we were down by like 14 with 3.5 quarters left didnt help. 

I wonder what the thought process was to throw 50 times against a team who is last or 2nd last against the run went like.. 

Osh: Hamilton sucks against the run

Lapo: noted, but lets not run and throw it all game

Osh: there is supposed to be gale force winds tho 

Lapo: lets beat them with the passing game tho. 

Lapo does this often. Like at least once a year. Where he seems to think "(Insert team that's bad against the run) is expecting us to run it down their throats, soooo we'll come out throwing!!"

There was a home game against BC a few years ago were something similar happened. BC was awful (surprise surprise!) against the run, it was late in the year and a cold day. Bombers being the hard nosed team they were didn't run the ball until 2nd ******* quarter (or at least well into the game). The people around me were cheering and high fiving me after the 1st run cause I was screaming at Lapo to run the ball. BC was a soft indoor team that couldnt stop the run, playing in the cold!!! ******* run it!!! God, still pisses me off lol.

[Bigblue204]

12 minutes ago, Floyd said:

The first shovel pass was essentially a run play and then Nichols threw an INT and we were down two scores...  even then our attack was reasonable. 

I don't think Lapo intentional game planned to get pass happy - look at our TD drive - it was balanced.

In order of 'what killed us'... Lapo's game planning is kind of third priority after Nichols INTs and our crappy return game/field position

We can't deny that Nichols was completely shattered after that last INT...  he needs a huge bounce back game against TO

 

This is a fair point. But the lack of running was still annoying.

[17to85]

15 minutes ago, Floyd said:

The first shovel pass was essentially a run play and then Nichols threw an INT and we were down two scores...  even then our attack was reasonable. 

I don't think Lapo intentional game planned to get pass happy - look at our TD drive - it was balanced.

In order of 'what killed us'... Lapo's game planning is kind of third priority after Nichols INTs and our crappy return game/field position

We can't deny that Nichols was completely shattered after that last INT...  he needs a huge bounce back game against TO

 

Essentially a run play, but you know what else is a run play? Handing the ball off and taking that one other element that can fail out of the equation. Hand off to Harris up the gut and maybe we aren't in a situation where it's 2nd and 10 throwing.

[Mark F]

speaking of giving players time to recover, they have a good backup Canadian running back who has shown some power, speed and moves, when given a chance.

And he's "fresh"

Whether he likes it or not, Andrew could use a break now and then.

To me, he actually did look a bit slow in that game. ie, tired.

Save him a bit for post season.

thanks.

Edited July 29, 2019 by Mark F

[Floyd]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Essentially a run play, but you know what else is a run play? Handing the ball off and taking that one other element that can fail out of the equation. Hand off to Harris up the gut and maybe we aren't in a situation where it's 2nd and 10 throwing.

Now you're bringing back memories of Lapo/Barresi constantly calling running plays up the gut and QB draws from 2011...  no thanks, we've been down that road.

I'll stick with the misdirection - screens, sweeps, shovels - that's what works in the CFL.

[Atomic]

Lapo's offensive scheme is great, it has evolved to a point where, in my opinion, it is the toughest offence to defend against in the league. The run game is outstanding.

The problem is still playcalling and it always has been, even back in 2010. I don't think he is going to change now.

[Noeller]

3 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Lapo's offensive scheme is great, it has evolved to a point where, in my opinion, it is the toughest offence to defend against in the league. The run game is outstanding.

The problem is still playcalling and it always has been, even back in 2010. I don't think he is going to change now.

oh it goes a lot farther back than that...