GDT-Stumps @ Bombers

[Mike]

Just here to make my weekly “Matt Nichols is absolutely atrocious” post

[ddanger]

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

Hate to think where the Bombers would be without #33

I think I might know.....

[Fatty Liver]

Just now, Doublezero said:

We are 6-2! Could be 8-0. Second time this year a Bombers win leaves me feeling more than a tad uneasy.

This game showed that the team has grit, glory hallelujah.  They defeated Calgary and it wasn't won on luck.

[Guest J5V]

1 minute ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

This game showed that the team has grit, glory hallelujah.  They defeated Calgary and it wasn't won on luck.

Um, OK.

[ddanger]

1 hour ago, Goalie said:

 

Strev comes in and secures the game cuz they dont trust Matt to do it. 

I disagree. IMO we finally did something unpredictable...we put in our running qb. Football is a team game, and they have to work together to make it happen. Putting in Streveler created confusion, and diverted a portion of their attention away from Harris. I've been bashing LaPo repeatedly, and now I get to praise him.

[17to85]

you know what, Nichols was OK tonight. He hardly saw the field in the first half because the returners took it too the house or fumbled and the D was complete **** letting the stamps move the length of the field. 

Yeah the throw to Wolitarsky on 2nd down last in the game was a bad throw, but one throw doesn't decide his game. He hit Wolitarsky deep in the endzone that was called no catch and hit matthews deep on a nice throw that was dropped and his stats look a hell of a lot better. 

The problem in this game was entirely the super soft defense we saw at times and the completely horrendous display of tackling. 

but they won and **** the stampeders. 

[17to85]

I also want to add that the reffing was complete one sided horse crap tonight. 

[M.O.A.B.]

10 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I also want to add that the reffing was complete one sided horse crap tonight. 

agree. lots of holding not called against Cgy

[rebusrankin]

Lapo did call a really conservative offensive game. Having said that though, Nichols didn't play well and you have to be concerned by his play.

[Doublezero]

The play I hate is handoff to Demski up the gut. It's been called maybe 10 times in the first 8 games. But he gets jammed up every time. 2 yards. Hurts my head.

 

[17to85]

Just now, Doublezero said:

The play I hate is handoff to Demski up the gut. It's been called maybe 10 times in the first 8 games. But he gets jammed up every time. 2 yards. Hurts my head.

 

#LapoProblems

[AKAChip]

The Demski run annoyed me too. Demski is significantly worse up the gut than Harris. I can understand giving him a carry or two every couple of games on a sweep or even a counter but there’s no benefit to the element of surprise when you run him up the gut instead of Harris because he goes down so easily. The D doesn’t even need to be prepared for it because you get one hand on him and he’s on the ground. Just nonsensical from Lapo. 

[Sard]

2 hours ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

I’ve noticed terrible spots for Winnipeg at least three or four times, and favourable spots for Calgary on more than one occasion. This is brutal. Way to go Medlock for preserving the drive with points at least, but wow. 

At the game, I commented on that as well.  There were about 4 or 5 spots that were a good half yard short of where I thought forward progress was.

[Fatty Liver]

27 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

The Demski run annoyed me too. Demski is significantly worse up the gut than Harris. I can understand giving him a carry or two every couple of games on a sweep or even a counter but there’s no benefit to the element of surprise when you run him up the gut instead of Harris because he goes down so easily. The D doesn’t even need to be prepared for it because you get one hand on him and he’s on the ground. Just nonsensical from Lapo. 

Substitute Flanders a real R.B., for Demski and the play works brilliantly.   There was a  trade-off when they made that switch, but since they aren't making much use of Demski's receiving ability, the payoff has not been fully realized.

[AKAChip]

Just now, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Substitute Flanders a real R.B., for Demski and the play works brilliantly.   There was a  trade-off when they made that switch, but since they aren't making much use of Demski's receiving ability, the payoff has not been fully realized.

Augustine is a real RB but it destroys the element of surprise when it’s a RB running that play and not a receiver. Demski is what he is. He can make splash plays but he’s inconsistent and struggles when not in open space. Even then , running him up the gut it a recipe for failure. 

