Week 3 (vs Ham...Now With Depth Chart)

[WBBFanWest]

7 hours ago, White Out said:

it won the game? or did hamiltons 6 turn overs and our D win the game? 

Perfect example of the "if we win, it's just because we were lucky" mindset.

[Nash00]

There seemed to be times in all three games so far that what should be a great situation for Harris to get the ball, we try to get too cute with it. The 1st and 20 draw play for one, and the fumble on the 8 in the 4th qtr.

These are tailor made spots for Harris to put his head down and run over guys but we seem to be thinking pass first, especially in the red zone.

[M.O.A.B.]

a win is a win. 

yes its ugly but as long as we see improvements thats all matters.

the D forced ticats O off the field. The O managed to stay on the field keeping our D fresh.

yes they have left some points off the board, heres hoping Willy can find his long-ball accuracy.

Edited July 8, 2016 by M.O.A.B.

[Bigblue204]

Solid win. All 3 teams have areas to improve.  But the best part about last nights game was the overall improvement. Steps in the right direction. No kicking ourselves in the teeth (every time). Taking two steps forward, then another 2 forward. Need to start converting 3's into 7's. But Im just glad they have started to play to their potential.

[ddanger]

11 hours ago, Goalie said:

Ticats have 7 points off a missed fg and 7 on a play where their receivers were 5 yards offside. Bombers should be winning by more 

that was an absolutely awful call. I thought scoring plays were reviewed how that was allowed to stand is beyond me...

[ddanger]

10 hours ago, Logan007 said:

I think Dressler messed him up on that first one by not being where he was supposed to be, then getting a 5 yard penalty for time count.. Guys need to be where they're supposed to be or mistakes like that end up happening. 

Maybe Dressler was still suffering from getting concked in the head 2 weeks ago. How in the world he didn't realize he needed to be on the field astounds me...he's the holder!! And that miss was all about Medlock being frazzled.

[ddanger]

10 hours ago, Jacquie said:

Here's a couple of things to consider... Offence had one 2 & out and it was the first series of the game. TOP for the Bombers was 33:33 and Ticats had the ball for 26:27.

about time we had the ball longer than the other team

[bearpants]

38 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Andrew Harris is good at football.

You don't say! 

My thoughts... offense is still concerning... the inability to finish drives will hurt us in future games... and the only TD they did produce came on (what I thought was) a very questionable PI call and a pretty darn lucky catch by Smith... however, I thoroughly enjoyed our ability to actually control the ball and time of possession... Early in the 2nd quarter, they had a drive that was around 7-8 minutes... I honestly can't remember the last time we had a drive like that... but I do believe with the opportunities given to them, we should have put up 45 points... Andrew Harris, wow, if you don't love this guy just stop watching Bomber football now...

Defense was stellar last night... off the top of my head... Leggett, Harris, Cummings, Shologan, and Wild were the stars, but no one really had a bad game... very happy with the win... looking forward (hoping, fingers-crossed, whatever!) to seeing more improvement by the offense next week...

[Jimmy Pop]

I'm hopeful our D brings the same intensity on Thursday.  Whether there's 20K or 30K in attendance, if the D plays well Wpg stadium is rockin'. 

Thought it was kind of neat that Smith's TD was RT by ESPN, Darren Rovell and some other big US outlets. 

[Logan007]

4 hours ago, iso_55 said:

Some interesting reactions by Austin & Masoli. For the Masoli interview the audio isn't synced with the video so it is a bit distracting. Drew Edwards got his ears pinned back by a very angry Kent Austin when Edwards questioned him about starting Masoli.

 

http://3downnation.com/2016/07/07/ticats-lose-another-ugly-one-28-24-bombers/#comments

They must have fixed the audio.

 

That aside, I'm going to use this link to 3downnation as an example for those select few who think we "lucked out".  Read the comments.  You know our team played well when the fans of the other team are stating how well we played and how our players were lit up last night.  Most of the comments are about how well the Bombers played and not that they lucked out, or some other excuse.  Just wanted to point that out. 

[ddanger]

8 hours ago, Goalie said:

I think the purpose is to eat the clock. And it worked. Obviously the end goal is to score touchdowns but if not you are eating the clock. If the bombers can dink and dunk all game long and score a few tds in the process.... they are gonna win quite a few games. They didn't today but if they ever do end up finishing these 12 13 play drives with tds... look out. Also depends where you start on the field tho right. Bombers had a couple drives start near or b4 our 10 yard line. Put together a few first downs. Moved the ball. It helps. The goal of the O is to score touchdowns or field goals.... if that doesn't happen the goal would be to keep your d off the field and they did that quite a bit tonight. 

grinding out yardage and eating the clock is the plan...especially when you're leading. I think it's a sign of a confident offense. I was really disappointed that they couldn't score in the 4th when they marched the ball all the way down the field, but it destroyed the clock, and kept our D on the sidelines. Coupled with a great defensive stand when they did get the ball back and victory!

