13 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

It's the annual changing of the guards is why.

I lol'd.

Bond also played RT in both pre-season games and looked good.  I'm confident he can play that position with ease when needed, best find of the year.

Apparently he upset Bowman by feeding him lines from "Porgy and Bess" between plays, Bond assumed the role of "Bess" and Bowman was supposed to recite the lines of "Pappy" but unfortunately could only respond with animalistic grunting sounds.

Edited August 31, 20168 yr by Throw Long Bannatyne

Interesting heard Walters on radio this morning. Said Bond was your prototypical guard big road grader. Also interesting is that he had been trying to get  Fokiti  up here for two years.

3 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

Interesting heard Walters on radio this morning. Said Bond was your prototypical guard big road grader. Also interesting is that he had been trying to get  Fokiti  up here for two years.

I think this goes to show you the Walter's crew has successfully recruited a legitimate O-line... Had they not signed Bryant the O-line could be Foketi-Bond-Goossen-Chungh-Hardrick... Although Hardrick was brought into the league by BC he was pretty much a cast-off by time we picked him up... 

So, was Bond my left guard or your left guard?

I believe it was mentioned earlier but just in case it wasn't, I mentioned this in another thread, but the reason IMO why Nichols and the offense isn't producing like it was is the fact we have stopped throwing the ball deep regardless of whether it is completed or not. By doing it we stretch the defense and permit more down low. Our play selection in the past two games; the first half of two games ago, and the entire last game we didn't stretch the defense and our offensive output suffered. We will win some games with defense and special teams but we will start to lose more simply because we cannot be a 2 dimensional team. Just my opinion

12 hours ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

I believe it was mentioned earlier but just in case it wasn't, I mentioned this in another thread, but the reason IMO why Nichols and the offense isn't producing like it was is the fact we have stopped throwing the ball deep regardless of whether it is completed or not. By doing it we stretch the defense and permit more down low. Our play selection in the past two games; the first half of two games ago, and the entire last game we didn't stretch the defense and our offensive output suffered. We will win some games with defense and special teams but we will start to lose more simply because we cannot be a 2 dimensional team. Just my opinion

what if the defense isn't giving you the deep ball? What if the defense takes that away and only allows you the dink-n-dunk underneath? 

What if not going deep means a lot less turnovers, potentially, and that's the reason Nichols has been able to play (mostly) mistake-free football and allow us to win the turnover battle pretty handily?

 

Again, just "What If"'s..........

Oh yes I do agree with your comment Noeller however if we don't at least attempt it once or twice during the game then in essence the defense has made you one dimensional in that you are just rinkie dinking them and yes you may win the time of possession or you may not. Throwing a 6 yard pass expecting to get 10 yards has in the past led us to many 2 and outs and thus the time of possession reverts to the opposition and then the wear and tear on the defense shows in the latter part of the game. We need only to look at the first 5 games of the season to verify this result. However when Nichols came in he did push it downfield and IMO at least it did open up some of the other stuff. Just my opinion and of course there are a lot of "what ifs" in every game.

They did attempt a few balls down the field Harris along the sideline. There was the deep ball that Shepard ran out of bounds than came back in on. Might of been a couple others.

52 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

They did attempt a few balls down the field Harris along the sideline. There was the deep ball that Shepard ran out of bounds than came back in on. Might of been a couple others.

Harris along the sideline isn't exactly a quick out........

On 8/31/2016 at 0:23 PM, Jpan85 said:

Interesting heard Walters on radio this morning. Said Bond was your prototypical guard big road grader. Also interesting is that he had been trying to get  Fokiti  up here for two years.

he said that a while ago, he said the same thing about many of the DB's too including Fogg.

6 hours ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

Oh yes I do agree with your comment Noeller however if we don't at least attempt it once or twice during the game then in essence the defense has made you one dimensional in that you are just rinkie dinking them and yes you may win the time of possession or you may not. Throwing a 6 yard pass expecting to get 10 yards has in the past led us to many 2 and outs and thus the time of possession reverts to the opposition and then the wear and tear on the defense shows in the latter part of the game. We need only to look at the first 5 games of the season to verify this result. However when Nichols came in he did push it downfield and IMO at least it did open up some of the other stuff. Just my opinion and of course there are a lot of "what ifs" in every game.

it's called YAC , chances are if they're taking away the over the top passes the coverage underneath is soft.

On 2016-08-31 at 1:32 PM, bearpants said:

I think this goes to show you the Walter's crew has successfully recruited a legitimate O-line... Had they not signed Bryant the O-line could be Foketi-Bond-Goossen-Chungh-Hardrick... Although Hardrick was brought into the league by BC he was pretty much a cast-off by time we picked him up... 

I think Hardrick spent some time with the Riders as well, but not sure if it was before or after BC. 

Glad he got his spot back from Foketi, love the guys enthusiasm.

 

 

Edited September 2, 20168 yr by Throw Long Bannatyne

It seems doubtful that a D would be playing prevent for an entire game 

On 9/2/2016 at 8:29 AM, Mark H. said:

It seems doubtful that a D would be playing prevent for an entire game 

except this isn't madden

2 hours ago, LimJahey said:

except this isn't madden

I don't play Madden or any other video game. If you can give an example of a D that plays prevent for an entire game, I'll be more than happy to listen. 

3 hours ago, Mark H. said:

I don't play Madden or any other video game. If you can give an example of a D that plays prevent for an entire game, I'll be more than happy to listen. 

Your right no D plays prevent for a game or a half. They will play soft cushion and come up and tackle the short under passes, which some people confuse as prevent. But our D does that a ton. Tor long played a match zone to a similar effect. 

2 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Your right no D plays prevent for a game or a half. They will play soft cushion and come up and tackle the short under passes, which some people confuse as prevent. But our D does that a ton. Tor long played a match zone to a similar effect. 

And even that doesn't happen for an entire game, due to necessary adjustments. 

And you don't always have to take what a defense gives you to be successful. Sometimes strength against strength still works to your advantage. 

30 minutes ago, J5V said:

And you don't always have to take what a defense gives you to be successful. Sometimes strength against strength still works to your advantage. 

Milt & Khari mostly connected on basic and/or ad lib plays that no one could stop. There wasn't always a complicated chess match based on the D

2 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Milt & Khari mostly connected on basic and/or ad lib plays that no one could stop. There wasn't always a complicated chess match based on the D

Khari was also willing to take a risk and let his receiver win a battle. Sometimes you gotta take those risks

7 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Khari was also willing to take a risk and let his receiver win a battle. Sometimes you gotta take those risks

Trust in your playmakers to go out and make plays .. sometimes a little of that gunslinger mentality goes a long way.

lot easier to say when you have Milt ******* Stegall as your weapon........

1 hour ago, Noeller said:

lot easier to say when you have Milt ******* Stegall as your weapon........

I still remember a half time segment that Matt Dunigan did explaining how the Bombers basically made the defense choose if they were going to double up on Stegall or Bruce and Khari was just putting it up to whichever one had single coverage. Not a bad way to go about things. 

The bomb in the 2001 Eastern Final was total ad lib. Khari saw blitz and the middle was going to be wide open looked at Milt and he ran down middle of the field.