Call it what you want … you need to move on from Collaros

[17to85]

5 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

That's weird because we ranked 2nd overall in sacks and QB pressures, and tops in the league in passing yardage against. Your argument does not hold up to the stats.

Obtuse....not at all. Was roster management a problem in our defensive decimation of BC in the WF? What was different that game do you suppose? Was it in 14 out of 18 games this year. No. Obtuse...you are the one being obtuse by measuring roster management impact solely on 5 out of 20 games. Look at the whole damn picture before you call me obtuse. Our defence led the league all year in just about every meaningful category despite the roster management. So if it was that problematic...I'm just not sure where that showed up.

Bc who didn't try and run the ball? Bc who we used a **** ton of linebackers moving around and rotating around rather than standard defensive linemen? 

Not sure exactly what your point is... except to maybe suggest that this team can't go back to back weeks anymore at a high level without a bye in there...

You seem ok being a good regular season team. You seem ok with the team aging and losing something year after year. These issues have been showing up and affecting the level of play. To stick your head in the sand and ignore them is just quite something.  If you aren't getting better you're getting worse. 

[GCn20]

8 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Ummm everyone... guys, especially guys on the older side of things wear down as a game goes on.  You rotate and keep guys fresh you can keep your level high where as the offensive line isn't rotating players and will be the ones with less in the tank by the end. 

Are you being deliberately obtuse here or what? Cause some of the things you are saying are pants on head ********.

Please tell me where you saw any of our guys out of gas in the GC. I didn't see it and I watched the game 4 times. High motor right till the end is what I saw. You can go back and look and if you see one guy with his hands on his hips or showing signs of fatigue let me know and I will rewatch it for a 5th time.

[17to85]

Sometimes it's not sucking wind, sometimes it's half a step behind the play.

[Noeller]

Just now, GCn20 said:

Please tell me where you saw any of our guys out of gas in the GC. I didn't see it and I watched the game 4 times. High motor right till the end is what I saw. You can go back and look and if you see one guy with his hands on his hips or showing signs of fatigue let me know and I will rewatch it for a 5th time.

the final TD given up was because the defense was gassed and/or injured...... I am really not sure what you're watching. I'm not even fully on Booch's end of things, but you are so far gone on the OTHER end of it, it's crazy. 

[17to85]

And that's the thing, absolutely no one has ever been trying to run oshea out of town. Just wanting the team to not play the game on hard mode when they don't have to.

[GCn20]

Just now, 17to85 said:

Bc who didn't try and run the ball? Bc who we used a **** ton of linebackers moving around and rotating around rather than standard defensive linemen? 

Not sure exactly what your point is... except to maybe suggest that this team can't go back to back weeks anymore at a high level without a bye in there...

You seem ok being a good regular season team. You seem ok with the team aging and losing something year after year. These issues have been showing up and affecting the level of play. To stick your head in the sand and ignore them is just quite something.  If you aren't getting better you're getting worse. 

You seem OK with our QB and running back turning the ball over 3x in the red zone, you seem OK with our coordinators calling an atrocious game. Sounds pretty frikken stupid right....I am not ok with us aging out. I just have seen no proof of that happening yet, I haven't seen us losing anything year to year either. Our last 2 years we have been pretty dominant imo.

[SpeedFlex27]

8 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

That's weird because we ranked 2nd overall in sacks and QB pressures, and tops in the league in passing yardage against. Your argument does not hold up to the stats.

 

I don't know what defense you watched but we played soft zone all year. In the GC when we needed a stop in the worst possible way we didn't get it. We played passive in the secondary. We got no push on the opposing qbs we played. There's no comaparison to the level we played in 2021 compared to the last 2 seasons. Stats can be interpreted in many ways. One of the many reasons we led in defensive stats is our offense. We;d grind out wins with 13 play drives. Defense wasn't ewven on the field as the offense was taking care of business. Our O was hampered by playing two injured receivers who never should have seen the field

[GCn20]

1 minute ago, 17to85 said:

And that's the thing, absolutely no one has ever been trying to run oshea out of town. Just wanting the team to not play the game on hard mode when they don't have to.

Then you haven't read every post. There were people on here suggesting that Walters either dictates roster usage to MOS or fire him. 

[SpeedFlex27]

1 minute ago, GCn20 said:

Then you haven't read every post. There were people on here suggesting that Walters either dictates roster usage to MOS or fire him. 