[do or die]

Not getting killed in TOP was somewhat refreshing.....especially for our D.

[ddanger]

5 minutes ago, Logan007 said:

They must have fixed the audio.

 

That aside, I'm going to use this link to 3downnation as an example for those select few who think we "lucked out".  Read the comments.  You know our team played well when the fans of the other team are stating how well we played and how our players were lit up last night.  Most of the comments are about how well the Bombers played and not that they lucked out, or some other excuse.  Just wanted to point that out. 

I get so tired of sitting in the stands at the stadium listening to my fellow season ticket holders bitching and complaining all the way through games about our team. Same thing here, people are complaining and are very critical even when we win. Was it a game for the ages?? No it wasn't. But our team played significantly better than last week. They played with emotion, and they dominated. They were excited and it showed.

[Nash00]

7 minutes ago, ddanger said:

I get so tired of sitting in the stands at the stadium listening to my fellow season ticket holders bitching and complaining all the way through games about our team. Same thing here, people are complaining and are very critical even when we win. Was it a game for the ages?? No it wasn't. But our team played significantly better than last week. They played with emotion, and they dominated. They were excited and it showed.

Agreed. The defense in particular was noticeably more energetic and were rallying to the ball carrier better than the last two weeks. Offensively, we were moving the sticks with more regularity also. Tackling was also miles better in my opinion.

Does Willy need to be more accurate? Yes.

Does he need to push the ball downfield more? Yes.

Do we need to have that killer instinct when we have a team on the ropes early in the 3rd quarter? Absolutely,

At the end of the day, had the roles been reversed there would be cries that "the score absolutely flattered the Bombers and we should have been blown out" etc. We have issues in our game that need to be addressed for sure, but in a game we needed to win we found a way to do it.

[Stickem]

A part of this team woke up....The bench looked alive (as opposed to lacklustre) and you could see the tenacity in their faces...They were not going to let this one slip away...More of that and we should be okay and Mike O can start unpacking one of his bags....This is a tough start to the season BUT with that kind of effort, no matter how unorganized at times it seemed, we'll win our share of games...A much happier Bomber fan today.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Stickem
spelling error

[rebusrankin]

As critical as I have been of MOS, I have to wonder if the what we saw last night was players who like him and stepped up to take the heat of him.

[17to85]

9 hours ago, White Out said:

it won the game? or did hamiltons 6 turn overs and our D win the game? 

It's a team game, the turnovers on their own don't win the game without some help from the offense. Yeah they coulda been better in the redzone, but they controlled the ball, moved it and garnered some momentum for the team and scored enough points to actually get the win. 

[do or die]

Well, the players have to stand up for MOS....he has bent over sideways and backwards to protect them.....up to placing himself in the barrel.    Much better attitude and intensity, last nite.

[Noeller]

40 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

It's a team game, the turnovers on their own don't win the game without some help from the offense. Yeah they coulda been better in the redzone, but they controlled the ball, moved it and garnered some momentum for the team and scored enough points to actually get the win. 

I look at it like this: The offense sustaining drives allowed the D to stay fresh and not get tired early, so they were able to make all those plays. It really is a team game where everyone doing their job, helps everyone else do THEIR job...

Re: Players stepping up for MOS....there was a good tweet from Irving earlier this week saying, essentially, "MOS continually has his players backs. Wouldn't it be nice if they had his on Thursday??"

[M.O.A.B.]

Did we have any injuries last night?

[rebusrankin]

On the defense, Fogg and Posey in particular, is this a case where we have to play them and let them develop (good or bad) because in the long run, it will really help us?

[17to85]

1 minute ago, rebusrankin said:

On the defense, Fogg and Posey in particular, is this a case where we have to play them and let them develop (good or bad) because in the long run, it will really help us?

I think it's just a case of too many young guys. A lot easier to work one in at a time but having to play 2 of them is tough, especially when a veteran guy gets hurt and you need to make a 3rd change. 

[Noeller]

We really really really could use Johnny Adams back.....

[Tracker]

We were fortunate to catch the 'Cats without Collaros and by no means did the Bombers run roughshod over them. I still have reservations about both Willy and O'Shea, but the Bomber defence looked respectable despite Bass not being dominant. The offensive line shut down a very good Hamilton front four and it sure looks like Taylor Reed is sorely missed.

[Atomic]

I noticed Brendan Morgan and Derek Jones getting lots of time on defence in the second half.  Not sure if there was an injury but Hawkins didn't seem to be out there too much as the game went on.  If I'm not mistaken.