Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

[GCn20]

14 hours ago, 17to85 said:

And I can't really agree with that. There is plenty of evidence to suggest this staff can identify and give chances to talent. Stove,  all the dbs, Wilson, Sayles, etc etc. I think the guys they had in camp simply weren't good enough. Yes they have some favorites, but they didn't even keep guys on the pr... 

Cream rises to the top. Simple as that. I think it is fallacy to suggest that rookies are never given a chance. Pure fiction. We have had outstanding contributions from rookie starters over the past several seasons that have taken the place of veterans who we moved on from. People are POed at MOS for being too loyal in season but he values chemistry and it can't be understated what effect a coaches loyalty has in the dressing room either. A lot of us like to think this is a game of Madden, and if we have a young guy who is a 92 and an aging vet that is a 92 that we should go with the young guy...and that is not the right move in anything other than video game football. 

We have Eli ripening on the vine at centre, and I kind of agree that he should be the future at OC. However, if we were going to make that move it needed to happen in June not now and he wasn't quite back to being game ready yet. I am a pretty firm believer in not shaking up your OL in season any more than you have to because of injuries unless there is a very glaring problem. I don't see a problem that is that noteworthy with our OL right now. I am hopeful that Eli goes and has a great offseason, and is ready to be our OC next year.

18 hours ago, wbbfan said:

When you break down blocking schemes even zone they seem complex when you look at the whole line, but when you look at your specific assignment and rules it’s very simple and has to be so guys can quickly decide and act and make the same calls. 
Marty Costello has two ol coaching seminars on the bombers site where he goes into painstaking detail on our system, calls, assignments, what they look for and what it takes to succeed. Any one doubting Booch should watch the first 20 minutes of the first one. 
 

And no, before people say it, we aren’t decoying with those videos. Ols don’t get by on disguised reads and assignments. As long as you aren’t tipping pass or run pre snap that’s all you need. Every team knows our run plays blocking schemes and calls. 

Pretty much every team utilizes the same block schemes. There is not a ton of possible variation without getting silly.

[bearpants]

14 hours ago, JohnnyAbonny said:

For fun, what’s everyone’s knowledge level of involvement playing or being around the football? 
For myself I’m basically just a fan. I never had the frame to play the game past minor bantam (15). 
Dad played/coached HS and Junior ball.
I’ve been going to Bomber games him since I was 3, taught me a lot from a very young age about how to watch football, especially the defensive backfield. 
My expert area would be more so when it comes to the history of the game. I’m a massive history nerd on all levels, and I’d put my memory vault up against anyone in the world (besides maybe Stats Junkie) 

That alone puts you ahead of a lot of people here... including myself... I have never stepped foot on a (organized) football field... I just starting going to Bomber games as a kid and fell in love with the sport and especially the team... I've had season tickets since 2004 and can't ever imagine not supporting this team... though I'll admit there was a time around 2014 when my patience was starting to wear thin

[Fatty Liver]

Is BA injured?  On that long Cottoy TD when he stiff armed Rose, looks like BA had the angle but was trotting 3/4 speed.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1710491882222960749

On the Parker game saving tackle on Rhymes, BA clearly pulls up lame and is unable to pursue.

https://twitter.com/3DownNation/status/1710612823947001980

Did he even play in OT?

 

[Booch]

37 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said:

Is BA injured?  On that long Cottoy TD when he stiff armed Rose, looks like BA had the angle but was trotting 3/4 speed.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1710491882222960749

On the Parker game saving tackle on Rhymes, BA clearly pulls up lame and is unable to pursue.

https://twitter.com/3DownNation/status/1710612823947001980

Did he even play in OT?

 

He fine...same with Schoen..BA played as well

[TrueBlue4ever]

21 minutes ago, Booch said:

He fine...same with Schoen..BA played as well

Thank you for the updates!

[wbbfan]

22 hours ago, johnzo said:

Is this the video you're talking about?  couldn't find any such videos on bluebombers.com.

this is fascinating stuff -- I never noticed that the Bombers only ran counter plays to the left side and never to the right.

and the part at 2:25 is pretty funny.

