Bombers at Als GDT

[wbbfan]

2 minutes ago, JohnnyAbonny said:

Gotta remember Montreal has by far the best OL in the league this year, and their RBs are pretty damn good in pass pro. I believe it was Fletcher who just embarrassed Kramdi when the latter came through through on a blitz in the 4th. 

We haven’t been getting much pressure on any other teams either though I guess..need an actual legit Rush End next year.
I know they’ve had some success with a 3 man front but when other teams figure it out in-game, Bombers need to be able to switch to a 40 on the fly. 
 

the ALs sure are, they’re tough in the trenches. 
 

I think Garbutt has really turned a corner. I think the edge problem revolves around wj, and the Canadians inside. Half his snaps wj doesn’t put any effort into getting to the qb. He coasts playing for pass kick downs. Which means the ol cheats in the other direction. 
 The issues with Jake and schmek are well known and don’t need to be restated. 
 

If we ran a 40 with woods and fox as the dts, Garbutt and wj on the edge and a rotation of Adam’s and Lawson we’d be in great shape. We’d need 1 more de who can rush to heavily spell wj but it’d work well. 
 If we ran a 30 with those same guys and just heavily rotated wj, we’d do well. 
 It’d be well worth while for us to pay a good pass rusher in free agency this year. But the changes we need are subtractions not additions. 

[GCn20]

19 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

If you fill every gap, you are still in a situation where the back is likely 1on1 in any gap he hits. Considering most teams run 1 decent sized lber max, the rb is basically 1on1 with a db sized player in a good 3 gaps. Which is a battle you expect a good rb to win more often than not. 
 Run schemes today often seek to steal back a body too. That’s why teams run read plays, boot the qb, use jet motion, or what some teams are doing is motioning two guys in jet, then returning one to force defenders to spread out creating seams and gaps inside. 
 

When we pass twice and don’t pa, or semi frequently go empty back field. 
 If we ran once with Brady, then threw an iso fade to some one like lawler and did that on every single red zone series we would have a drastically higher success rate. 
 The problem is we often throw twice, don’t threat the run, and don’t throw into the end zone. We throw a screen or short pass and expect the wr to do the rest. 

Thing is that in order for a RB to be a clean 1v1 in the gap in a loaded box means that every OL has executed his blocking assignment perfectly. That is unrealistic to expect and those 1v1s are often impeded and then it is big advantage to the defence. There is a reason teams stack the box against the run. It's because it's effective. When a D is doing that the smart play is to pass against them and force them out of the box. We just weren't consistent enough in our air attack in the first half. In the 2nd half we got some traction in the passing game and the box loosened somewhat.

Edited October 28 by GCn20

[Booch]

14 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

the ALs sure are, they’re tough in the trenches. 
 

I think Garbutt has really turned a corner. I think the edge problem revolves around wj, and the Canadians inside. Half his snaps wj doesn’t put any effort into getting to the qb. He coasts playing for pass kick downs. Which means the ol cheats in the other direction. 
 The issues with Jake and schmek are well known and don’t need to be restated. 
 

If we ran a 40 with woods and fox as the dts, Garbutt and wj on the edge and a rotation of Adam’s and Lawson we’d be in great shape. We’d need 1 more de who can rush to heavily spell wj but it’d work well. 
 If we ran a 30 with those same guys and just heavily rotated wj, we’d do well. 
 It’d be well worth while for us to pay a good pass rusher in free agency this year. But the changes we need are subtractions not additions. 

I think we have that guy in Person's......wished he would have got a token game before season ended...I bet if he got in he wouldnt have been taken  out

I think we have some scheme going at times where e just want to bubble around the QB and keep him there and have him try and beat us with pocket passes....hence why at times WJ seems to be playing the knock down/contain

When he is actually attacking...he is causing issues and with another guy on the other end....and yes Garbutt been getting better and better we can do some things....but when we run the 30 with Thomas...or Scmeck or those fronts with both....expecting/hoping for them to push and penetrate the pocket...well it rarely happens, and on any run play they just get washed right out of their gap, and have zero backside pursuit ability, and no lateral movement to get off and disrupt anything

