Gary Etcheverry prediction came true!

[Goalie]

Thought I read Barron Miles signed a 2 year extension with the Riders last offseason.

I actually thought i heard his name thrown around in the off-season, not sure if it was someone on the fan board here or if it was in the paper and it turned out he didn't want to leave regina because he has a good thing going there.

 

With that being said tho, I suppose if he wanted to become a DC, that would be a promotion for him, so i suppose technically the riders would probably let him take the DC role here, if it was offered to him and he wanted it. I'm really under the impression though that he doesn't want to be a DC at this time. 

[gbill2004]

Thought I read Barron Miles signed a 2 year extension with the Riders last offseason.

I actually thought i heard his name thrown around in the off-season, not sure if it was someone on the fan board here or if it was in the paper and it turned out he didn't want to leave regina because he has a good thing going there.

With that being said tho, I suppose if he wanted to become a DC, that would be a promotion for him, so i suppose technically the riders would probably let him take the DC role here, if it was offered to him and he wanted it. I'm really under the impression though that he doesn't want to be a DC at this time.

Yes Miles name was thrown around this past offseason as a potential DC but then he signed a 2 year extension.

[Logan007]

 

 

Thought I read Barron Miles signed a 2 year extension with the Riders last offseason.

I actually thought i heard his name thrown around in the off-season, not sure if it was someone on the fan board here or if it was in the paper and it turned out he didn't want to leave regina because he has a good thing going there.

With that being said tho, I suppose if he wanted to become a DC, that would be a promotion for him, so i suppose technically the riders would probably let him take the DC role here, if it was offered to him and he wanted it. I'm really under the impression though that he doesn't want to be a DC at this time.

Yes Miles name was thrown around this past offseason as a potential DC but then he signed a 2 year extension.

 

Yeah but he's a coach, not a player.  Signing an extension doesn't mean he can't quit the Riders and come and be our DC.

[17to85]

 

I would prefer an up and coming defensive genius who's ready to break out with a devastatingly fresh new scheme, designed around movement and the ability to fool the hell out of any or all QBs and OCs in the league.

 

Know any?

I'll give you 3. DeVone Claybrooks is the DL coach with the Stamps & Huff was going to promote him to DC as he thought he was ready until Rich Stubler became available. Tony Missick is the linebacker coach here in Calgary & from all accounts may be ready for a DC position. He has NCAA & CFL experience. Barron Miles in Saskatchewan is supposed to be a very good coach & may be ready to step up to DC.

 

Now maybe I'm confused here but it sounds to me like Mr Dee is describing wanting a young Etch....

[Logan007]

 

 

I would prefer an up and coming defensive genius who's ready to break out with a devastatingly fresh new scheme, designed around movement and the ability to fool the hell out of any or all QBs and OCs in the league.

 

Know any?

I'll give you 3. DeVone Claybrooks is the DL coach with the Stamps & Huff was going to promote him to DC as he thought he was ready until Rich Stubler became available. Tony Missick is the linebacker coach here in Calgary & from all accounts may be ready for a DC position. He has NCAA & CFL experience. Barron Miles in Saskatchewan is supposed to be a very good coach & may be ready to step up to DC.

 

Now maybe I'm confused here but it sounds to me like Mr Dee is describing wanting a young Etch....

 

Typical.  Psshhh...you should never listen to that guys ideas.

[Armchair GM]

I feel the need to give a "small c" congratulations to everyone who made the Etcheverry failure prediction.  Be correct on a less obvious call and I'll lick and preen you like you want.

 

TBieber's well-researched point though is all you need to know about the Bombers, and has little to do with Etch.  3-0 when winning the turnover battle, 3-8 when losing it.  Guys, we're winning more than a third of games where we turn the ball over more than the opposition, so technically speaking we are doing better than we should be.  More importantly, we've lost the turnover battle in 11 of 15 games.  That's why we're not a playoff team.

 

Give us a DC with a better scheme, and some better players in 2015, and we MIGHT gain 2-3 defensive turnovers... but to put it all on Etch is wrong.  Special teams in particular we've had many turnovers.  I can't find stats on it, but we have to be at or near the top of the league in ST turnovers.  We're a young team on offense, and our players need to progress over the offseason, specifically in playing well without making as many poor decisions with the football. 

 

Want a defence that is less predictable, and less vulnerable to big backs and dump-offs over the middle?  Fire Etch.  But if what we want is to win games... it starts with NOT TURNING THE DAMN BALL OVER AS MUCH.

[Logan007]

I feel the need to give a "small c" congratulations to everyone who made the Etcheverry failure prediction.  Be correct on a less obvious call and I'll lick and preen you like you want.