That’s not one of them I’ll have to watch it later and dig the videos up  

 

22 hours ago, 17to85 said:

And I can't really agree with that. There is plenty of evidence to suggest this staff can identify and give chances to talent. Stove,  all the dbs, Wilson, Sayles, etc etc. I think the guys they had in camp simply weren't good enough. Yes they have some favorites, but they didn't even keep guys on the pr... 

Wilson only got a shot after a long while not really a good example. Sayles and stove got chances because of roster issues / injuries. It’s easy to assess talent and give chances to guys in a position of need. Not soo much when it’s a position where a young guy out performs a vet, or a vet is slowing down and performing at a lower level. 

[Bigblue204]

4 hours ago, Booch said:

He fine...same with Schoen..BA played as well

Schoen getting up there with the toughest players in the league.

52 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

That’s not one of them I’ll have to watch it later and dig the videos up  

 

Wilson only got a shot after a long while not really a good example. Sayles and stove got chances because of roster issues / injuries. It’s easy to assess talent and give chances to guys in a position of need. Not soo much when it’s a position where a young guy out performs a vet, or a vet is slowing down and performing at a lower level. 

If I'm not mistaken didn't Stove beat out Bryant(or another DT)  right out of camp? I don't remember him getting a start due to injuries and everyone saying he'd be the guy coming out of camp...

[Pete Catan's Ghost]

6 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Schoen getting up there with the toughest players in the league.

If I'm not mistaken didn't Stove beat out Bryant(or another DT)  right out of camp? I don't remember him getting a start due to injuries and everyone saying he'd be the guy coming out of camp...

Didn’t Stove gain playing time after Mr. Nevis signed elsewhere?

[JohnnyAbonny]

4 minutes ago, Pete Catan's Ghost said:

Didn’t Stove gain playing time after Mr. Nevis signed elsewhere?

Yeah beat out Brandin Bryant in 2019 camp. Stove was taking reps from the start, but he became the starter after Nevis went to the Argos 

Edited October 10, 2023 by JohnnyAbonny

[Booch]

2019 we ran with the Jeff's and Nevis and Thomas as starters...with Stove rotating with those 2 in the middle and Hansen and Kongbo once he was healthy off edge

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Booch

[17to85]

1 hour ago, wbbfan said:

Wilson only got a shot after a long while not really a good example. Sayles and stove got chances because of roster issues / injuries. It’s easy to assess talent and give chances to guys in a position of need. Not soo much when it’s a position where a young guy out performs a vet, or a vet is slowing down and performing at a lower level. 

The point is they identified them and kept them around for when they needed the depth. 

They've shown the ability to evaluate players. If no one was kept around after camp should we just not assume no one was good enough?

[wbbfan]

15 hours ago, 17to85 said:

The point is they identified them and kept them around for when they needed the depth. 

They've shown the ability to evaluate players. If no one was kept around after camp should we just not assume no one was good enough?

Guys aren’t identified and kept for pure talent reasons. From the marine to Schmekel to machino and soo many others. 
 I think you too quickly forget how much we’ve sucked at lber in the mafia era. Two years of biggie, one year of jsk and maybe a seasons worth of games from kyrie over 2 ish years. Yet we’ve barley kept imp lbers around. Pretty much all of last year we didn’t have one on the pr despite kyrie being hurt most of last year. 
 Look at how many ex bombers are in the league, even just at ol. Then look at how much we’ve struggled in pass pro this year. It’s not that the talent isn’t good enough. It’s almost never a pure talent problem in football. Edm ham ott ssk all have sufficient talent. Poor use of talent is the problem. 
 
Guys don’t adapt to the cfl instantly, and guys also don’t get that adaptation done by sitting on a pr getting a handful of reps a week in mostly un padded soft ass practices. You need to give guys a few regular season starts before they have had a real shot. We haven’t done that. Especially at dl, ol, and lber. 
 