We should be running heavy rotations with Woods and fox at the center...with an end....or even 2 ends stacked together....And even some modified 30fronts with WJ as a true Jack....or even allowed to just freelance his way to the QB and let the boys clean up. And Adams should be used all over the line...and even dropped off and coming downhill once he see's what the offence is doing...for a big dude he closes fast and he knows how to tackle

Especially with Jones and Griffin, and Cole when in who fly and come down hard on anyone who gets past the dline...to me it looks like we are almost intentionally running a passive front to funnel the play to our backers and HB's....but that is fine when it's working...you also need to change it up and actually run it different up front with actual pressure...we seem to not be doing that

[wbbfan]

16 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Thing is that in order for a RB to be a clean 1v1 in the gap in a loaded box means that every OL has executed his blocking assignment perfectly. That is unrealistic to expect and those 1v1s are often impeded and then it is big advantage to the defence. There is a reason teams stack the box against the run. It's because it's effective. When a D is doing that the smart play is to pass against them and force them out of the box. We just weren't consistent enough in our air attack in the first half. In the 2nd half we got some traction in the passing game and the box loosened somewhat.

Thats true in a man scheme, however in a zone scheme you don’t need to have every block executed. You need the gap with the line men forming it to seal those edges. You can allow defenders outside of that to push the backfield and get trapped on the back side of plays, or if the defense is getting leverage on the blockers in outside zone you run wide zone, allowing them to get that outside leverage then cutting back and washing them all out. 
 Zone is much more about a gap with good blocks at the point of attack and then washing out as many guys as you can outside of that. 
 Which is also what’s been happening to our box defenders the last two seasons. 
 

Athletes will some times just make plays and blow up your scheme single handedly. That’s the nature of football. However to do that consistently you need an exceptional player the likes of which are rare up here. 
 

Stacking the line and the box is traditional wisdom. You can defend the run many ways, it really depends on what you want to take away and what you want to give. Like the original 3-4 D was used to force the run side ways and force the back into a group of backers who were fairly well spread. It gave up a couple yards on each run to prevent getting gauged for huge runs. 
 Stacking the box in the cfl isn’t actually a great idea imo. You might have 2 guys on the field the size of an ol. You might have 3 the size of the rb or bigger. Trying to stack plays into the offences hands. 
 If you have a dominant nose, and also if the opposition runs a limited set of designs it’s more effective. But overall it’s kinda lack lustre. 
 

You need run fits, but play action is way more dangerous than the run in the CFL. 

[Brandon]

My concern is that it clearly wasn't working and if are only going to rush three then can we at least not allow Fajardo and Alexander to go on a run where they have a 95% completion ratio mixed with many 6 - 20 yard runs from Fletcher/Erlington.     The only guy on D that I saw doing anything was Ford and Jones.    No big hits,  no turn overs,   no sacks,  no hurries,  it really looked like a vanilla pre season game.       Would of been nice had they at least tried something else to change it up.  

Also this off season if we don't replace Thomas with anyone else even a raw rookie then that is a big fail.   Outside of looking like a tired old bald guy on the sidelines he was completely invisible all night. 

 

 

[wbbfan]

2 minutes ago, Booch said:

I think we have that guy in Person's......wished he would have got a token game before season ended...I bet if he got in he wouldnt have been taken  out

I think we have some scheme going at times where e just want to bubble around the QB and keep him there and have him try and beat us with pocket passes....hence why at times WJ seems to be playing the knock down/contain

When he is actually attacking...he is causing issues and with another guy on the other end....and yes Garbutt been getting better and better we can do some things....but when we run the 30 with Thomas...or Scmeck or those fronts with both....expecting/hoping for them to push and penetrate the pocket...well it rarely happens, and on any run play they just get washed right out of their gap, and have zero backside pursuit ability, and no lateral movement to get off and disrupt anything

We should be running heavy rotations with Woods and fox at the center...with an end....or even 2 ends stacked together....And even some modified 30fronts with WJ as a true Jack....or even allowed to just freelance his way to the QB and let the boys clean up. And Adams should be used all over the line...and even dropped off and coming downhill once he see's what the offence is doing...for a big dude he closes fast and he knows how to tackle

Especially with Jones and Griffin, and Cole when in who fly and come down hard on anyone who gets past the dline...to me it looks like we are almost intentionally running a passive front to funnel the play to our backers and HB's....but that is fine when it's working...you also need to change it up and actually run it different up front with actual pressure...we seem to not be doing that

He certainly seems the type. I agree it sucks we didn’t get him in a game to see. 
 

