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

[SpeedFlex27]

1 minute ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

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 

Stats can be interpreted in many ways. Against the Argos & Als when we needed just a single first down to seal the victories in each game we couldn't do it. All those stats meant nothing, I'm afraid. 

[Booch]

13 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. 

Hardly smoke and mirrors...we lead CFL in total touchdowns at 45...next best team has 39

Of the 45...37 are scored on offence...with 8 from Def and ST

The second best scoring team (HAM) has scored 39 touchdowns...33 from their offence and 6 from Def and ST

So by your logic Hamilton is all smoke and mirrors too...

Calgary also...34 total touchdowns...but 6 of which came from ST and DEF....didn't realize there was a plethora of smoke and mirror teams at top of the leagues standings

Last time i played...and checked.... ST and Defense were a big part of the team and vital in wins..being it scoring themselves, or preventing scores..of which we lead the league in least TD's given up as well as being tied for first with total points allowed...is that smoke and mirrors too?

We have had a couple utterly pathetic brain farts, wedged between for what is the most part some pretty dominating football over all, and that was with missing anywhere from 3 to 7 starters along the way for the most part...Fool me once shame on..fool me twice shame on me....I highly doubt this team gets to a fool me three times scenario...can't see that happening

I also don't include the Sask last drive win in the T.O and MTL class of crap...that was a different situation and sometimes that happens...the second game against them was proof of who truly is the better team

Edited September 26, 2019 by Booch

[TrueBlue4ever]

8 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Stats can be interpreted in many ways. Against the Argos & Als when we needed just a single first down to seal the victories in each game we couldn't do it. All those stats meant nothing, I'm afraid. 

And when we needed a convert to avoid a one point loss, Medlock did not come through. So in that one particular scenario, his previous 100% conversion rate meant nothing too, I guess. If you want to cherry-pick an exact scenario to counter the overall trend, you are going to find a way to do that and scapegoat someone. When we needed Harris not to fumble on the 5 yard line in Toronto and get us up 27-0, he did not come through. When we needed Streveler to protect the ball in the last minute of the half and not give the Als any momentum down by 24, he gets baited and throws a pick. When we needed our defence to come up with one single stop, we gave up a late long TD drive to lose the game on 3 separate occasions. When we needed to play a simple prevent with a minute left, our secondary blows a coverage and gives up a 60 yard bomb. The list goes on and on. The problem I have is the absolutism of posters that "LaPo ALWAYS does this" or "he has always held back our players" when overall, this offence is a more well-oiled machine than pretty much all of the other teams over the long haul. The objective numbers and the team's record supports that this team is a lot more successful than not, but I know people on both sides will see what they want to see to justify their own biased opinion. I just try to offer some objective data to bolster my position that it isn't only LaPo's schemes that cost us that game, and maybe had something to do with execution or personnel mistakes as well. If my interpretations of raw data are wrong, tell me how they are wrong, don't just offer up the "well you can interpret stats many ways so I reject them without any counteranalysis and will just revert to my entrenched position that he is the reason we lost and will always lose, and nothing else" which was the dominant talking point after the loss.

We will agree to disagree.

[Booch]

8 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Stats can be interpreted in many ways. Against the Argos & Als when we needed just a single first down to seal the victories in each game we couldn't do it. All those stats meant nothing, I'm afraid. 

you can't cherry pick a specific drive out of a game, or a specific stat and ignore the whole body of work....especially in football...

[NorthernSkunk]

Well I feel better about the rest of the season after reading the three posts above mine.  Go Bombers.....I hope they add to all them good stats Friday night.

[TrueBlue4ever]

Me too. Especially that stat about 9 wins and first place in the division. Unless you'd rather have Edmonton's dominant offence and defence and their 6-7 record.

[do or die]

Problem is making needed adjustments on both sides of the ball, later in games.   We have seen this even in games we have won.   Not just this year either......there is a pattern, here.   You can also throw in some playoff games, as well.

[GCn20]

18 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

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.

For sure. We don't have a long play clock to be audibling constantly.

[GCn20]

There is nothing smoke an mirrors about our club this year. We have a well earned 9-4 record despite not having our starting QB for the past month.