2 minutes ago, Brandon said:

The D was soft, but they blitzed. Hell on the first Banks TD Heath was in on a blitz. The big issue was soft coverage plus not getting to masoli with the pressure.

The LB's they are currently playing are not good at blitzing, although Santos-Knox has potential.  Both Wild and Bass were very effective at blitzing and often converged on the QB.

3 hours ago, Mark F said:

At this point, it  looks to me like Hurl is just much too slow to play linebacker in the CFL. 

 He brings all the disadavantages of a big, slow, 240 lb linebacker, and none of the advantages.  he's easily blocked, and not a hard hitter.

It looked like they had three different players at the position, Hurl, Knox, and Briggs . 

Defence might be better when they have this fixed.

 

Yes I remember the discussion on this board early in the season about where would we compromise talent on D i.e., linebacking core versus halfbacks and corners.

We are 10 and 4 and Randle and company (outside of last night) are a big part of why we are 10 and 4 but our weaknesses at the linebacker positions really showed up last night.

Hurl needs to go back to molded as a special teams demon and the odd wrinkle player on D. I think that's what he is suited for and could make a great career out of it, not as a starting MLB in the CFL.

Got give credit to June Jones he had a fantastic game plan. Maybe if he was there two years ago they would not have ruined Collaros by rushing the ball 5 times a game.

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

 

Looks like the media is starting to turn on Hall.

 

 

By media you mean a fan blogger

Also, even without taking the kick returning into account it has become more and more clear that throwing to Lankford when he's actually being covered by a man is a terrible idea. The only plays he's made from the receiver spot this year have come when the defence has more or less left him completely uncovered. Let's see Chris Givens. 

The defence wasn't much different last night than it is most nights. The big difference was that our offence couldn't put up more than 30 points and eat up a bunch of TOP. I'd say we are 10-4 despite our defence, not because of it.

23 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

The defence wasn't much different last night than it is most nights. The big difference was that our offence couldn't put up more than 30 points and eat up a bunch of TOP. I'd say we are 10-4 despite our defence, not because of it.

Amen! Could not have said it better! Never going anywhere  with the Richie Hall defense.

46 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

The defence wasn't much different last night than it is most nights. The big difference was that our offence couldn't put up more than 30 points and eat up a bunch of TOP. I'd say we are 10-4 despite our defence, not because of it.

For sure the team's record is despite the defense. It's just that after the last two weeks, it looked like the defense had got itself on track. Then last night, it was the same old same: poor pressure, lousy coverage, bad positioning, and brutal tackling. And that was pretty much from the first snap.

1 hour ago, Mark F said:

And they are not standing still as far as bringing players in goes. They just signed 6 guys.

 

All of whom are "no names" and true practice roster fodder.

This team is named "Stand Pat Sally" for a reason.

 

1 minute ago, TheSource said:

All of whom are "no names" and true practice roster fodder.

This team is named "Stand Pat Sally" for a reason.

 

I hate the term "PR fodder". You never know who is going to become a star in this league and tons of small school guys with limited resumes turn out to be amazing players. 

59 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

For sure the team's record is despite the defense. It's just that after the last two weeks, it looked like the defense had got itself on track. Then last night, it was the same old same: poor pressure, lousy coverage, bad positioning, and brutal tackling. And that was pretty much from the first snap.

The thing is though that one of those games was against Ryan Lindley in the rain, and another against a snakebit Eskimo team.  Not real good barometers of improvement.

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

The defence wasn't much different last night than it is most nights. The big difference was that our offence couldn't put up more than 30 points and eat up a bunch of TOP. I'd say we are 10-4 despite our defence, not because of it.

That's exactly why I've been calling for Hall to get fired all year cuz I knew if we had an off night like that, the defense would be unable to rise to the occasion.  And he's the architect of it.

#NoMoreBendBreakDefense

We often talk about Calgary's success going through the offense, but I seen BLM struggle too.  Difference between us and them is the Claybrooks brick wall defense.

But I'll tell you another thing.  There was more than one person who stunk it up on offense last night, but Lankford had better not ever play another offensive snap.  Surely there's somebody either on a practice roster or who just got released who's 1000x better at route running and not running drunk like he does.  He really stuck out like a sore thumb last night.

52 minutes ago, TheSource said:

All of whom are "no names" and true practice roster fodder.

This team is named "Stand Pat Sally" for a reason.

 

LOL everybody's a nobody until they become a somebody. Don't be ignorant. 