Yeah I’m sure that’s some of what we do. He also just free lances a lot, you can see especially if he’s faced double team a few times he just doesn’t rush much or jogs on the back end of plays. 
 Honestly his ability to finish pressures has always been an issue, he’s never been a great tackler. But the last year and a half the oppositions have consistently run read plays off him and he hasn’t made the play once. 
 

When he turns it on ya, you can see he can still get off the line with the best of them and whip tackles with speed. Which pretty much makes him the most frustrating bomber to watch. Jake shouldn’t be out there at all, but wj can just be confounding. 
 

agree 100%, using him as a stand up rusher would drastically improve his effectiveness and decision making, and add length to his career. Rotating him more again would be huge too. At his best he wasn’t an every down guy or close to it. He was a 50% of snaps guy playing his best ball. 
 

I think we’ve seen glimpses of that. And that next year, or maybe even in the play offs we will start to see more of that. Selective times we throw those explosive imp tweeners into rushes clean off the edge. We had one effective blitz this week late in the game and boy was it pretty. Montreal was not prepared for that. Gives me a lot of hope moving forward. 
 

5 minutes ago, Brandon said:

My concern is that it clearly wasn't working and if are only going to rush three then can we at least not allow Fajardo and Alexander to go on a run where they have a 95% completion ratio mixed with many 6 - 20 yard runs from Fletcher/Erlington.     The only guy on D that I saw doing anything was Ford and Jones.    No big hits,  no turn overs,   no sacks,  no hurries,  it really looked like a vanilla pre season game.       Would of been nice had they at least tried something else to change it up.  

Also this off season if we don't replace Thomas with anyone else even a raw rookie then that is a big fail.   Outside of looking like a tired old bald guy on the sidelines he was completely invisible all night. 

 

 

Absolutely. I think we have the pieces to temp fix it and be decent. But idk if we will. I actually rather doubt it. 

It also makes me wonder what we’d have done if Lawson didn’t get hurt? Clearly with that pay day he was gonna be dt1. Would they have cut woods/adams? Or would Jake have been a rotational back up? 

[BomberBall.]

40 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

He certainly seems the type. I agree it sucks we didn’t get him in a game to see. 
 

Yeah I’m sure that’s some of what we do. He also just free lances a lot, you can see especially if he’s faced double team a few times he just doesn’t rush much or jogs on the back end of plays. 
 Honestly his ability to finish pressures has always been an issue, he’s never been a great tackler. But the last year and a half the oppositions have consistently run read plays off him and he hasn’t made the play once. 
 

When he turns it on ya, you can see he can still get off the line with the best of them and whip tackles with speed. Which pretty much makes him the most frustrating bomber to watch. Jake shouldn’t be out there at all, but wj can just be confounding. 
 

agree 100%, using him as a stand up rusher would drastically improve his effectiveness and decision making, and add length to his career. Rotating him more again would be huge too. At his best he wasn’t an every down guy or close to it. He was a 50% of snaps guy playing his best ball. 
 

I think we’ve seen glimpses of that. And that next year, or maybe even in the play offs we will start to see more of that. Selective times we throw those explosive imp tweeners into rushes clean off the edge. We had one effective blitz this week late in the game and boy was it pretty. Montreal was not prepared for that. Gives me a lot of hope moving forward. 
 

Absolutely. I think we have the pieces to temp fix it and be decent. But idk if we will. I actually rather doubt it. 

It also makes me wonder what we’d have done if Lawson didn’t get hurt? Clearly with that pay day he was gonna be dt1. Would they have cut woods/adams? Or would Jake have been a rotational back up? 

We probably wouldn’t want to hear the answer to that.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

9 hours ago, Doublezero said:

Roughriders Guy says "we were robbed". First 5 mins pretty funny 

 

I like this guy- seems like a good egg. I think he's deserving of a follow.

2 hours ago, GCn20 said:

There were at least two games I saw on TV where the stadium looked half full.

TBF- the PAS, looks half empty most of the time too... until you look at the rhum hut... and then it's like- "ah, that's where everyone is at.".

