About our defence - Wally is sounding like the Lions DC

[TheLionKing]

Mark Washington has been a major disappointment as Defensive Coordinator. Seems to me to be way over his head.

[DanoT]

Mark Washington has been a major disappointment as Defensive Coordinator. Seems to me to be way over his head.

I just posted the same thing in another thread. MW needs coaching help.

[WestCoastJoe]

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/footb ... story.html

From Lowell Ullrich ...

Defensively it was clear within the first Hamilton possession that the Ticats would attack the Lions by trying to get Elimimian and Adam Bighill to vacate the middle of the field.

Any OC would be happy to take advantage of Biggie and Solly vacating the middle of the box. It is a head shaker to some that Mark W's system cooperates with that notion.

[WestCoastJoe]

He (Lulay) said Hamilton's defence gives a lot of looks, they put different people in the box and drop off different people and they run stunts and twists in attempt to make things difficult for the O-line and to confuse the QBs and receivers on where the hot reads will be. (My comment: That might account for Lulay's hesitation throughout the game, when his first read wasn't open and he hesitated in the pocket before scrambling or being sacked.)

Copying your comment over to this thread, BCFAN, as it relates to defence, albeit Hamilton's.

* lots of looks

* different people in the box

* drop off different people

* run stunts and twists

* attempt to make things difficult for the O Line

* and to confuse QBs and receivers
................

Pressure defence

Pressure with speed. Pressure with making the offence think and react.

Add in some blitzing, sprinkle with some seasoning, mix lightly, and one would have "aggressive," "attacking" defence.

[WestCoastJoe]

From the Buono/Sekeres interview posted by sjroc ...

Buono: Our pass rush is excellent

WB: "What you guys don't know, our pass rush is excellent"

"I will have you guys apologize to your listeners. There is nothing wrong with our pass rush."

Buono gets testy in defending the defence. Makes sense. It is his preferred defence. Conservative. Zone. D Line on their own in rushing the passer. Nothing fancy, except deep coverage scheme from Mars.

He says the D Line is doing what they are asked to do. I agree with that. The view of this fan is that the D Line does not get the kind of help that aggressive, attacking defences give their front four. Blitzes. Overloads. 8 or 9 men in the box pre-snap. Et cetera.

Wally will show 4 men rushing against 5 or even 6 blockers. They perform their assignments. He calls that excellent D Line play. And it is, for guys who are outmanned. Our defence sacrifices the D Line in order to put more guys back in coverage. We even move Bighill back there, along with Johnson, who is already a DB.

Wally will show tape to Sekeres. And yes, the D will be shown to be doing what they are asked. No one disputes that. I would suggest that the D Line needs more help from the system and plays they run. Starting with more guys at or near the LOS. More active. More challenging. All noted elsewhere in this thread. It is not rocket science. Drop back and you lessen pressure. Put pressure on the LOS as with Edmonton and Hamilton and the D Line looks much better.

Once again, it is the view of this fan that the personnel of the D Line need more help from the system. How? Chris Jones could do it. Steinauer could do it. Stubler could do it. And maybe Mark W could do it, but with a different philosophy, a different approach. Is that in his makeup to do? It does not look like Mark W would ever be comfortable running a Don Matthews style of defence.

MS: Are you out talented against a team like Hamilton?

WB: They've got no weaknesses on defence. If they do have a weakness, they cover it up by what they do. They're a better football club than we are. Sometimes the systems make your players better. Sometimes the systems make your players worse. Do we need to improve in an area or two? The players still have to go out and execute.

Wally does not address the issue of whether other personnel staffs are doing a better job of evaluating talent.

His comments about systems making players better or worse are revealing, but not in the way he intended. The view of this fan is that it is our defensive system that is primarily responsible for our very poor defensive results. As noted by MLF, if Chris Jones or Orlando Steinauer had our guys, they would be looking a lot better than they do in our system.

If they (Hamilton) do have a weakness, they cover it up by what they do. -- Wally Buono

Yes. Aggressive defences do cover up weaknesses by what they do. They gamble. The gamble works if confusion happens in the offence. They leave DBs in single coverage, or on an island. The gamble is that the DBs will be close enough to disrupt plays, while the LOS is attacked by extra men.

