Jump to content

How good is our offensive play calling?

BigBlue

By BigBlue
in Blue Bomber Discussion

 Share

  

46 members have voted

  1. 1. How good is our offensive shemes, the timing of our run calls and fooling our opposition's defensive schemes ( outhinking them) HOW GOOD IS OUR PLAY-CALLING? ...

    • very good
      1
    • above average
      11
    • average
      20
    • below average
      11
    • not good at all
      2
    • other ... please explain
      1

Recommended Posts

Goalie Grand Master

Goalie

Posted
Posted

Considering most offences look pretty bad, including sasks who didn't score a td for 2 or 3 games up until the last second of the 3rd quarter against montreal, I'd say above average.

 

We are scoring points, we are putting up points, don't we lead the league in points scored? That has to mean something. I'm not really qualified to go on and on about the play calling and i don't think anyone really is, we aren't in the huddle so we really have no clue at all, wish people would stop pretending they do, but... just based on points scored, lack of 2 and outs, all that stuff and based on what other teams have done so far or havent done, you have teams who haven't scored offensive touchdowns in 2 or 3 straight games so we are above average. 

blitzmore Newbie

blitzmore

Posted
Posted

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

gbill2004 Newbie

gbill2004

Posted
Posted

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

Problem with that strategy is it's not always sustainable as defenses can tailor their coverage based on the offensive personnel.

blitzmore Newbie

blitzmore

Posted
Posted

 

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

Problem with that strategy is it's not always sustainable as defenses can tailor their coverage based on the offensive personnel.

 

I fully realize that...I didn't say we had to do it every running play, just much more than we do now. 

BigBlue Community Regular

BigBlue

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

"he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same" ... to me this is the big deal ... run where you can do the most good ... don't have a philosophy that says you must balance the offense by running up the gut ... hit 'em where they ain't!

btw I believe we need to use the pass to set up the run ... not the other way round

GCn20 Grand Master

GCn20

Posted
Posted

 

I don't know if any of you noticed, but in the Calgary game Dickenson, used Hugh Charles almost exclusively on outside runs. If my memory serves me right he ran into the middle only a couple of times. To me Dickenson is smart enough to know that Charles is not an inside runner, so he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same, as least more than he does now.

"he utilized his strengths. Too bad Bellefeuille doesn't do the same" ... to me this is the big deal ... run where you can do the most good ... don't have a philosophy that says you must balance the offense by running up the gut ... hit 'em where they ain't!

btw I believe we need to use the pass to set up the run ... not the other way round

 

 

Well that's a novel approach. You be sure to pass that along to our competitors.

Brandon Grand Master

Brandon

Posted
Posted

 

 

He hasn't been that bad... It's light years better then what we have had since Berry.

I just wish he would push the ball deep more often and maybe bounce Grigsby out to the side more often.

https://twitter.com/cfllandry/status/501460287137284096

And boom goes the dynamite.

 

 

And this proves my point exactly... the team is successful pushing it down the field yet in certain games they avoid the deep ball like the plague for some reason or another. 

BigBlue Community Regular

BigBlue

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think we have the personnel on offence, our offensive line is adequate, Drew Willey is up to the job, so why was our offence so anemic against Montreal tonight?

 

Yes, Montreal has a decent defense but so does the Riders, the Stamps, the Eskimos and the Lions,,,,  I can only conclude we are not strategizing very well ...

 

Our running game is a little better but its not blowing anybody away ... and I doubt it will this year

 

My greater concern is that our passing game is way below its potential and capability

 

In my opinion, the problem is schemes, set-ups and play calling

 

MOS has got the team hanging in there but the biggest under achiever on the club is MB ,,, not sour grapes after a victory but a concern as we get ready ro take on our division rivals ,,,, we can't avoid change because we have a winning record

 

Just 13 first downs (10 in the 4th Q) tonight and less than 300 yards of offence

 

We are winning as a team but not as an offence

 

We have to get past Drew Willey and 4th Q heroics ,,, we need a regular 400 yards of O produced through all 4 Qs

 

Wake uo MB or we will go 3 & 6 in the second half of this so far great season

Goalie Grand Master

Goalie

Posted
Posted

Why is everyone afraid of the riders really? we need to play 4 quarters to beat them? LOL, no we don't, we just can't turn the ball over against them and we should win..

 

I don't get it really, Yeah they are the defending grey cup champs but they have looked pretty average this season so far... 

 

Montreal gave them a run for their money last week, just like they gave us a run for our money this week, Riders did nothing for 3 quarters just like us and beat them in the 4th, just like us.. When we played SASK, we gave them the game off of turnovers, they didn't kill us, Heck i don't even think they scored an offensive touchdown against us... DId they?

 

People going on about Messam but for all the running messam did, the sask offence put up 4 friggin points.. Don't get this 'gotta play 4 quarters vs sask to win'... I understand what some mean but... I really don't get why sask is getting so much credit here from some people... THEY kind of aren't very good this year, They have got lucky, 

 

We barely beat montreal? Sure, sask barely beat them too, When we lost to sask, we beat ourselves, sask didn't do anything really..

 

Not sure why anyone would be afraid of SASK, they aint what they used to be. 

Floyd Collaborator

Floyd

Posted
Posted

MB is in a tricky spot now... he's gone conservative and teams now know that they can key in on Willy.  We never move the pocket, playaction seems to be used less and for the most part, our run game is not a big threat.  That being said, if Willy gets some chemistry with any receiver on the fade, a lot of our redzone problems disappear.

Mark H. Grand Master

Mark H.

Posted
Posted

Why is everyone afraid of the riders really? we need to play 4 quarters to beat them? LOL, no we don't, we just can't turn the ball over against them and we should win..

 

I don't get it really, Yeah they are the defending grey cup champs but they have looked pretty average this season so far... 

 

Montreal gave them a run for their money last week, just like they gave us a run for our money this week, Riders did nothing for 3 quarters just like us and beat them in the 4th, just like us.. When we played SASK, we gave them the game off of turnovers, they didn't kill us, Heck i don't even think they scored an offensive touchdown against us... DId they?

 

People going on about Messam but for all the running messam did, the sask offence put up 4 friggin points.. Don't get this 'gotta play 4 quarters vs sask to win'... I understand what some mean but... I really don't get why sask is getting so much credit here from some people... THEY kind of aren't very good this year, They have got lucky, 

 

We barely beat montreal? Sure, sask barely beat them too, When we lost to sask, we beat ourselves, sask didn't do anything really..

 

Not sure why anyone would be afraid of SASK, they aint what they used to be. 

 

Those turnovers didn't just randomly happen.  They were net result of Willy being under pressure the entire game.  

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

×
×
  • Create New...