Edited October 7, 20177 yr by Arnold_Palmer

We learned a few things last night....we don't have that killer instinct and that passive D reared it's ugly....Not too thrilled with the effort or lack of it, at all ...A blown play by our O line might have cost us our starter for awhile (or longer) in the most important part of our stretch run....Letting a team like Ham. march at will, sure pointed out the defence is lacking and I'm looking at the soft play in the middle...Masoli wasn't panicked at all or even rushed that much...He just went calmly about dismantling us and this is Masoli of the last place team in the east we're talking about...4 games left and we're in repair mode...We better find some answers or by the look of that game last night post season will be very brief.

Edited October 7, 20177 yr by Stickem

4 minutes ago, Stickem said:

We learned a few things last night....we don't have that killer instinct and that passive D reared it's ugly....Not too thrilled with the effort or lack of it, at all ...A blown play by our O line might have cost us our starter for awhile (or longer) in the most important part of our stretch run....Letting a team like Ham. march at will, sure pointed out the defence is lacking and I'm looking at the soft play in the middle...Masoli wasn't panicked at all or even rushed that much...He just went calmly about dismantling us and this is Masoli of the last place team in the east we're talking about...4 games left and we're in repair mode...We better find some answers or by the look of that game last night post season will be very brief.

I'm interested to see what the X-rays on Nichols's throwing hand revealed.  Seems like hand fixes usually can be done within a couple weeks, or QB plays with a glove or something.

 

Davis didn't look good last night, but I wonder how he'd do with a week of practice.

11 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

The bigger question is, if we accept Hall is done after this, a successful season, what possessed MOS to keep him after last season?  Hall is exactly what you expect from him. 

Davis looked like nothing tonight.  How many years as he been here?

I wouldn't give up on Davis because of his performance last night. Darned few Bombers looked good enough to play in this league. Hall, on the other hand....

Davis has been practicing here for years....Sure as heck didn't look like it last night and if that's the result of all of his practice time, we better be on the look for a new back-up....I'd rather see Lefevour in there at this point if Matt can't go

Just now, Stickem said:

Davis has been practicing here for years....Sure as heck didn't look like it last night and if that's the result of all of his practice time, we better be on the look for a new back-up....I'd rather see Lefevour in there at this point if Matt can't go

Perhaps giving Davis a game where he's had starters reps for the week and is not coming into the game cold is warranted. We didn't keep him around for 3 years to bench him after one half of mediocre play. 

2 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

Perhaps giving Davis a game where he's had starters reps for the week and is not coming into the game cold is warranted. We didn't keep him around for 3 years to bench him after one half of mediocre play. 

This.  Now I'll warrant he did show a bit of indecisiveness out there last night, but idk if that's a lack of being able to grasp the speed of the game, or just lack of prep.  He threw some passes right on target that got dropped though.  He also has a pretty good deep ball, so let Adams and company get comfortable with him and he might do some damage.

1 hour ago, TheSource said:

All of whom are "no names" and true practice roster fodder.

This team is named "Stand Pat Sally" for a reason.

 

So, basically the same as every other team. 

Another gem of a post from "TheSource"... Comical how you only show up here after the team loses. You're either daft or obtuse, or maybe both.

59 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

The thing is though that one of those games was against Ryan Lindley in the rain, and another against a snakebit Eskimo team.  Not real good barometers of improvement.

And Masoli was a career backup until this season. The defense put together two solid games going into last night's game and I think we all expected better. That was my point.

4 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

So, basically the same as every other team. 

Another gem of a post from "TheSource"... Comical how you only show up here after the team loses. You're either daft or obtuse, or maybe both.

And Masoli was a career backup until this season. The defense put together two solid games going into last night's game and I think we all expected better. That was my point.

Yes we did expect better.  I've been expecting better from them nearly all year though and I'm afraid last night's game was not an outlier.  If we don't do something to pressure Jennings next week though, Lord help us.

15 hours ago, Bubba Zanetti said:

Thorpe quit on the team. Cant keep a guy like that around.

They ran right up the middle around the post or through it.

1 hour ago, AKAChip said:

Perhaps giving Davis a game where he's had starters reps for the week and is not coming into the game cold is warranted. We didn't keep him around for 3 years to bench him after one half of mediocre play. 

Davis won't get starters reps if Nicholls is ready to go. Doesn't work that way. Matt will continue to get 90% of the reps. Davis will only get those reps if Matt cant play.

7 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Davis won't get starters reps if Nicholls is ready to go. Doesn't work that way. Matt will continue to get 90% of the reps. Davis will only get those reps if Matt cant play.

Yes no one is disputing that. 

I probably made a mistake with the title, instead of making the Grey Cup, it should be winning the Grey Cup.  Because I think if we make the Grey Cup but lose to anyone in the East (or crossover team), Hall should be tossed out the door.

Edited October 7, 20177 yr by USABomberfan