Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

[Dr Zaius]

The season comes down to the Calgary and Sask match ups anyway. 

I ain't shook.

[17to85]

2 minutes ago, MC said:

The Bombers lost a non-conference away game.  It happens.  They are in first place and have their fates in their hands.  They play Sask once and Calgary twice.  The season is not quite over yet.

They have blown 2 massive leads and had 3 games where they gave up late scoring drives to lose. That is a concern because they could have been running away with the division but these recurring problems have prevented it. That is a concern.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

9 minutes ago, MC said:

The season is not quite over yet.

BLM is alive and well.

[Deiter Fan]

7 hours ago, gcn11 said:

Our sun will have burnt out long before that.

Who's to say by that point our descendants will still be living in this solar system?

[johnzo]

On 2019-09-23 at 2:39 PM, Deiter Fan said:

I simply may not have noticed but I'll be damned if I can remember the last time a Bomber QB called an audible. I do recall other teams QBs doing it but for the life of me I can't remember Matt or Chris doing it.

I remember back in 2010 the Fabulous Blue Bomber Show was interviewing Jyles and they asked him a question about audibles, and he said something like "we don't ever call audibles, there's reads for me on every play no matter what the defence."

Maybe I heard that wrong, but would that even be a thing, an offence that has no audible plays designated?

[Deiter Fan]

44 minutes ago, johnzo said:

I remember back in 2010 the Fabulous Blue Bomber Show was interviewing Jyles and they asked him a question about audibles, and he said something like "we don't ever call audibles, there's reads for me on every play no matter what the defence."

Maybe I heard that wrong, but would that even be a thing, an offence that has no audible plays designated?

Hmmm...interesting. Thanks for sharing that.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Deiter Fan

[trueBlue83]

2 minutes ago, Deiter Fan said:

Hmmm...interesting. Thanks for sharing that.

I've always wondered why Nichols would never call an audible at the line, even when it was obvious a blitz was coming... run it up the gut anyways.

 

[Deiter Fan]

26 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said:

I've always wondered why Nichols would never call an audible at the line, even when it was obvious a blitz was coming... run it up the gut anyways.

 

So it's not me just being unaware...you haven't been noticing any audibles either. Good to know.

[GCn20]

Matt Nichols audibles on occasion, but I have not seen Streveler do so.

[MC]

13 hours ago, johnzo said:

I remember back in 2010 the Fabulous Blue Bomber Show was interviewing Jyles and they asked him a question about audibles, and he said something like "we don't ever call audibles, there's reads for me on every play no matter what the defence."

Maybe I heard that wrong, but would that even be a thing, an offence that has no audible plays designated?

Sure, most plays have multiple reads that can lead to several different routes being run or result in different progressions.  For instance, any receiver may have three or more route options depending on whether there how the DB is shading or whether the safety is sitting high or moves up.  If the QB and the receiver get one of those reads wrong, then it looks like the QB has a bad throw, takes a sack when he shouldn't, or takes the checkdown.  The QB knows that he doesn't have to call an audible because the defense just told him that he has another option anyway.  That is why QB's don't come into their own until they have been around for long enough to be able to process the defense.  Running QB's do better out of the gate because they just run when they can't process what is happening. That will only go so far though.  Sooner or later, he has to learn to make plays from the pocket.

[TrueBlue4ever]

23 hours ago, 17to85 said:

They have blown 2 massive leads and had 3 games where they gave up late scoring drives to lose. That is a concern because they could have been running away with the division but these recurring problems have prevented it. That is a concern.

Calgary has done the exact same thing this year, twice at home. Blew a 15 point lead against Ottawa, gave up a late TD to lose. Had a 14 point lead on Hamilton and lost, gave up a late TD there. Up 11 with under 2 minutes against Montreal, gave up a 96 TD yard drive in 51 seconds, then a 2 point convert, then an onside kick, then 2 TDs in overtime. Anyone concerned about them right now?

And hey, concern is one thing. Demanding that we gas our coordinators immediately and not even let them fly home is another. We are 9-4 with the #1 scoring offence and #1 red zone offence in the league. Sky is not falling.

[Booch]

mere blips in what is the grand scheme of a season...other teams too have had gaffs...that being said, no other team has shown the sheer domination during games .for extended periods like Winnipeg has, and some of those early games where we were basically over at halftime, and we coasted breeded a bit of complacency...with players and coaches...figuring we just had to show up for the last bit of a game and play safe and we would win...Toronto game showed different...Sask labour day one was basically 2 minutes of a combination of things so I'm not grouping that into the T.O and MTL collapses.