The point  is we haven’t identified and developed guys at those positions. This year we’ve struggled at db where we used to do it very well too. We have positions of need now. And we’ve cut more talent at those positions than any thing. Few have gotten a chance. Bennett has gotten far more of a chance than the blue chip guys we’ve brought in this year. 

[17to85]

Bennett got a chance simply because that's a ratio decision. 

Honestly Haba was the only rookie who looked like he had a clue in preseason on defence and it's not like he was amazing, just more of an i guess he was around the ball a lot kind of thing. 

We've lost Canadian talent for a variety of reasons and I don't think their last draft was all that strong. So it means some of the NIs are weaker. Throw in some lackluster recruiting and it was just not a stellar offseason. These coaches do know how to evaluate talent.  The only quibble can be how they allocate NI vs. Import positions sometimes. 

[Booch]

5 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Guys aren’t identified and kept for pure talent reasons. From the marine to Schmekel to machino and soo many others. 
 I think you too quickly forget how much we’ve sucked at lber in the mafia era. Two years of biggie, one year of jsk and maybe a seasons worth of games from kyrie over 2 ish years. Yet we’ve barley kept imp lbers around. Pretty much all of last year we didn’t have one on the pr despite kyrie being hurt most of last year. 
 Look at how many ex bombers are in the league, even just at ol. Then look at how much we’ve struggled in pass pro this year. It’s not that the talent isn’t good enough. It’s almost never a pure talent problem in football. Edm ham ott ssk all have sufficient talent. Poor use of talent is the problem. 
 
Guys don’t adapt to the cfl instantly, and guys also don’t get that adaptation done by sitting on a pr getting a handful of reps a week in mostly un padded soft ass practices. You need to give guys a few regular season starts before they have had a real shot. We haven’t done that. Especially at dl, ol, and lber. 
 

The point  is we haven’t identified and developed guys at those positions. This year we’ve struggled at db where we used to do it very well too. We have positions of need now. And we’ve cut more talent at those positions than any thing. Few have gotten a chance. Bennett has gotten far more of a chance than the blue chip guys we’ve brought in this year. 

Truth be told...in practice all yr up in Canada...you hardly have a ability to develop and grow...let alone a chance to actually show it....sadly....it's a game of fav's, and clinging to holdovers...some warranted...many not.....Nothing that goes on in practice now benefits any new talent with reps they get and things they do...It's having the eye to see the skill set, and what it can do in games if brought in....we have suffered lately in talent we keep around, being basically a waste of space ...30% of our PR was worthy...the rest should have been continually rotated through and replaced

3 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Bennett got a chance simply because that's a ratio decision. 

Honestly Haba was the only rookie who looked like he had a clue in preseason on defence and it's not like he was amazing, just more of an i guess he was around the ball a lot kind of thing. 

We've lost Canadian talent for a variety of reasons and I don't think their last draft was all that strong. So it means some of the NIs are weaker. Throw in some lackluster recruiting and it was just not a stellar offseason. These coaches do know how to evaluate talent.  The only quibble can be how they allocate NI vs. Import positions sometimes. 

Bennett cause also we picked him with 1st pick....there were a few others, if kept would have developed, and could have been usefull during the yr here that I saw....but we sent em away, and assumed what we had was sufficient, not necessarily better....and kept some for what reason I have no clue....and some who could be usefull, and then just dumped them

[Fatty Liver]

49 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Guys aren’t identified and kept for pure talent reasons. From the marine to Schmekel to machino and soo many others. 
 I think you too quickly forget how much we’ve sucked at lber in the mafia era. Two years of biggie, one year of jsk and maybe a seasons worth of games from kyrie over 2 ish years. Yet we’ve barley kept imp lbers around. Pretty much all of last year we didn’t have one on the pr despite kyrie being hurt most of last year. 
 Look at how many ex bombers are in the league, even just at ol. Then look at how much we’ve struggled in pass pro this year. It’s not that the talent isn’t good enough. It’s almost never a pure talent problem in football. Edm ham ott ssk all have sufficient talent. Poor use of talent is the problem. 
 

