GCn20 Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said: yes and no. The coverage is what allowed the pressure to happen. Which is generally backwards from how it happens. Usually your Dline makes your DBs look good. That has kinda flipped with this Defence. Adams often had time to throw the ball but because the coverage was so good the pocket eventually collapsed. We were getting nice pressure on him. Were we getting coverage help absolutely. However, at the end of the day we were making life miserable for him with a 3 man front for a lot of the game. 3 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said: Disagree. They had a scheme to let Rourke rot back there by taking away his pre-snap (first) reads with multiple coverage looks and changing looks right off the snap. There was hardly any pressure. There were some coverage sacks. Pressure wasn't key to that game plan. But you can't play that scheme repeatedly and against QB's like BLM and Harris. You need to move them. Was talking about the donut against Adams. We played Rourke exactly as we should have but not the same as Adams. Against Rourke it was like we almost wanted to give him time to throw knowing he would be completely out of sync with his receivers anyway. Edited August 29 by GCn20 Bigblue204 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 2 minutes ago, GCn20 said: We were getting nice pressure on him. Were we getting coverage help absolutely. However, at the end of the day we were making life miserable for him with a 3 man front for a lot of the game. Was talking about the donut against Adams. We played Rourke exactly as we should have but not the same as Adams. Our Adams played in the game in Winnipeg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 (edited) 4 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said: Our Adams played in the game in Winnipeg. Oops, my bad....had the games reversed. However, sitting Adams against Rourke makes pretty good sense now in hind sight. I guess that's why we shouldn't over react to roster moves without knowing our teams game plan week in and week out. Pretty obvious that pressure wasn't our priority vs. Rourke and rightfully so. Rourke had one chance to beat us and that is quick hitters and we took that away as you described. Edited August 29 by GCn20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardCoreBlue Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 11 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said: Disagree. They had a scheme to let Rourke rot back there by taking away his pre-snap (first) reads with multiple coverage looks and changing looks right off the snap. There was hardly any pressure. There were some coverage sacks. Pressure wasn't key to that game plan. But you can't play that scheme repeatedly and against QB's like BLM and Harris. You need to move them. Yup get in his kitchen quick. Don't let him become comfy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 (edited) 3 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said: Yup get in his kitchen quick. Don't let him become comfy. Harris you need to hit him early then just let him spray balls all over the field when he hears the footsteps after that. Early in his career Harris would stand in and deliver, now he panics. Edited August 29 by GCn20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue204 Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 1 hour ago, GCn20 said: Harris you need to hit him early then just let him spray balls all over the field when he hears the footsteps after that. Early in his career Harris would stand in and deliver, now he panics. ditto for Bo and Zach..though Zach isnt as bad as the other 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardCoreBlue Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 7 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said: ditto for Bo and Zach..though Zach isnt as bad as the other 2 Yup that's why it would be nice if Zach could mimic in some way what Anthony Calvillo did so good and get that ball out quick to his receivers. Bigblue204, IC Khari and K-Shack 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noeller Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 Tracker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 4 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said: Yup that's why it would be nice if Zach could mimic in some way what Anthony Calvillo did so good and get that ball out quick to his receivers. He's getting better as an adjustment to our group of receivers minus Schoen. I just don't understand why basically every receiver we brought in this year was 6' 180 lbs except for a couple. Collaros loves vertical. We need catch radius guys like Lawler, Schoen, Wolitarsky style even. Noeller and HardCoreBlue 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IC Khari Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 18 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said: He's getting better as an adjustment to our group of receivers minus Schoen. I just don't understand why basically every receiver we brought in this year was 6' 180 lbs except for a couple. Collaros loves vertical. We need catch radius guys like Lawler, Schoen, Wolitarsky style even. They’re easier to find and recruit. Most of the tall fast ones with good hands are down south … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted August 29 Report Share Posted August 29 21 minutes ago, IC Khari said: They’re easier to find and recruit. Most of the tall fast ones with good hands are down south … Well I don't expect them to run a 4.4. There's tons of 6'3-6'4 guys up here. rebusrankin and Noeller 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 1 hour ago, JuranBoldenRules said: Well I don't expect them to run a 4.4. There's tons of 6'3-6'4 guys up here. Sask. has done a good job drafting receivers of those dimensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 JCon, bb1, kelownabomberfan and 8 others 2 1 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbbfan Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 2 hours ago, IC Khari said: They’re easier to find and recruit. Most of the tall fast ones with good hands are down south … Most of our big guys are pretty fringe in the speed tool. High 4.5- high 4.6. 