Drew Willy

[Mike]

6 minutes ago, LeBird said:

I will admit I don't have much of a clue what all that goes on in a sack  but doing the maths if it takes 2 or 3 things to go wrong that would mean 10 to 15 things went wrong on sacks alone.  When you add the times when enough went wrong that we couldn't get a yard or Harris ran up the backside of the linemen and it sure does not leave many plays that went all  good.  

All I'm trying to say is at some point, which might not be too far off, the fans will start looking for blood and that is when the GM might get happy feet.

 

Something goes wrong on every single play in football, it doesn't take much for multiple things to go wrong in a single instance.

[LeBird]

6 minutes ago, Mike said:

Something goes wrong on every single play in football, it doesn't take much for multiple things to go wrong in a single instance.

I'll buy that. Still, why are we victim of so many plays with multiple errors that cost us lots but are unable to exploit other team's multiple error plays? How do we compare in errors per play to other teams? Better still, how do we correct this and how long should it take? Just asking.

[Mike]

8 minutes ago, LeBird said:

I'll buy that. Still, why are we victim of so many plays with multiple errors that cost us lots but are unable to exploit other team's multiple error plays? How do we compare in errors per play to other teams? Better still, how do we correct this and how long should it take? Just asking.

My theory? Our youth has a lot to do with it, as does the continuity (or lack thereof) on our roster. Talent level from 1 to 44 on the game day roster obviously plays a part as well. We've come a long way, but we still need to put together a game when every asset we have is in sync and the team is firing on all cylinders. Week 1 was a perfect example of that, in my opinion. We came out and had a better showing in several areas - our run game was stronger, our receivers created better separation, our play calling was improved and our OL performed better. Unfortunately, you take all those factors and couple it with a QB who had one of the worst games of his life and you see how it panned out. Wasted effort by 80% of our offensive structure, sadly.

How long should it take is an interesting question, because obviously the answer is never the same. The best way I can put it? The team that corrects their early errors the quickest is most likely to be the team that finishes the year hoisting the Grey Cup. It's easy to be optimistic and say that Drew played one of his worst pro games ever and we were still within striking distance but it's easy to suggest that he might be "damaged goods" at this point as well - I don't agree, as I believe you need a larger sample size, but it's still an opinion held by some.

[do or die]

Sure, Willy missed some throws, and held the ball too long for a couple of sacks......

But a number of other things went wrong...... in a game where we got dominated for 50 min.    We looked unprepared coming out of the gate....for the umpteenth time.   Yup, Glenn played a good game.....but to complete 30 passes, you have to have a lot of open receivers.

 

 

[Floyd]

2 minutes ago, do or die said:

Sure, Willy missed some throws, and held the ball too long for a couple of sacks......

But a number of other things went wrong...... in a game where we got dominated for 50 min.    We looked unprepared coming out of the gate....for the umpteenth time.   Yup, Glenn played a good game.....but to complete 30 passes, you have to have a lot of open receivers.

This forum has been hijacked by crazy posters!!!  AAAIIIEEEEE!!!!!!

[Blueandgold]

34 minutes ago, do or die said:

Sure, Willy missed some throws, and held the ball too long for a couple of sacks......

But a number of other things went wrong...... in a game where we got dominated for 50 min.    We looked unprepared coming out of the gate....for the umpteenth time.   Yup, Glenn played a good game.....but to complete 30 passes, you have to have a lot of open receivers.

 

 

The three step drop and quick release worked wonders, but with that being said our Dline still didn't get enough pressure. I know sacks were difficult to come by, but even a few more hits to rattle Kevin would've been huge. I also thought our entire secondary minus randle was meh at best and awful(macho & Bruce) at worst.

[Mike]

Macho was safety of the week according to CFL.ca

[Jpan85]

Thought he was sure tackler on Friday. Drew a penalty on SJ Green.

[Fatty Liver]

One thing I noticed as the game went along Willy got more comfortable relying on Harris to "do his thing" play after play.  This must have been a startling revelation to Willy coming out of last years MB offence were the RB would only touch the ball twice per quarter.

[17to85]

13 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

One thing I noticed as the game went along Willy got more comfortable relying on Harris to "do his thing" play after play.  This must have been a startling revelation to Willy coming out of last years MB offence were the RB would only touch the ball twice per quarter.

I was talking with Noeller about Dressler coming back and Harris being proven veterans who know what to do out there and how much that can help Willy. We really have lacked that kind of security blanket for a qb for a long long time. 