O'Shea needs to be saved from himself. 

[GCn20]

Just now, SpeedFlex27 said:

I don't know what defense you watched but we played soft zone all year. In the GC when we needed a stop in the worst possible way we didn't get it. We played passive in the secondary. We got no push on the opposing qbs we played. There's no comaparison to the level we played in 2021 compared to the last 2 seasons. Stats can be interpreted in many ways. One of the many reasons we led in defensive stats is our offense. We;d grind out wins with 13 play drives. Defense wasn't ewven on the field as the offense was taking care of business. Our O was hampered by playing two injured receivers who never should have seen the field

Our O basically stopped using Brady in the 2nd half, and we had 3 drives into the red zone resulting in ZERO points. That's basically what lost us this game. BC was in max protection for most of the game and we were still dialling up blitzes. Hall and Buck were outcoached.

2 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

O'Shea needs to be saved from himself. 

LMAO.

7 minutes ago, Noeller said:

the final TD given up was because the defense was gassed and/or injured...... I am really not sure what you're watching. I'm not even fully on Booch's end of things, but you are so far gone on the OTHER end of it, it's crazy. 

I will give you the same challenge as SpeedFlex. Show me one instance, one indicator in the footage that shows our defence being gassed. I've watched it 4x and do not see any indication of it. In fact I was very impressed with the motor of Jeffcoat and Jefferson still at the end.

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, JCon said:

FACT: We won the GC with Lapo as OC, so if Buck leaves, we should bring him back. 

 

 

(I'll just watch the heads explode from here)

Makes sense that LaPo might be the first person Buck calls, if he doesn't want to be the OC.  If LaPo has any sense of self-preservation left, he chooses the Bomber OC job over the Riders.

[Sard]

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

That's not grinding tho. That's doing your job. If you are going 2 and out as you should, then your defence is fresh as a daisy all game long without needing a huge rotation and roster management is a moot point. That's what I'm getting at. The games we lost this year is because of one of two reasons, our offence was going 2 and out, and our defence was allowing long drives. Sometimes it was both. Did not having fresh bodies complicate things...yea....I have never suggested it didn't however only after we shat the bed.

You're kindof arguing your own point.  Because of roster management, ie. not having the best possible guys out there or on the roster to rotate in, they weren't able to get the 2 and outs earlier in the game and were worn out by the end.

The argument has always been that the roster management would cost us some games... as you point out in a later post, 5 out of 20 games sounds about right.

[Super Duper Negatron]

27 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said:

Makes sense that LaPo might be the first person Buck calls, if he doesn't want to be the OC.  If LaPo has any sense of self-preservation left, he chooses the Bomber OC job over the Riders.

Buck, Lapo and Dru Brown leading the Riders to a Grey Cup would almost be hilarious.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

You seem OK with our QB and running back turning the ball over 3x in the red zone, you seem OK with our coordinators calling an atrocious game. Sounds pretty frikken stupid right....I am not ok with us aging out. I just have seen no proof of that happening yet, I haven't seen us losing anything year to year either. Our last 2 years we have been pretty dominant imo.

Actually if you've paid attention I've been on the move on from collaros wagon too, and I've got plenty of criticism for the coordinators and their game plan... you can lose for a variety of reasons you know, and one of the most significant reasons was the piss poor roster usage in the Grey Cup game along with a myriad of other issues.

You don't think that the inconsistencies that are showing up in this team ate age related? It's not like guys just all of a sudden  fall off a cliff. It's a process that takes a while for them to be totally gone and it's happening right before our eyes whether you want to admit it or not. Kyle walters based on his comments seems to see it thankfully.

[Booch]

1 hour ago, Sard said:

You grind out a win on defence by constantly forcing 2 and outs for the offence to come back on the field.

and smothering the life out of an offence, and constantly putting a QB on his hiney

 

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

That's not grinding tho. That's doing your job. If you are going 2 and out as you should, then your defence is fresh as a daisy all game long without needing a huge rotation and roster management is a moot point. That's what I'm getting at. The games we lost this year is because of one of two reasons, our offence was going 2 and out, and our defence was allowing long drives. Sometimes it was both. Did not having fresh bodies complicate things...yea....I have never suggested it didn't however only after we shat the bed.

and you cant do a proper job undermanned, or with poor choice in manpower

 

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

If we improve the Front 7 just watch how much better the Back 5 play. Right now, the Front 7 isn't good enough. 

history has shown that...when we decided to "try a new front"...Right after we traded away Wilcott's and dumped Mack...we havnt been the same.....and even then we were not like we were as we hadnt really replaced Stove/Nevis....and Sayles and lost Kongbo and Hansen....