1 hour ago, Fatty Liver said: Sask. has done a good job drafting receivers of those dimensions. The size yeah. They pretty much draft all the big WRs with no wheels. Fits their system well enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 16 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said: He's getting better as an adjustment to our group of receivers minus Schoen. I just don't understand why basically every receiver we brought in this year was 6' 180 lbs except for a couple. Collaros loves vertical. We need catch radius guys like Lawler, Schoen, Wolitarsky style even. In fairness, Wilson seems to be that type of receiver as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 2 hours ago, GCn20 said: In fairness, Wilson seems to be that type of receiver as well. He isn't. He can adjust to deep balls but generally needs a very accurate ball to have a shot. Haven't really seen him take a lot of contested balls aside from the Calgary game when he went off. He needs space. I'm talking about guys who have range and can get the ball covered or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 38 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said: He isn't. He can adjust to deep balls but generally needs a very accurate ball to have a shot. Haven't really seen him take a lot of contested balls aside from the Calgary game when he went off. He needs space. I'm talking about guys who have range and can get the ball covered or not. So who does the Riders have that qualifies as such? Big guys does not equate to winning contested balls. Lawler is average size and is one of the best in the CFL at it. You don't need to be 6'4. You need to have exceptional concentration, body control, timing, and hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 30 minutes ago, GCn20 said: So who does the Riders have that qualifies as such? Big guys does not equate to winning contested balls. Lawler is average size and is one of the best in the CFL at it. You don't need to be 6'4. You need to have exceptional concentration, body control, timing, and hands. 6'3 is not exactly average. That's above average. wbbfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 3 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said: He isn't. He can adjust to deep balls but generally needs a very accurate ball to have a shot. Haven't really seen him take a lot of contested balls aside from the Calgary game when he went off. He needs space. I'm talking about guys who have range and can get the ball covered or not. Interesting. When his signing was announced, I checked and one of his strengths was listed as fighting for the ball and winning most times. His highlights showed a lot of those types of catches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noeller Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyAbonny Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 21 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said: Well I don't expect them to run a 4.4. There's tons of 6'3-6'4 guys up here. Are there many good ones though? Especially younger? There’s 4 guys over 6’2 in the top 20 receivers this year. Coxie, McInnis, Rhymes and Shemar Bridges. Besides Bridges, they’ve all been around a while. Everyone else is in the 5’11- 6’1, 175-200lb range. There’s some NI freaks like Mardner and that kid Edmonton took in the supplemental draft, but I don’t see many really tall American receivers having a lot of success up here since the NFL PR expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.O.A.B. Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 (edited) https://www.facebook.com/reel/1930151600740856 Edited August 30 by M.O.A.B. rebusrankin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 (edited) 2 hours ago, JohnnyAbonny said: Are there many good ones though? Especially younger? There’s 4 guys over 6’2 in the top 20 receivers this year. Coxie, McInnis, Rhymes and Shemar Bridges. Besides Bridges, they’ve all been around a while. Everyone else is in the 5’11- 6’1, 175-200lb range. There’s some NI freaks like Mardner and that kid Edmonton took in the supplemental draft, but I don’t see many really tall American receivers having a lot of success up here since the NFL PR expansion. Who have been our best guys since Collaros has been here? The guys he seeks out? Adams, Lawler, Ellingson, Schoen, Wolitarsky, mix in a bit of Bailey. Then you have the shots to Demski and guys like that. All 6'1, over 200 lbs. Once we lost Schoen and Lawler our offense changed significantly without any vertical threat. And we had 20 American rookie receivers in camp. I think 3 of the 20 fit the profile of Collaros type targets. Wheatfall made the team, Alston got brought back. There's enough guys around to bring in 7-8 guys like that instead of 3 or 4. But it's pretty easy to tell they were thinking "we have Lawler, Schoen, Wolitarsky" so we're covered and they were very specifically looking for someone like Wilson to fit around those guys so they brought 15 of them to camp. Edited August 30 by JuranBoldenRules JCon and rebusrankin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eternal optimist Posted August 30 Report Share Posted August 30 Oof. No Stanley Bryant or an unprepared one does not bode well. Noeller 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Perfect Posted August 31 Report Share Posted August 31 23 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said: Oof. No Stanley Bryant or an unprepared one does not bode well. At this point in his career, I think Big Stan can manage just fine without practice. Goalie, Noeller and GCJenks 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now