[Bigblue204]

26 minutes ago, Mike said:

Macho was safety of the week according to CFL.ca

He did make a few solid hits. And seemed to get under the skin of Sutton. This likely speaks to the lack of production from the other safeties though.

[Floyd]

31 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

He did make a few solid hits. And seemed to get under the skin of Sutton. This likely speaks to the lack of production from the other safeties though.

... Macho was on the field a lot more than other safeties as well...

[rebusrankin]

You know who looked weak at S? Edmonton with King.

[Dragon37]

18 hours ago, Mike said:

Can it get any worse? 

 

Wow. We lost by one score in his first game back off a season ending injury. I think some of us are getting ahead of ourselves here.

Winnipeg lost by one score only because of two turnovers by Randle and one penalty. Winnipeg was never in the game.

[do or die]

When we got Harris going, it seemed to help kick start the passing game.......however, we hardly had the ball (Montreal O) for most of the game....

[Taynted_Fayth]

I think if you factor in it was week 1 after not much of a preseason compared to other leagues and sports, it should be expected teams wouldnt be totally in sync yet (except maybe those that didnt have much roster turnover) from what i can this past weekend it wasnt just the bombers still getting their feet under them in terms of gelling. 

I'd step away from the ledge until at least game 5 or 6 to really see what this team is made of. even after week 5 or 6 theres still lots of season left

[Noeller]

a truism of the CFL has always been "You never know how a team's season is going to go, good or bad, until at least Labour Day"...

[Floyd]

12 minutes ago, Noeller said:

a truism of the CFL has always been "You never know how a team's season is going to go, good or bad, until at least Labour Day"...

I remember getting lit up for saying that in 2014...

[Mr Dee]

1 hour ago, Dragon37 said:

Winnipeg lost by one score only because of two turnovers by Randle and one penalty. Winnipeg was never in the game.

Johnson caused the fumble Randle got. Bass caused the interception that Randle got. That's the defence doing their job. Kinda like Montreal's defence doing their job of stopping our 3rd down gambles. 

Willy caused his own fumble. Willy overthrew 3 times for what could have been game changers. Glenn didn't miss those.

That is the way the game went and we lost, and didn't look good in doing it, but conversely, flip that long TD pass to Smith or Adams, and just get one of those 3rd down situations, or Willy doesn't fumble, well, you get my point, I hope. We made mistakes but to say we were never in the game is only related to the fact we just put ourselves in those situations.

Oh, and we did get killer penalties too.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, Dragon37 said:

Winnipeg lost by one score only because of two turnovers by Randle and one penalty. Winnipeg was never in the game.

if you want to play the oh so close what if game there are plenty of just misses that the Bombers had that could have changed the game too. It's a fools errand to try and do that though. 

[Tracker]

Quote

At the risk of being called overly pessimistic, I think we will know within six games what this season holds for the Bombers. Last game was a carbon copy (or Xerox if you like) of most of our games last year, and that does not bode well. I have said this before, but Willy cannot have too many games left before he loses the confidence of his teammates. O'Shea may take until December before he comes to that conclusion.

 

[Adrenaline_x]

50 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

if you want to play the oh so close what if game there are plenty of just misses that the Bombers had that could have changed the game too. It's a fools errand to try and do that though. 

Right. But Montreal was in a different league of play then ours.  They killed themselves with penalties and costly mistakes.  They were moving the ball up and down the field. 

 

We did sweet **** all and only lucked out in one or two good throws and a bunch of runs   

 

[Blueandgold]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

if you want to play the oh so close what if game there are plenty of just misses that the Bombers had that could have changed the game too. It's a fools errand to try and do that though. 

We really didn't miss anything though. That's the worst part about it. Aside from Willy badly overthrowing a wide open Ryan Smith deep we don't have a lot of plays like that. 

[17to85]

2 hours ago, Blueandgold said:

We really didn't miss anything though. That's the worst part about it. Aside from Willy badly overthrowing a wide open Ryan Smith deep we don't have a lot of plays like that. 

Except he missed a bunch of deep throws that could have got field position and kept the offense on the field. People seem to forget that. It's not just the big plays, if you miss a throw on 2nd down you take yourself off the field and who knows what would have happened if you'd got a fresh set of downs. You can play the what if game with every team in every game. Trying to use it to prove anything one way or the other is just playing silly buggers. 

[do or die]

Miss a pass, take a penalty, drop a pass, fail on short yardage......Bombers kept themselves off the field alright, while the Als kept themselves on.  Don't know what the TOP at the end of the 3rd was.....but pretty sure it was ugly,