You also have to account for scheme change over time, the game does not remain static and is ever evolving.  In 2019 the Bombers did not use the 2-wide option on the O-line except for short yardage, but Hamilton did.  Now they're using it quite generously for pass protection and running plays including adding Jackson on the end occasionally. 

They've also increased the blocking duties of their receivers more than any other team, on Brady's last TD run both Demski and Bailey were on the interior helping the O-line fortify a gap for him to run through.  Don't think I've ever seen that before.

[Nolby]

Went out to the garage for some devils lettuce last night, came back in to the 4th quarter of the game on tsn....I was still on the edge of my seat........for some reason.

[bearpants]

8 hours ago, Nolby said:

Went out to the garage for some devils lettuce last night, came back in to the 4th quarter of the game on tsn....I was still on the edge of my seat........for some reason.

I was standing up during overtime... watching it three days later

[Booch]

got a chance to watch the game footage....frame by frame....some posters were thinking that BC should have got the first down on that Vaj scramble before the 3rd and 1 denial...BC actual got a favorable spot as the Vaj stepped out about 3/4 yard further back than the spot they gave him before he extended his arm out at the marker....so the on field guys actually got it correct...basically amazingly enough

[TBURGESS]

22 minutes ago, Booch said:

got a chance to watch the game footage....frame by frame....some posters were thinking that BC should have got the first down on that Vaj scramble before the 3rd and 1 denial...BC actual got a favorable spot as the Vaj stepped out about 3/4 yard further back than the spot they gave him before he extended his arm out at the marker....so the on field guys actually got it correct...basically amazingly enough

Disagree. No way to see where his foot actually went out of bounds (Behind Bighill's head) on any vid that I've seen. His foot goes out of bounds somewhere between 9:41 & 9:42 of:  https://www.cfl.ca/2023/10/07/recap-winnipeg-34-bc-26/

I thought it should have been a first in real time and that we'd lost the game. The attached video shows that is should have been at least 1/2 yard closer to a first than the refs gave him, but not a first. Being as they missed the first by 3 inches or less, they'd have made the first down with a proper mark with 1:50 left on the clock @ the BC 52. That would have meant they drained at least another minute from the clock and we couldn't have stopped them. Even making zero yards, they'd be able to punt the ball on third, which they should have done due to the mark anyway, & we'd have been inside our 20 with about 45 seconds to get the tying FG. One first down and they'd have drained the clock. 

Maybe you can share a better video that shows your opinion of where the ball should have been spotted?

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Disagree. No way to see where his foot actually went out of bounds (Behind Bighill's head) on any vid that I've seen. His foot goes out of bounds somewhere between 9:41 & 9:42 of:  https://www.cfl.ca/2023/10/07/recap-winnipeg-34-bc-26/

I thought it should have been a first in real time and that we'd lost the game. The attached video shows that is should have been at least 1/2 yard closer to a first than the refs gave him, but not a first. Being as they missed the first by 3 inches or less, they'd have made the first down with a proper mark with 1:50 left on the clock @ the BC 52. That would have meant they drained at least another minute from the clock and we couldn't have stopped them. Even making zero yards, they'd be able to punt the ball on third, which they should have done due to the mark anyway, & we'd have been inside our 20 with about 45 seconds to get the tying FG. One first down and they'd have drained the clock. 

Maybe you can share a better video that shows your opinion of where the ball should have been spotted?

cause I watched all 24, not tv feed....and its right foot....outside the head of Biggie...Prob can see it on a TV feed as well

Edited October 12, 2023 by Booch

[Doublezero]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

cause I watched all 24, not tv feed....and its right foot....outside the head of Biggie...Prob can see it on a TV feed as well

Agreed. it looks on the CFL.ca highlights as if VA's foot touched the sideline just shy of the 52. And they needed to get to the 53 for the 1st down so he was a full yard short. VA said he thought he stretched and got it - but I believe the rule for ball placement is at the spot where the player steps out of bounds - not where the the ball is when the player goes out of bounds. After all, he stepped out of bounds while the ball was in his hand and still in the air. And the play is dead at the instant the players foot touches the out of bounds mark. You can stretch all the way to Saskatoon, but the ball is no longer live or in play. Someone on the other forum was saying it should be marked where the ball goes out of bounds not where the foot goes out, but I think that would be incorrect (unless we are talking about the goal line). Sometimes, if there is some doubt, the officials will give the ball carrier some benefit and mark it half way between where a knee or foot goes down and the forward point of a stretch. But in this case the sideline official was right there to see exactly where VA's foot stepped on the sideline marker. And he correctly marked it there. Great tackle by Bighill, BTW.