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, wbbfan said:

Thats true in a man scheme, however in a zone scheme you don’t need to have every block executed. You need the gap with the line men forming it to seal those edges. You can allow defenders outside of that to push the backfield and get trapped on the back side of plays, or if the defense is getting leverage on the blockers in outside zone you run wide zone, allowing them to get that outside leverage then cutting back and washing them all out. 
 Zone is much more about a gap with good blocks at the point of attack and then washing out as many guys as you can outside of that. 
 Which is also what’s been happening to our box defenders the last two seasons. 
 

Athletes will some times just make plays and blow up your scheme single handedly. That’s the nature of football. However to do that consistently you need an exceptional player the likes of which are rare up here. 
 

Stacking the line and the box is traditional wisdom. You can defend the run many ways, it really depends on what you want to take away and what you want to give. Like the original 3-4 D was used to force the run side ways and force the back into a group of backers who were fairly well spread. It gave up a couple yards on each run to prevent getting gauged for huge runs. 
 Stacking the box in the cfl isn’t actually a great idea imo. You might have 2 guys on the field the size of an ol. You might have 3 the size of the rb or bigger. Trying to stack plays into the offences hands. 
 If you have a dominant nose, and also if the opposition runs a limited set of designs it’s more effective. But overall it’s kinda lack lustre. 
 

You need run fits, but play action is way more dangerous than the run in the CFL. 

Totally agree.  However, with Montreal's defence stacking the box is what they felt worked best yesterday because of the conditions. Hard to argue that as we had trouble getting traction against it early in the game. We went away from Brady because their defence dictated that we go elsewhere with the ball to be high efficiency. They trusted their bend and don't break to hold us to FGs and for the most part it did.

[TBURGESS]

16 hours ago, GCn20 said:

Yes it is the same thing. We had 2-3 plays in the game yesterday where if players make the right read/decision they are punting instead of scoring. You are just purposely CHOOSING to ignore the first 57 minutes of a 60 minute game because it doesn't suit your argument.

Part of every loss EVER is the opposition making mistakes at wrong time.  You keep putting up the 61 yard FG as one such mistake when every KR ever is coached to field a short FG because they often take extremely unpredictable bounces and are a live ball.

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm saying changing 0 plays in the game, we lose if they simply make 1 correct coaching decision even if the wind she blow like 50 bear in their face. 

I'm also saying not making a play is different than not making the right coaching decisions. Coaching decisions are made prior to taking the field on the play. They aren't made in real time at game speed. They aren't physical mistakes. They aren't making the right read or making the tackle or taking a penalty. (This is where we disagree)

On the 61 yard try, the ball was caught on the 2 yard line. Let it bounce and it goes into the endzone 99 times out of 100. The returner is 20 yards closer to the ball than the kick team. If the ball goes out of the endzone without being touched, the receiving team still gets the ball. If they get it in the endzone they still get the ball. The only risk is us getting to the ball first. Give up the point and take the ball at the 40 or 53 in this case as it was the LOS when we kicked, is the right call 99 times out of a 100 & coaches should take those odds unless the single point means a tie or a win at the end of the 4th. 

 

[wbbfan]

24 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Totally agree.  However, with Montreal's defence stacking the box is what they felt worked best yesterday because of the conditions. Hard to argue that as we had trouble getting traction against it early in the game. We went away from Brady because their defence dictated that we go elsewhere with the ball to be high efficiency. They trusted their bend and don't break to hold us to FGs and for the most part it did.

They did and they are good at it. That’s really what they are designed around. 
 

We didn’t move away from the run because they forced us to. We had 1 run in the first Q for 6 yards from Brady. We had 7 runs in the first half, 3 went for 3 yards, 4 went for 5+ and we averaged over 5 per rush with Brady. 2 of the runs were read options where zach made the wrong call as well. 
 The game plan was clearly possession passing to force feed Wilson and Demski their 1k and chuck to lawler when in doubt/need. 
A couple 3 yard runs instead of 5 don’t force you to pack in the run. It just wasn’t the game plan. We’ve seen games in the past where we are hammering away for 3-4 till we break the D with physicality. 
 