This team learned a lesson in T,O...had it hammered home in MTL...from a mindset of a former player, that WON'T happen again. Sometimes you need a few slaps upside the head to get a point across to someone....these were our slaps....And I am gonna go on record now saying we close out going 4-1...and sit and wait for whover comes outta the slugfest of the WSF

[17to85]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

mere blips in what is the grand scheme of a season...other teams too have had gaffs...that being said, no other team has shown the sheer domination during games .for extended periods like Winnipeg has, and some of those early games where we were basically over at halftime, and we coasted breeded a bit of complacency...with players and coaches...figuring we just had to show up for the last bit of a game and play safe and we would win...Toronto game showed different...Sask labour day one was basically 2 minutes of a combination of things so I'm not grouping that into the T.O and MTL collapses.

This team learned a lesson in T,O...had it hammered home in MTL...from a mindset of a former player, that WON'T happen again. Sometimes you need a few slaps upside the head to get a point across to someone....these were our slaps....And I am gonna go on record now saying we close out going 4-1...and sit and wait for whover comes outta the slugfest of the WSF

I don't question the players, but these coordinators seem to enjoy getting slapped like this often. I mean how long does it take for Lapo to learn that his play not to lose game plan doesn't do anything but lose when the D doesn't generate a bunch of turnovers and points for the team?

[JuranBoldenRules]

17 hours ago, johnzo said:

I remember back in 2010 the Fabulous Blue Bomber Show was interviewing Jyles and they asked him a question about audibles, and he said something like "we don't ever call audibles, there's reads for me on every play no matter what the defence."

Maybe I heard that wrong, but would that be a thing, an offence that has no audible plays designated?

Audibles are pretty rare in this era of Canadian football.  Most plays would have a designated hot route and a read option based on the defensive alignment.  Might see the odd one if a team is in tempo.

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

mere blips in what is the grand scheme of a season...other teams too have had gaffs...that being said, no other team has shown the sheer domination during games .for extended periods like Winnipeg has, and some of those early games where we were basically over at halftime, and we coasted breeded a bit of complacency...with players and coaches...figuring we just had to show up for the last bit of a game and play safe and we would win...Toronto game showed different...Sask labour day one was basically 2 minutes of a combination of things so I'm not grouping that into the T.O and MTL collapses.

This team learned a lesson in T,O...had it hammered home in MTL...from a mindset of a former player, that WON'T happen again. Sometimes you need a few slaps upside the head to get a point across to someone....these were our slaps....And I am gonna go on record now saying we close out going 4-1...and sit and wait for whover comes outta the slugfest of the WSF

You words are herein recorded and will be used against you should the need arise.

[Booch]

3 minutes ago, Tracker said:

You words are herein recorded and will be used against you should the need arise.

i'm cool and confident with that!! lol

[do or die]

42 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I don't question the players, but these coordinators seem to enjoy getting slapped like this often. I mean how long does it take for Lapo to learn that his play not to lose game plan doesn't do anything but lose when the D doesn't generate a bunch of turnovers and points for the team?

I trust, that at this point....the Bombers can proceed without any further slaps or blows to the head.  Absolutely no excuse for it now, moving forward.....none.

[do or die]

18 minutes ago, Booch said:

i'm cool and confident with that!! lol

I'm shaken, but not stirred....

[TrueBlue4ever]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

I don't question the players, but these coordinators seem to enjoy getting slapped like this often. I mean how long does it take for Lapo to learn that his play not to lose game plan doesn't do anything but lose when the D doesn't generate a bunch of turnovers and points for the team?

Two assumptions you make are: (a) that he employs a "try not to lose game plan", and that (b) he always loses doing it. His record as an offensive co-ordinator in the CFL is 87-51-1, so he isn't losing, not by  a long shot. His team has led the league in scoring each of the last 3 years. So either his "play not to lose" game plan ISN'T "doing anything but lose", or he ISN'T employing that kind of game plan in the first place. I get that the scoring numbers drop in the second half, I just don't see that it is all on the OC turtling. It is not true that the Bombers MO is simply "run on first, short pass on second" if you actually look at the play calls. And the MO certainly is "protect the football", but that approach is applied all game, not just in the 4th quarter. AND WE ARE LARGELY WINNING WITH THIS PLAN.