 

TBieber's well-researched point though is all you need to know about the Bombers, and has little to do with Etch.  3-0 when winning the turnover battle, 3-8 when losing it.  Guys, we're winning more than a third of games where we turn the ball over more than the opposition, so technically speaking we are doing better than we should be.  More importantly, we've lost the turnover battle in 11 of 15 games.  That's why we're not a playoff team.

 

Give us a DC with a better scheme, and some better players in 2015, and we MIGHT gain 2-3 defensive turnovers... but to put it all on Etch is wrong.  Special teams in particular we've had many turnovers.  I can't find stats on it, but we have to be at or near the top of the league in ST turnovers.  We're a young team on offense, and our players need to progress over the offseason, specifically in playing well without making as many poor decisions with the football. 

 

Want a defence that is less predictable, and less vulnerable to big backs and dump-offs over the middle?  Fire Etch.  But if what we want is to win games... it starts with NOT TURNING THE DAMN BALL OVER AS MUCH.

Woah, dude...is that a promise?

[iso_55]

 

 

Thought I read Barron Miles signed a 2 year extension with the Riders last offseason.

I actually thought i heard his name thrown around in the off-season, not sure if it was someone on the fan board here or if it was in the paper and it turned out he didn't want to leave regina because he has a good thing going there.

With that being said tho, I suppose if he wanted to become a DC, that would be a promotion for him, so i suppose technically the riders would probably let him take the DC role here, if it was offered to him and he wanted it. I'm really under the impression though that he doesn't want to be a DC at this time.

Yes Miles name was thrown around this past offseason as a potential DC but then he signed a 2 year extension.

 

He can leave during the off season. Chamblin wouldn't stand in his way.

[Armchair GM]

 

I feel the need to give a "small c" congratulations to everyone who made the Etcheverry failure prediction.  Be correct on a less obvious call and I'll lick and preen you like you want.

 

TBieber's well-researched point though is all you need to know about the Bombers, and has little to do with Etch.  3-0 when winning the turnover battle, 3-8 when losing it.  Guys, we're winning more than a third of games where we turn the ball over more than the opposition, so technically speaking we are doing better than we should be.  More importantly, we've lost the turnover battle in 11 of 15 games.  That's why we're not a playoff team.

 

Give us a DC with a better scheme, and some better players in 2015, and we MIGHT gain 2-3 defensive turnovers... but to put it all on Etch is wrong.  Special teams in particular we've had many turnovers.  I can't find stats on it, but we have to be at or near the top of the league in ST turnovers.  We're a young team on offense, and our players need to progress over the offseason, specifically in playing well without making as many poor decisions with the football. 

 

Want a defence that is less predictable, and less vulnerable to big backs and dump-offs over the middle?  Fire Etch.  But if what we want is to win games... it starts with NOT TURNING THE DAMN BALL OVER AS MUCH.

Woah, dude...is that a promise?

 

 

LOL... Etch is predictable to a T.  Predictable that he'll employ an undersized defense.  Predictable that he'll send the house on almost every down and be vulnerable over the middle.  Predictable that it'll find some early season success, and that success be unsustainable.  And predictable that it will not adapt to defend against these holes that other teams are exploiting. 

 

So yeah, it's a little painful to hear people proclaiming how right they were on Etch.  You're unqualified to post on a football board if you didn't see this coming.

[Brandon]

As I said in the other thread... I can't believe how little pressure we are getting on the qb. We are near the bottom of the league in sacks... Is it because of injuries or because of our coach?

[Tracker]

As I said in the other thread... I can't believe how little pressure we are getting on the qb. We are near the bottom of the league in sacks... Is it because of injuries or because of our coach?

Its due to lack of talent, injuries and having a dolt for a defensive coach.

[pigseye]

Well that should be enough now to get him fired in the off season. The look on O'Shea's face on that last Stamps drive said it all.

[gbill2004]

On the CJOB post game show Bob Irving said to O'Shea that the Bombers had a chance to win it but the D couldn't make a stop at the end. O'Shea replied "Yep we've seen that before".

That tells me Etch is gone.

[Ripper]

On the CJOB post game show Bob Irving said to O'Shea that the Bombers had a chance to win it but the D couldn't make a stop at the end. O'Shea replied "Yep we've seen that before".

That tells me Etch is gone.

Watching game last night reminded me of our game with Stamps 2 weeks ago, came roaring back with a backup qb only to fall short because the defence couldn't make a stop at a critical point in game.  As far as Miles goes, I'm hoping he will at some point be our DC.

[iso_55]

On the CJOB post game show Bob Irving said to O'Shea that the Bombers had a chance to win it but the D couldn't make a stop at the end. O'Shea replied "Yep we've seen that before".

That tells me Etch is gone.

Too bad he wasn't gone last night. 