5 receivers --> 5 DBs. 7 men blitzing, in all kinds of looks and combinations and fakes.

6 receivers --> 6 DBs. 6 men blitzing. Et cetera ...

Steady diet of 4 men on a very similar, repeating pass rush --> Inadequate in the view of this fan.

Just the view of a fan of the Lions and the CFL ...

[Toppy Vann]

WCJ... good summary.

Wally did blurt out how sometimes (DEf) systems make players better - FFS Wally YES and your MW's systems aren't cutting it.

Defends hard working pass rushers who get pressure and blames the other on breakdowns.

[WestCoastJoe]

WCJ... good summary.

Wally did blurt out how sometimes (DEf) systems make players better - FFS Wally YES and your MW's systems aren't cutting it.

Defends hard working pass rushers who get pressure and blames the other on breakdowns.

Thanks, Toppy. Some of us have been around for a while. We try to see things as they are.

Our D Line guys do work their butts off. But they get little or no help from blitzes, nor any of the other things attacking defences use to add pressure on the LOS.
.............

Consider a basketball analogy. Reporter asks a coach: Why don't you guys play an attack style defence? Coach answers: But we do attack, from a two-three, half court zone (without full court press).

That is not an attacking defence. Man to man is attacking. Full court press is attacking.
................

Some coaches are out of their comfort zone if they consider playing an attack style defence.

Other coaches such as Jones or Steinauer love it, and so do their players.

[DanoT]

I loved the interview with Wally including the hook to tune in again on Wednesday to find out the radio guys reaction to the film session with Wally.

Wally seemed more aggressive defending the play of the D than the D actually plays. I did like the way he admitted that schemes can make a player better or worse. I didn't expect him to admit that the Lions schemes on D make the players worse.

Just about everyone here thinks the D schemes (Mark Washington's coaching) make the results worse. Statistically Lions are the worst in just about every D category so it pretty much backs up the contention that either Wally has brought in the wrong, inadequate players, or the coaching is inadequate, or it could be both.

[TheLionKing]

My Lord, Buono thinks our pass rush is "excellent". That confirms that Buono has lost touch with reality.

[WestCoastJoe]

Is Mark Washington running the defence that Wally Buono wants? Is it Buono's system?

WB: "What you guys don't know, our pass rush is excellent"

"I will have you guys apologize to your listeners. There is nothing wrong with our pass rush."

Buono: Our pass rush is excellent

Wally got very testy with Matt Sekeres when Matt suggested that there are issues with our pass rush, and that Wally's colleagues around the league see problems with our pass rush.

Does Wally have a hand in setting the tone for our defence? Does he have a hand in influencing how Mark W runs the defence? Wally is very much into how the defence works. He is going to break down film with Matt and Giulio to show them how well it works. Sounds like Wally is the DC.

Yes, it sounds like Wally is the Defensive Coordinator. The GM has the defensive system that the GM wants. And the GM has the Defensive Coordinator that the GM wants. And the GM defends that system against criticism.
.............

Wally will say that our D Line is playing excellent football.

My view: The D Line is doing exactly what the system calls for them to do. They rush 4. They do not load up the box. They do not do anything to make the offence think or doubt. Wally will be able to show how each D Line player is performing a function. This system sacrifices the D Line, with little or no help, in order to put guys back in zone pass coverage. And, as Wally has said in the past, these guys have to play like men. Beat those double teams.

Old school thinking. Very, very old school. And time will tell once again if the evolution of football has passed Wally by. He is not going to change his philosophy of defence. Make no mistake. This is Wally's defence.

Just IMO ...

[DanoT]

I hope Sekeres brings up the Lions worst in the CFL D stats and asks Wally to defend.

[sj-roc]

I hope Sekeres brings up the Lions worst in the CFL D stats and asks Wally to defend.

I would simply ask, "If the pass rush is excellent, where are the results?"

[WestCoastJoe]

I hope Sekeres brings up the Lions worst in the CFL D stats and asks Wally to defend.