 

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

That's weird because we ranked 2nd overall in sacks and QB pressures, and tops in the league in passing yardage against. Your argument does not hold up to the stats.

Obtuse....not at all. Was roster management a problem in our defensive decimation of BC in the WF? What was different that game do you suppose? Was it in 14 out of 18 games this year. No. Obtuse...you are the one being obtuse by measuring roster management impact solely on 5 out of 20 games. Look at the whole damn picture before you call me obtuse. Our defence led the league all year in just about every meaningful category despite the roster management. So if it was that problematic...I'm just not sure where that showed up. Look, I'm not defending the roster management quirks of MOS. I'd love to see him change that. However, I'm not ready to run him out of town with a pitch fork either. It's odd roster usage but minimally damaging imo and it is being vastly oversold here as some kind of huge problem.

stats can be misleading on various levels....but was obvious in many games we lacked upfront pressure and run stopping ability...especially with a mobile QB because we had a gassed front 7....Or a few guys in that front 7 that were basically just place fillers

[SpeedFlex27]

This conversation...

[GCn20]

13 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

This conversation...

I agree. I have my opinion others have theirs and I don't think anyone is convincing anyone else of anything at this point.

[Stickem]

14 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

This conversation...

Sometimes there is non-so blind as those who will not see.....I never liked apologists for inadequacy and I believe we have some in our midst

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, Stickem said:

Sometimes there is non-so blind as those who will not see.....I never liked apologists for inadequacy and I believe we have some in our midst

Yes, I believe we might. I don't buy into the players were tired or letting them off the hook for mental errors. Games are won and lost by player performance and unless the time of possession becomes extremely lopsided fatigue is a BS excuse. Plain and simple.

Edited November 30, 2023 by GCn20

[17to85]

9 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Games are won and lost by player performance and unless the time of possession becomes extremely lopsided fatigue is a BS excuse.

It's a game of inches, you are viewing fatigue as being too tired to get out there... it can be as simple as that one step slower. Fact is our star players are on the wrong side of 30 and the best this D played was with heavy rotation on the defensive line. Fatigue is absolutely a factor. I don't know what more evidence you need to see. 

[MOBomberFan]

Our players didn't suddenly turn old and tired when they landed in HAM, yet virtually the same roster of old tired players with limited rotation put BCs season to bed with little to no sign of fatigue a week before. Our redzone turnovers were incredibly costly and it's a big stretch to blame them on fatigue. Our stars failed to execute all at once. So many points left on the field.

[17to85]

17 minutes ago, MOBomberFan said:

Our players didn't suddenly turn old and tired when they landed in HAM, yet virtually the same roster of old tired players with limited rotation put BCs season to bed with little to no sign of fatigue a week before. Our redzone turnovers were incredibly costly and it's a big stretch to blame them on fatigue. Our stars failed to execute all at once. So many points left on the field.

They did have a bye week before playing BC...

[SpeedFlex27]

42 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

It's a game of inches, you are viewing fatigue as being too tired to get out there... it can be as simple as that one step slower. Fact is our star players are on the wrong side of 30 and the best this D played was with heavy rotation on the defensive line. Fatigue is absolutely a factor. I don't know what more evidence you need to see. 

Even Walters is acknowledging that (age) is becoming an issue with them being more expensive as well as injury issues & may overrule Osh on some players by not re-signing them. That will free up money for some new blood as well as Oliveira & Schoen. It's freaking time to shake up the core. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by SpeedFlex27

[GCn20]

On 2023-11-30 at 12:39 PM, SpeedFlex27 said:

Even Walters is acknowledging that (age) is becoming an issue with them being more expensive as well as injury issues & may overrule Osh on some players by not re-signing them. That will free up money for some new blood as well as Oliveira & Schoen. It's freaking time to shake up the core. 

I absolutely agree that age of some players needs to be looked at this offseason. My point was that I thought we got another darn good year from almost all our aging players this past year, not that we should count on that again.

[SpeedFlex27]

3 hours ago, GCn20 said:

I absolutely agree that age of some players needs to be looked at this offseason. My point was that I thought we got another darn good year from almost all our aging players this past year, not that we should count on that again.

Defensive schemes did us in not age.