I wouldn’t say the bend but don’t break worked. The ALs pulled Cody in the 3rd and still gave us every thing we could handle and more. Took a literal miracle occurrence to win it. 
 

The big issue is play calling and game plan. If a team packs the box and plays the run aggressively, that’s when you bust them with counter traps, counter jet sweeps, pa screens, pa boots, wide zone etc. play action wheel route to the rb is deadly too. 
 The issue is our offence is one dimensional. Buck had no progression for the curls to Wilson, to the counter to our run (which was a decent battle but not a win by any means for them) or a plan to punish the ALs for sending pressure, or any thing. We have no 1-2 combo. No counter punch. All we do is throw one punch constantly. Jabs with the run, jabs with short passes, or haymakers with deep shots. 
Strategy with out tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics with out strategy is the noise before defeat. Bucks upside as an oc has been strategy with out sound tactics to achieve the strategy. His downside has been tactics with out strategy. And it’s been a down side heavy year. 

53 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said:

I like this guy- seems like a good egg. I think he's deserving of a follow.

TBF- the PAS, looks half empty most of the time too... until you look at the rhum hut... and then it's like- "ah, that's where everyone is at.".

OT but I wish they’d add like 1-2k tickets for standing only in the rumhut area. I know a few people who are in that pack that’d love it. 

[HardCoreBlue]

11 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm saying changing 0 plays in the game, we lose if they simply make 1 correct coaching decision even if the wind she blow like 50 bear in their face. 

I'm also saying not making a play is different than not making the right coaching decisions. Coaching decisions are made prior to taking the field on the play. They aren't made in real time at game speed. They aren't physical mistakes. They aren't making the right read or making the tackle or taking a penalty. (This is where we disagree)

On the 61 yard try, the ball was caught on the 2 yard line. Let it bounce and it goes into the endzone 99 times out of 100. The returner is 20 yards closer to the ball than the kick team. If the ball goes out of the endzone without being touched, the receiving team still gets the ball. If they get it in the endzone they still get the ball. The only risk is us getting to the ball first. Give up the point and take the ball at the 40 or 53 in this case as it was the LOS when we kicked, is the right call 99 times out of a 100 & coaches should take those odds unless the single point means a tie or a win at the end of the 4th. 

 

The other side of it, it’s an extremely long field goal where the coverage team has a big chore huffing it down the field to cover, ball is fluttering in the air well short where the speedy returner can catch it on the fly with lots of field vision in front of him. We’ve seen it on occasion where an errant (ie usually short) long field goal try ends well for the returning team. I don’t think it’s as straight forward as you present it.

[Bigblue204]

It's never the right call to let a short FG bounce into the endzone. That's hindsight and a bizarre hill to die on. FG is short, you better be catching it in the air and ideally on the run. Hoping a football bounces the right way would be an idiotic coaching move.

[Piggy 1]

All this talk about the field goal and the wind ,what about Maas decision to call a time out there?

[Brandon]

I've complained about this numerous times in previous years....   could the league ban the air horns at Montreal?      I was debating on watching the game on mute as it was giving me a headache hearing it non stop over and over again.  Super irritating. 

[bigg jay]

25 minutes ago, Piggy 1 said:

All this talk about the field goal and the wind ,what about Maas decision to call a time out there?

I had the same thought.  Killing the clock was the right call but had they not taken the timeout and allowed so much time to pass, they would have been able to get the punt off before the wind blew in.  

[3rdand1.5]

The horns, for the life of me I don't understand how in today's society with all the awareness and promotion towards workplace injuries, sports injuries, etc. compressed air horns are allowed at any public sporting event. It baffles my mind and I believe only a matter of time until a fan in the stands files a strong injury claim against the ownership group for allowing that...I mean anyone can take 3 minutes and google hearing loss and decibel levels of compressed air horns and see that this is has prime lawsuit potential, each week there are 300k +/-witnesses across Canada.....

 

Second vent about those horns. TSN or the CFL need to figure out a better way to "filter" them out during broadcasts.....it ruins the broadcast having constant honk, honk, honk air horn sound all game....heck they don't even just do it when the defence needs a big stop they literally honk those damn things from pre kickoff to post game every single game.