I would simply ask, "If the pass rush is excellent, where are the results?"

It seems to me that Wally clearly thinks: The D Line is doing exactly as we demand, in the 4 man rush (no help from dangerous, gambling blitzes). Our cover guys have to do a better job. We have extra guys back there. So Wally thinks: Hang the results. This is an excellent defence.

It is the attempt to force reality into your own view. Doesn't matter what others think. Doesn't matter what the results show.

Living in a dream world. Dinosaur age thinking in the modern world.

4 DL facing 5 or 6 blockers or even more? I recall Wally saying: "Be men."

In other words: Play like men. Take on those constant double teams. Sacrifice yourselves for our defence.

Fans are restless. Media are closing in with tougher questions. Opposing coaches are expressing no fear for this defence. But it will all come down to wins and losses. Wally is not ready to give up his pet defence just as of yet.

[TheLionKing]

Wallyspeak: It's not about schemes, it's all about execution. Where have I heard this before ??

[Toppy Vann]

Wallyspeak: It's not about schemes, it's all about execution. Where have I heard this before ??

Wally is in territory that he is not fully used to as he was for the most part always GM/HC. I don't think he overstepped his role as GM in defending his players. But it concerns me that Jeff Tedford is defending his team's effort.

We want GMs in the media to be interesting, informative and at times provocative as they have a role there. We also want the HC to be similar. One of the issues with the BC Lions Don Matthews I didn't like was how media unfriendly he was in those early days as HC. By the time I'd get to my car post game to hear him speak and I had a space by BC Place, he'd be done. Now we've got Jeff Tedford who is not saying much so Wally is filling the void.

If you go to back to his Sekeres interview, Wally was simply defending the def line and blaming the breakdowns in other spots. Was this over the top to say he will show the team film? I don't think so. Was he nice saying it? Not really and he treated Sekeres like a dummy - that is his worst sin of all.

I do think his little accidental blurt out of the scheme can make players better or worse words was not something typical Wally but I loved it. Yes, Wally Steinhauser's scheme is making those players not only better but they players love their schemes and they're feeding off that and each other.


______

Wally is a good interview and in a far better mood with Sekeres today.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040- ... s-1.347922

Very worthwhile to listen.

1. One key for me was WB's point that their DLINE are working hard and are true blue collar in that regard. He added that if the other 2 units were more like these bc players, the record might be better.

WB on the above point seems to be in a disconnect from how JT sees all his players based on Tedford Tuesday.

I keep hitting on the same themes as I truly wonder that in reading between the lines of players who say intensity is not there and the exit comments of Kevin Glenn and the welcome comments from Paul Mc that there MIGHT be a character issue in the chemistry of this team.

Now that's not on the HC as he is new but it's on him if he doesn't see it and address it.

2. The second key was how he described the MW DEF. It's based on minimizing mistakes and maximizing discipline. If a player messes up, it's a problem and he's noting that there are mess ups.

3. The Lions will look to improve the pass rush and to see if there is a dominant LB out there. No mention of Jasper Simmons in the tape whose gone to the Bombers. His agent of course went to the Casey Printer's Uncle's School for Bad Agents. What a dumb move by the agent and re-tweet by the player. Seems Hufnagel was trying to trade but couldn't but then the player re-tweeted the worst org tweet and that was going to end. Stamps including Bo Levi (who is honest and also says his POW was a snub of Zach - it was) said Simmons is a good player and a starter BUT all asked who on their team was going to sit for him as others are better.

So Wally is in love with the DEF system BUT that is not a smoking gun that he is the puppet master. If there is clear evidence that Jeff T is fully in charge of coaching it's the difference in the GM saying ST and OFF aren't as blue collar as the D Line and if they were - the record could be better.
Sure sounds to me like Jeff T's fully in charge and not Wally on the roof if he's there.

Ackles used to watch practice and we know he was not interfering nor was that in his job description with the owner. A GM not around was alleged to have been ETillman in Edmonton and that didn't work well. Of course the death threats and not moving his family there as a result didnt help.