[do or die]

Some pretty strange play calls and overall timid approach on O. Terrible execution on a lot of 2nd down plays.   Need far more killer instinct with leads.  We got away with it tonight

[Brandon]

I like Demski as a receiver... not so much as a rb... Augustine is slick and I hope he can get more carries in the future in a game where we have a massive lead. 

[Sard]

Watching the game again after the fact, the Illegal Contact call with about 4 minutes left was utter bulls#!t.  Sayles was standing there and the receiver ran right into him.  That has Dickenson written all over it.  It was plays like that where he went fishing with his challenges that made the league change it to only allow 1 challenge.  He won them almost every time, but it was the receivers causing the contact every time.  The QB barely glanced in that direction and never had any intention of throwing there.  That play pisses me off because if it was called properly, the D had the stop that they needed and the end of the game is far less stressful.

[Fatty Liver]

1 minute ago, Sard said:

Watching the game again after the fact, the Illegal Contact call with about 4 minutes left was utter bulls#!t.  Sayles was standing there and the receiver ran right into him.  That has Dickenson written all over it.  It was plays like that where he went fishing with his challenges that made the league change it to only allow 1 challenge.  He won them almost every time, but it was the receivers causing the contact every time.  The QB barely glanced in that direction and never had any intention of throwing there.  That play pisses me off because if it was called properly, the D had the stop that they needed and the end of the game is far less stressful.

I thought the league made the decision when they changed the rules that if the play was on the other side of the field and had no impact on the play they were not going to call it.  Utter bullshit.

[jazzsax]

4 hours ago, BBRT said:

How do you figure that? Maybe Calgary D does not come out for the second half?  Would be nice but not something I would hang my hat on that's for sure.

It's a running joke that matt can't get 300 yards. You should be able to sense the sarcasm...

[Sard]

1 minute ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I thought the league made the decision when they changed the rules that if the play was on the other side of the field and had no impact on the play they were not going to call it.  Utter bullshit.

That's why Dickenson has the QB glance in that direction before turning to throw to the other side of the field.  The argument then is that because of the contact, the QB had to look the other way so it did technically affect the play.  You could see that he never had any intention of throwing in that direction, but it creates the argument for the penalty.  It's total crap and a cheap play by Dickenson.

I've always respected how O'Shea uses technicallities in the rules to make exciting plays happen, but he never did it in a cheap way like Dickenson does.

[SpeedFlex27]

Missed the game tonite. I thought I pvr'd it as the Shaw Cable Tv listings said CFL: Calgary @ Winnipeg 6pm (MDT). then when I get home about 8:30 pm it said CFL Pre Game Show 6-7 pm & the recording stopped. Like WTF??? I don't know if that was Shaw or TSN. Anyway, I was lucky enough to see the last two minutes of the game.  Not happy.

[Bigblue204]

10 hours ago, O2L said:

What is our O supposed to do when they have two less possessions thanks to two great punt return TDs, a fumbled punt return, and Calgary had a seven minute drive? Two of our, what, four maybe? possessions have resulted in field goals and one should’ve been a touchdown on a perfect pass if not for the idiot refs. They’ve moved the ball well, only two bad plays, neither of which were Nichols’ fault: the blindside sack untouched and the Harris untouched hit on second and two. Handing it to Harris on that play is what EVERYONE here would want, the lack of a block isn’t Nichols or Lapos fault. Calgary has given up ONE play over 30 yards this season, so yeah, throwing deep balls probably isn’t the smartest move.

nichols hasn’t been good most of the year. Lapo has made some questionable calls this year. Our offence has struggled moving the ball at times this year. NONE of those things have been true today.

Give your damn heads a shake people. Jesus Christ this place is volatile and idiotic sometimes. 

Post of the month candidate 

[Bigblue204]

9 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

If we win.... we do not fukcing deserve it at all

Maybe you didnt. But the Bombers absolutely did.

[Bigblue204]

The general lack of football IQ in this city/forum has dropped in recent times. I cant believe how many people think Streveler going in was due to Nichols play and not the situation in the game. They did it last year too fyi. With Streveler back there, they now have 4 legitimate options out of the back field. While trying to kill the clock....but yeah I'm sure its cause they dont trust Nichols lololololololol