Edited October 12, 2023 by Doublezero

[Piggy 1]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

cause I watched all 24, not tv feed....and its right foot....outside the head of Biggie...Prob can see it on a TV feed as well

Some folks like to disagree on principle it seems. No way in H he made the 1st. Just watched it again for the 15th time.

[Booch]

9 minutes ago, Doublezero said:

Agreed. it looks on the CFL.ca highlights as if VA's foot touched the sideline just shy of the 52. And they needed to get to the 53 for the 1st down so he was a full yard short. VA said he thought he stretched and got it - but I believe the rule for ball placement is at the spot where the player steps out of bounds - not where the the ball is when the player goes out of bounds. After all, he stepped out of bounds while the ball was in his hand and still in the air. And the play is dead at the instant the players foot touches the out of bounds mark. You can stretch all the way to Saskatoon, but the ball is no longer live or in play. Someone on the other forum was saying it should be marked where the ball goes out of bounds not where the foot goes out, but I think that would be incorrect (unless we are talking about the goal line). Sometimes, if there is some doubt, the officials will give the ball carrier some benefit and mark it half way between where a knee or foot goes down and the forward point of a stretch. But in this case the sideline official was right there to see exactly where VA's foot stepped on the sideline marker. And he correctly marked it there. Great tackle by Bighill, BTW.

he clearly stepped out of bounds before he extended his arm....ball placement was pretty much bang on...if anything we got the bad spot

 

5 minutes ago, Piggy 1 said:

Some folks like to disagree on principle it seems. No way in H he made the 1st. Just watched it again for the 15th time.

yup....if u slow the speed down you can catch it too actually on the TV feed

[TBURGESS]

6 minutes ago, Doublezero said:

Agreed. it looks on the CFL.ca highlights as if VA's foot touched the sideline just shy of the 52. And they needed to get to the 53 for the 1st down so he was a full yard short. VA said he thought he stretched and got it - but I believe the rule for ball placement is at the spot where the player steps out of bounds - not where the the ball is when the player goes out of bounds. After all, he stepped out of bounds while the ball was in his hand and still in the air. And the play is dead at the instant the players foot touches the out of bounds mark. You can stretch all the way to Saskatoon, but the ball is no longer live or in play. Someone on the other forum was saying it should be marked where the ball goes out of bounds not the foot, but I think that would be incorrect (unless we are talking about the goal line). Sometimes, if there is some doubt, the officials will give the ball carrier some benefit and mark it half way between where a knee or foot goes down and the forward point of a stretch. But in this case the sideline official was right there to see exactly where VA's foot stepped on the sideline marker. And he correctly marked it there. Great tackle by Bighill, BTW.

The ball placement is where the ball is when the foot goes out, not where the foot is when the foot goes out. Example: TD's. Lots of time the knee is down in the field of play, while the ball is over the goal line. That's a TD every time. 

1 hour ago, Booch said:

cause I watched all 24, not tv feed....and its right foot....outside the head of Biggie...Prob can see it on a TV feed as well

You can't see the right foot on the TV feed. Does the all 24 have an angle that shows both the foot and ball? 

[Booch]

5 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

The ball placement is where the ball is when the foot goes out, not where the foot is when the foot goes out. Example: TD's. Lots of time the knee is down in the field of play, while the ball is over the goal line. That's a TD every time. 

You can't see the right foot on the TV feed. Does the all 24 have an angle that shows both the foot and ball? 

yes....you see foot out 1.5 yards short of the first down, and the Vaj arm yet to be extended and the ball is inside the field of play...Have a feed from the endzone, as well as from north sideline side