I did notice this about the playcalling - the tempo certainly changes. I  the first half there is a fast pace to the snap of the ball. In the third and fourth quarters, the QB lets the 20 second clock run right down to :01 often - makes sense if you want to eat up the clock, but the defence can anticipate the snap better and the offensive line is not getting the jump on opening the lanes. That up tempo pace that keeps the defence on its heels may be something to consider, but will not chew up clock when time is the opposition's enemy.

[17to85]

Well I look at his time as head coach, when it was all his way, the only times he won was when the D carried them. If the D can't carry the day then they lose. 

[Mark H.]

4 hours ago, Booch said:

mere blips in what is the grand scheme of a season...other teams too have had gaffs...that being said, no other team has shown the sheer domination during games .for extended periods like Winnipeg has, and some of those early games where we were basically over at halftime, and we coasted breeded a bit of complacency...with players and coaches...figuring we just had to show up for the last bit of a game and play safe and we would win...Toronto game showed different...Sask labour day one was basically 2 minutes of a combination of things so I'm not grouping that into the T.O and MTL collapses.

This team learned a lesson in T,O...had it hammered home in MTL...from a mindset of a former player, that WON'T happen again. Sometimes you need a few slaps upside the head to get a point across to someone....these were our slaps....And I am gonna go on record now saying we close out going 4-1...and sit and wait for whover comes outta the slugfest of the WSF

I have been waiting for your take on this - thanks.

It probably boils down to it being a tough sport where it is hard to play all out, all the time.  If you feel you can coast your way to a win - why wouldn't you? 

[TrueBlue4ever]

57 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Well I look at his time as head coach, when it was all his way, the only times he won was when the D carried them. If the D can't carry the day then they lose. 

I was wondering how much of your opinion was shaped by the years that Jamie Barrisi was the OC, Buck Pierce was injured more often than not and we had the likes of Jyles, Goltz, Elliot, and Brink at the controls of the offense. And yeah, that D of Brown, Willis, Hunt and Turner Jr. on the D line, Lobendahn ,Bowman and Muamba  at linebacker, and Hefney, Johnson, Suber, Stewart and Washington was going to outshine the offence. And of course, since you long staked your credibility on this site defending Joe Mack and sought to justify his record by highlighting the failings of others and minimizing his errors, I can see why you would look to LaPo for any shortcomings on those teams. Take another look at his work as an OC now. I'm not saying he is blameless for any deficiencies in the offence, but he is hardly "holding back the players" and "making less with more" like the critics would say ad nauseum. He certainly isn't the only (or in my opinion the main) reason we lost that game in Montreal. This offence is designed around ball control and Andrew Harris as its feature weapon. Given the talent Harris possesses relative to the rest of the league at his position, it seems like a shrewd game plan, and it has been putting up points, winning enough games to have us on top of the division at week 15 (can't say that this late in the season since 2011 when, yes, LaPo was the coach).

I shudder to think how some on the board would have reacted to the 1984 Bombers offence, given they employed the same style of game plan to a large extent as this one (Reaves as the feature back, Clements running a methodical game that rarely went over 300 yards passing, and THAT was an offence where it was run on first down, pass on second a lot more than this one). Clements would have been run out of town for the number of slow starts and non-gaudy stats he had in most games.

[SpeedFlex27]

 

6 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

 

And hey, concern is one thing. Demanding that we gas our coordinators immediately and not even let them fly home is another. We are 9-4 with the #1 scoring offence and #1 red zone offence in the league. Sky is not falling.

Smoke & mirrors. How many of those points are from punt & kick return TDs as well as defensive plays? Our offense scores points but only when LaPo wants it to & it isn't this great well oiled machine. 

[BigBlueFanatic]

Actually I think this offense is really quite good... but like in 1/4 mile drag racing you’re not supposed to take your foot off the gas halfway down the track 🤷🏻‍♂️

[TrueBlue4ever]

5 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

 

Smoke & mirrors. How many of those points are from punt & kick return TDs as well as defensive plays? Our offense scores points but only when LaPo wants it to & it isn't this great well oiled machine. 

Bombers are the #1 scoring team on defence / special teams with 52 points, since you asked. They are also #2 in scoring offence, pass efficiency rating, trips to the red zone, time of possession, “big plays”, and passing TDS, and #1 in rushing yards and average, overall offensive TDS, red zone TD percentage, and 2nd down conversion rates. Don’t kid yourself that this is smoke and mirrors propped up by our defence and special teams