 

 

[GCn20]

55 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

The other side of it, it’s an extremely long field goal where the coverage team has a big chore huffing it down the field to cover, ball is fluttering in the air well short where the speedy returner can catch it on the fly with lots of field vision in front of him. We’ve seen it on occasion where an errant (ie usually short) long field goal try ends well for the returning team. I don’t think it’s as straight forward as you present it.

Nothing is as clear cut as TB would like to pretend it is. He won't acknowledge that their is inherent risk to letting that ball fall to the ground. 

[Slimy Sculpin]

1 hour ago, wbbfan said:

They did and they are good at it. That’s really what they are designed around. 
 

We didn’t move away from the run because they forced us to. We had 1 run in the first Q for 6 yards from Brady. We had 7 runs in the first half, 3 went for 3 yards, 4 went for 5+ and we averaged over 5 per rush with Brady. 2 of the runs were read options where zach made the wrong call as well. 
 The game plan was clearly possession passing to force feed Wilson and Demski their 1k and chuck to lawler when in doubt/need. 
A couple 3 yard runs instead of 5 don’t force you to pack in the run. It just wasn’t the game plan. We’ve seen games in the past where we are hammering away for 3-4 till we break the D with physicality. 
 

I wouldn’t say the bend but don’t break worked. The ALs pulled Cody in the 3rd and still gave us every thing we could handle and more. Took a literal miracle occurrence to win it. 
 

The big issue is play calling and game plan. If a team packs the box and plays the run aggressively, that’s when you bust them with counter traps, counter jet sweeps, pa screens, pa boots, wide zone etc. play action wheel route to the rb is deadly too. 
 The issue is our offence is one dimensional. Buck had no progression for the curls to Wilson, to the counter to our run (which was a decent battle but not a win by any means for them) or a plan to punish the ALs for sending pressure, or any thing. We have no 1-2 combo. No counter punch. All we do is throw one punch constantly. Jabs with the run, jabs with short passes, or haymakers with deep shots. 
Strategy with out tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics with out strategy is the noise before defeat. Bucks upside as an oc has been strategy with out sound tactics to achieve the strategy. His downside has been tactics with out strategy. And it’s been a down side heavy year. 

OT but I wish they’d add like 1-2k tickets for standing only in the rumhut area. I know a few people who are in that pack that’d love it. 

I agree about play calling and game plan especially on the O-side of the ball. A thought....Buck used to call the game from "upstairs". I think that he started the season that way but for some reason decided to be on the sidelines. (Gosh, I hope that he has minions upstairs assisting.) Anyway, most, if not all, of the other teams O-coordinators are still upstairs where they can, IMO, get a better feel for what's unfolding on the field. Comments anyone?

[Fatty Liver]

22 minutes ago, 3rdand1.5 said:

The horns, for the life of me I don't understand how in today's society with all the awareness and promotion towards workplace injuries, sports injuries, etc. compressed air horns are allowed at any public sporting event. It baffles my mind and I believe only a matter of time until a fan in the stands files a strong injury claim against the ownership group for allowing that...I mean anyone can take 3 minutes and google hearing loss and decibel levels of compressed air horns and see that this is has prime lawsuit potential, each week there are 300k +/-witnesses across Canada.....

 

Second vent about those horns. TSN or the CFL need to figure out a better way to "filter" them out during broadcasts.....it ruins the broadcast having constant honk, honk, honk air horn sound all game....heck they don't even just do it when the defence needs a big stop they literally honk those damn things from pre kickoff to post game every single game.

 

 

Turn off the quadrophonic high definition surround sound and set the audio to the TV speaker or just the front 2, it makes a huge difference.

[wbbfan]

17 minutes ago, Slimy Sculpin said:

I agree about play calling and game plan especially on the O-side of the ball. A thought....Buck used to call the game from "upstairs". I think that he started the season that way but for some reason decided to be on the sidelines. (Gosh, I hope that he has minions upstairs assisting.) Anyway, most, if not all, of the other teams O-coordinators are still upstairs where they can, IMO, get a better feel for what's unfolding on the field. Comments anyone?

It changed early this season. Doug on one of the early games calls was talking about how long we took to get the ball snapped (tons of early season snap count violations and time outs) and that he was signalling basically for buck to stop talking in the head set.
 It’s become a problem in general with OCs all over football, over talking through the head set. In some places they basically don’t stop. 
 It got drastically better by mid season. I suspect bucks move to the side line was to change and improve the communication with zach, and reduce the excess. I’ve even seen mos do play call and signal on offence this year. 
 

