Keen observations cromartie and I concur. I mostly focused on the 'what'' and you provided the 'why' insightfully.cromartie wrote:First off, kudos to whoever hung the "Parks Department" sign. That was pretty funny.Blitz wrote:We beat the Bombers because our offence contributed to our defense. Our offence played well overall, for these simple reasons -
1. We used many more tight end sets than usual with an extra lineman and Lumbala lined up as the tight ends.
2. We rushed the football more than 20 times
3. We rushed for 165 yards - a huge difference than our previous three games.
The run helped with pass protection and opened up the passing attack, allowing us to go vertical for some big plays. We wrapped up the game with our ability to run the football.
Some thoughts on this.
I would submit that the only reason you saw Lumbala on the field as much as you did was because, with injuries to Taylor and Haidera, the depth chart was getting thin.
Winnipeg doesn't disguise much on defence. In the first half, they sent Maurice Leggett three times on a short side blitz on 2nd and long, two of which resulted in sacks against a five man line. The third time it happened, you would think someone would have noticed and picked it up. Nope.
Like the Don Matthews coached Alouettes of the early 'aughts, when they put seven men on the line of scrimmage, they were sending seven men. Consistently.
The third drive of the second half is indicative of what really irritates me about this offense. Facing a consistent seven man rush, the first two plays featured seven men on the line of scrimmage, the results were an 11 yard pass and a 14 yard rush. The third play was a six man offensive line, which was a pass to Logan for no gain (thanks to a missed downfield block). The fourth play was an old Jacqueball special, a five man line with trips in tight to the short side, and that resulted in a 14 yard gain.
Then, it was a five man line, the results of which were: Harris stuffed, incompletion, punt.
In the end, we wore them down, which is fine. But it's as much about getting your line some help, understanding what your opponent is doing and adjusting to it as it is simplifying the blocking schemes. And we don't adjust very well.
Our offence drives me crazy too. In fact I have no idea why so many CFL offences are so stuck in the spread offence...and I was very surprised this year when Khari Jones re-introduced full spread empty backfield that even Chap had abandoned. Without going into a whole Chap thing...the best thing I liked about our offence from 2011 -2013 is that we used less spread and more power formations than any other CFL team but still it was not enough. Most CFL defenses are going to continue to blitz the spread with obvious change-ups at times.
Its interesting to see how most CFL defenses like to defend us, when we are in the spread. Most blitz us while either playing zone or combination/man zone (except in the red zone, where they often go man). For example Andrew Harris was wide open for his short touchdown pass against Winnipeg because they Winnipeg blitzed and went man and Winnipeg didn't account for him but that isn't they way defenses play us between the 20's,
A common defense against us, when we go 5 receiver spread is that they blitz with 6 (often usinng stunts as well )against our 5 offensive lineman. If we don't keep Harris or Logan in to block, then one of their defenders has a free route to our quarterback. Often this ends up being two defenders with a clear route to the quarterback because our blitz or stunt pickup is so bad. It forces a very quick throw, under lots of pressure for our quarterback, if he can get it off.
Of course we can throw to Harris or Logan out of the backfield but the defense accounts for the tailback in either zone or combination man/zone and we also have to throw the pass to the tailback quickly. How do defenses do this? Quite simply they cheat. How do they cheat>? Most often they leave the wide flat wide open, knowing that our offence is unlikely to make that long throw, under quick pressure, to Iannuzzi out there....
When they blitz seven defenders against our five offensive lineman, even if we keep our tailback in to block, one defender will come free and with Dorazio's terrible blitz/stunt pickup this usually means two defenders coming free. That, once again forces a very quick pass under big pressure, if we can avoid the sack. We can release the tailback out of the backfield for a quick pass but the tailack is accounte for. How does the defense do this, when we have five receivers and a tailback running a pass pattern. Quite simply, they cheat even more. They usually account for the tailback, leaving four defenders to cover five receivers. Once again, they leave the wide flat open and without a safety in the middle, they believe that we won't have the time to get the football off deep down the middle.
I won't even bother discussing the six receiver, empty backfield set. The results are obvious.
Of course, we so often struggle with being defended this way and our quarterback gets quick pressured, hit, mauled, and sacked. The blitz often works as a run blitz as well.
Another thing that drove me crazy at times, when Chap coached the offence and we also saw in the Winipeg game is that we used Lumbala and an extra lineman, when we go power set. The defense doesn't count for the extra lineman in their pass defense and why should they (except for down at the goal line, when they should).
What would be wiser would be to use two tight ends that can block and catch. Lumbala is ok for one of those positions. The other tight end we should have been using Ernest Jackson (when he was in the lineup) or Haidara, I remember well, at one time when we lined up Lyle Green and Jason Clermont often, as tight ends against Don Mathews Alouettes blitz and burned them but of course we went back to running Clermont on suicide underneath crossing patterns again. Its like the spread is a religion to too many offensive coordinators. The New England Patriots saw the writing on the wall for the spread, as have other NFL teams but most CFL coordinators have not made the paradign change. (hwo is that for a phrase..
)When you look around the CFL, most offensive coordiantors are still stuck in the spread. Cortez is a huge disciple of it in Saskatchewan as is Austin in Hamilton, Milanovich in Toronto, Dinwiddie in Montreal, etc, etc, and most CFL offensive coordinators use it as their primary formation. Khari Jones uses it much more often than Chap did in his last 3 years.
Change comes slowly, even when it should be obvious that its necessary, as your post clearly showed cromartie.
) because I can't see what else triggered the AR.
I like long TD passes and long runs as much as the next fan does but I like all those other plays too. Show them, let me decide whether they are worth watching. I'm usually GLUED to the replay screen in between plays. I even sometimes end up watching a play LIVE on the replay screen because somebody is coming or going from their seat while the play is on. Nice to not miss a play just because Bob wants another beer and doesn't want to wait until the play is over to get it....