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

Lining up 8 guys at the LOS on obvious run plays should be enough to show that Etch has no ideas for stopping the run.  I could understand preaching patience if we were having issues with the run after Week 6 (which we were), but we're 16 games in and the only response I've seen to address our run D issues was to get Unamba and Sears in at LB.  And that was only done yesterday, not earlier in the season.  Don't get me wrong, Unamba and Sears played well but you need more than that going up against the likes of Cornish.  

 

What goes through Etch's head?  It's one thing in the summertime and early fall to focus more on pass D and let the run D slide (not acceptable to me btw) when teams are throwing more, but when October hits and the weather gets colder it becomes prime time to run the ball.  If we had playoff aspirations an effective run D is crucial and necessary come November.  Odds are we won't have to worry about that sadly.

 

I'm firmly in the "Etch has to go" camp.

[Floyd]

The CFL has changed to focus more on the run in recent years... Etch has not changed one bit.  Hope he had evolved.

 

Back to the GeeGees.

[Fatty Liver]

Okay, so all of the losses are not Etch's fault and the D has played reasonably well for the most part despite it's inherent design flaws..

 

Let's blame Marcel!

 

I think the proof will be in the pudding when Willy returns to the line up because Marcel is going to revert to his comfort zone and do the same damn things he's been doing all season, sans Grigsby.  I believe the progressions we thought we witnessed on offence against the Stamps were out of Marcel's control and went well beyond his mental agility to game plan for them to occur.

 

Here are my predictions.

 

2 and outs all night long.

 

Cotton goes nowhere.

 

Willy gets clobbered, repeatedly.

 

O-line looks bad as usual.

 

O turns over the ball 3+ times.

 

O scores no more than one TD.

 

If the Bombers win or come close, it will be on Lirim's foot.

 

 

Unfortunately history does repeat so I'm predicting with Willy back at the helm the next game will be another regression.  This will not be on Willy but on the scheme Marcel sets up for him with the idiotic fixed pocket which is almost impossible to protect.

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

Okay, so all of the losses are not Etch's fault and the D has played reasonably well for the most part despite it's inherent design flaws..

 

Let's blame Marcel!

 

I think the proof will be in the pudding when Willy returns to the line up because Marcel is going to revert to his comfort zone and do the same damn things he's been doing all season, sans Grigsby.  I believe the progressions we thought we witnessed on offence against the Stamps were out of Marcel's control and went well beyond his mental agility to game plan for them to occur.

 

Here are my predictions.

 

2 and outs all night long.

 

Cotton goes nowhere.

 

Willy gets clobbered, repeatedly.

 

O-line looks bad as usual.

 

O turns over the ball 3+ times.

 

O scores no more than one TD.

 

If the Bombers win or come close, it will be on Lirim's foot.

 

 

Unfortunately history does repeat so I'm predicting with Willy back at the helm the next game will be another regression.  This will not be on Willy but on the scheme Marcel sets up for him with the idiotic fixed pocket which is almost impossible to protect.

 

I certainly agree that it's not all on Etch's D.  I too take issue with Marcel's offense.  He seems to insist on keeping the QB in the pocket at all times despite having an Oline that can't maintain that pocket long enough for the play to develop.  And when it's Willy in there it doesn't seem like his release is quick enough to compensate for it at times.  Brohm seems to handle it a little better only because he has a quicker release. And Marve doesn't seem to care for the pocket at all and did a lot of improvising.  

 

I think a previous poster mentioned that when Marcel ran the O in Montreal, it coincided with Calvillo taking some brutal punishment over that period of time.  If this is accurate I think we're seeing the same thing happen to Willy this year.  So yeah, change the damn scheme this offseason or find the best oline money can buy (within the salary cap of course  ).  I believe Willy is our QB now and for the foreseeable future.  He deserves better than this.

[Logan007]

 

On the CJOB post game show Bob Irving said to O'Shea that the Bombers had a chance to win it but the D couldn't make a stop at the end. O'Shea replied "Yep we've seen that before".

That tells me Etch is gone.

Too bad he wasn't gone last night. 

 

I don't think O'Shea will get rid of him until he's got a replacement ready sign and take over.

[DR. CFL]

Failed offensive production still doesn't explain opposing teams going on extended offensive drives and chewing up 150 plus yards of rushing per game. Going 2 and out on offence doesn't mean your defence can't turn around and force the opposition into a 2 and out.

[Noeller]

Failed offensive production still doesn't explain opposing teams going on extended offensive drives and chewing up 150 plus yards of rushing per game. Going 2 and out on offence doesn't mean your defence can't turn around and force the opposition into a 2 and out.

Actually it does -- when you understand that the D is completely gassed because the O can't give them a breather with some extended drives.