Zach has been fired up more in the last season and half to 2 seasons than I’ve ever seen him. At pass pro, WRs you name it. He’s also been hit as much in that time as he has since he left the riders, and was with them the last year or so. 
 

I could see zach being frustrated with buck to the point of a rift this year. Though not a crazy big one. If buck doesn’t leave in the off season (really hope he does) I would be surprised if we don’t add a qb coach to the side line and send buck back up stairs. 
 I could also see buck being frustrated with zach this year especially early to mid. Physically he wasn’t were he needed to be, he’s struggled making decisions this year, and for most of the year couldn’t hit with the same accuracy/touch he has in the past. 
 Arguably buck could’ve been running a basic offence all year because he didn’t think zach and our ol could accomplish more. And while we’ve seen much better flashes from buck prior to this year, it doesn’t make sense in terms of actually running systems to counter what opponents do and or build off what works. 

[Fatty Liver]

3 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Yeah I’m sure that’s some of what we do. He also just free lances a lot, you can see especially if he’s faced double team a few times he just doesn’t rush much or jogs on the back end of plays. 
 Honestly his ability to finish pressures has always been an issue, he’s never been a great tackler. But the last year and a half the oppositions have consistently run read plays off him and he hasn’t made the play once. 
When he turns it on ya, you can see he can still get off the line with the best of them and whip tackles with speed. Which pretty much makes him the most frustrating bomber to watch. Jake shouldn’t be out there at all, but wj can just be confounding. 
agree 100%, using him as a stand up rusher would drastically improve his effectiveness and decision making, and add length to his career. Rotating him more again would be huge too. At his best he wasn’t an every down guy or close to it. He was a 50% of snaps guy playing his best ball. 

Willie and the D-line didn't create much pressure, but they did a very good job containing Fajardo (2 for 6 yds) and Alexander (3 for 4 yds), which is now a critical requirement when playing the Als. 

When Willie does make a strong push to get to the QB in the pocket he often loses contain while wrestling with the OT, Jeffcoat was much better at pushing back in a direct line toward the QB and disengaging at just the right moment.

[Stickem]

Man the football gawds can sure serve one up once in awhile...Down to the last seconds and with Castillo already missing one from about the same distance, I thought ...welllll that's all she wrote BUT I'm sure Sergio thought about that wind, which was sent from the heavens ,and thought ...'Hey this is meant to be' and kicked the rock right down the middle and sent our bench into a frenzy ...WOW ....I've seen a lot of CFL football in my time BUT that win has to be ranked right up there with one of the strangest and best ever...Meant to be for sure and I hope that's our mantra right up to Cup time in BC

Edited October 28 by Stickem

[Fatty Liver]

26 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

It changed early this season. Doug on one of the early games calls was talking about how long we took to get the ball snapped (tons of early season snap count violations and time outs) and that he was signalling basically for buck to stop talking in the head set.
 It’s become a problem in general with OCs all over football, over talking through the head set. In some places they basically don’t stop. 
 It got drastically better by mid season. I suspect bucks move to the side line was to change and improve the communication with zach, and reduce the excess. I’ve even seen mos do play call and signal on offence this year. 
 

Zach has been fired up more in the last season and half to 2 seasons than I’ve ever seen him. At pass pro, WRs you name it. He’s also been hit as much in that time as he has since he left the riders, and was with them the last year or so. 
 

I could see zach being frustrated with buck to the point of a rift this year. Though not a crazy big one. If buck doesn’t leave in the off season (really hope he does) I would be surprised if we don’t add a qb coach to the side line and send buck back up stairs. 
 

Figured Buck was on the sidelines this season to help out the young receivers learn their roles as they seem to be the reason for a lot of Zach's frustration.  Who does he spend most of his time with when the D is on the field?

[JCon]

Going back to the end of the game and the wind storm, I found everything just played out perfectly, with Forde bringing up this crazy wind that was all-of-sudden pushing into the stadium, with the leaves following for the visual effect, a slight build-up in anticipation before the punt, and then the pooch. The drama could not have been better scripted.