The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!
It's becoming common in the NFL for teams to gamble on 4th down near mid-field. It's too far for a field goal and a punt will likely sail into the endzone for a touchback. So NFL Analytics says why not gamble for a 1st down since the ball is coming out to the 20 yd line anyways. I think coach Tedford was perhaps relying on his American football experience on the 3rd and 4 gamble. But the CFL is much more of a field possession game. A directional punt pinning the opponent inside the 20 yd line was probably a much smarter play in the CFL. I'll bet the coach won't do another gamble like that anytime soon.
In fairness to Travis, several of his "overthrows" were a result of the receiver running the wrong pattern on Friday. Collie bent his route in while Travis threw it straight...and the overthrow to Arseneux also, was a case of the receiver and QB not on the same page...not a physical issue with Travis' accuracy.
I can't believe the Toronto defence was so effective to completely shutdown A. Harris after the 1st Q? Harris rarely saw the ball. I'll bet Andrew could have busted a few big runs despite them keying on him. Travis was so effective running the ball versus the Riders, if Toronto was keying on Andrew shouldn't that open up running lanes for Travis or another RB?
It will be a long season unless the Lions can get more pressure on the opposing QB. The team also needs a punt returner. Chris Williams and Brad Banks were both free agents in the off-season but the Lions weren't interested...despite giving away the most reliable returner in the game in Tim Brown. The returners we have now are but a shadow of a T. Brown or Yonus Davis.
I'm wondering if Tedford/Cortez decided to do the 3rd down gamble as a challenge for Travis and the OFF to see how they respond a to lower-pressure (at the time the game was not on the line) situation.
I agree, I guess they learned not to try that again. (Without better schemes).
JohnHenry wrote:It's becoming common in the NFL for teams to gamble on 4th down near mid-field. It's too far for a field goal and a punt will likely sail into the endzone for a touchback. So NFL Analytics says why not gamble for a 1st down since the ball is coming out to the 20 yd line anyways. I think coach Tedford was perhaps relying on his American football experience on the 3rd and 4 gamble. But the CFL is much more of a field possession game. A directional punt pinning the opponent inside the 20 yd line was probably a much smarter play in the CFL. I'll bet the coach won't do another gamble like that anytime soon.
Interesting take. I have immense respect for the posters on this board and differing opinions make this an interesting place, but I can't believe folks think that the gamble was a sound decision (for the record, Moj and Reid liked it, Farhan and LU were very critical). Just not buying into the notion of "showing confidence in your offense" and "looking to give the team some momentum." To me, it was a poor decision compounded by an ill-conceived play. I still would have characterized it as a ballsy, wreckless gamble even if they pulled it off.
First, it wasn't really 3rd and 3; it was more like 4 as JohnHenry notes. Second, I could live with the call if we were down by a bunch or it was late in the game. It was neither. The field position battle was still critically important at that stage. Why not a change in Travis's cadence to try and draw the Argos offside? Then, if the Argos didn't bite, punt. Or even a fake punt that's been in the playbook since Day 1 would have been a better option.
The trite 'shows confidence in your offense and confidence in your defense if it doesn't work that they'll get the stop' is nothing but a bullet-proof excuse.
David wrote:
Shall we add A.C. Leonard's name to this list of forgotten 2nd half men? The Argos had no answer for him early. Who kidnapped our OC and replaced him with Chapdelaine anyway?!? Eerily similar to his "if-it's-working-then-let's-not-go-back-to-it" philosophy. Everything that worked early (or last game for that matter) was completely abandoned for low percentage plays. Harris's running should have set up play action. Also, was a screen pass even attempted last night?
About AC Leonard. Man that guy has some skill and just pure strength. He's and NFL calibre TE but just a bit too small. Shame really. He's going to be an absolute beast in this league as he learns the routes more. Mark my words.
We haven't had a guy like him in our line-up since Harry Holt ('78 - '82).
JohnHenry wrote: The team also needs a punt returner. Chris Williams and Brad Banks were both free agents in the off-season but the Lions weren't interested...despite giving away the most reliable returner in the game in Tim Brown. The returners we have now are but a shadow of a T. Brown or Yonus Davis.
Tillman looks reliable - he attacks the ball well and goes straight up field with decent wheels. So little room to move against the Argos though. No holes or lanes. Does that surprise anyone from a unit coached by 'Ground' Chuck McMann?
As for Williams and Banks, we made an offer for Chris Williams in the off-season but not surprisingly in this Wally Buono era, came up a day late and a dollar short. Just the kind of player that could give this team/organization a shot in the arm too.
Manny did not shield the defender away (That happened in the Super Bowl). I would say we need to practice that situation more often, and more effectively. Shielding the ball from the defender, like the low post in basketball. Also going down to the ground for a deliberate low throw. Also fighting for possession of the possibly contested ball. One on one, IMO, that short passing play should be very high percentage.
(Depending on how well it was practiced, one could see not making the call. But I respect Tedford for his decision, as he is in the driver's seat.)
Manny did not fake the defender away, nor off balance.
Manny did not reach enough.
I thought the defender got a hand in there just enough.
Travis did not throw it where only Manny could get his hands on it.
A lower throw towards Manny's chest area would have been almost impossible for a defender to reach over and touch.
I applaud Tedford for having the balls to go for it. We were dying on the vine. His team will grow in courage from his call.
The alternative? Play it safe. Which we have seen for 12 years. Most coaches could not make that call in a hundred years.
It is one game we lost. But the call helps define a team for the future. We would probably have lost anyway, if we had played it safe with a punt.
When you are on the ropes, sometimes it is best to take your best shot. The play had the odds in its favour, IMO. Perhaps 60-40 or higher.
Back in the early 1960s I saw Johnny Unitas go for it on 4th and 5, not last gasp time. Quick breakout pass to flanker/split end Jimmy Orr from in tight, beside the tackle. 1st down. Shocking at the time. Ballsy. If you miss, at least you were fighting, striking at your opponent.
Better to go down fighting, than die on your knees.
Would a successful play swing the momentum and the confidence of your team? I say Yes.
Play it safe? Go for it? It is a defining moment. We see the differing opinions. All defensible. The decision defines the decision maker.
Just IMO ...
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.
Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.
Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
Again, lots of comments, thoughts and criticisms labelled against the Lions and Tedford, but they are FORTUNATE to be at 2-2...Lulay hasn't really played for 2 seasons, and has had 3 procedures on his throwing shoulder, and he's STILL playing with a good QB rating. The defence has become a "work in progress" and is last in most defensive categories, and we have had a large overhaul with both players and coaches all trying to adapt to new systems. The Lions NEED to improve their overall talent and that's not going to happen for a while as well, so if the Leos can be near .500 at the halfway point, it will be a MAJOR ACHIEVEMENT.
And again, as for the 3rd down gamble, Tedford is attempting to establish bonds of trust with his players...this decision can't be seen as a "fail" without knowing its full effect...which is something that most fans will never notice.
"Condemnation Without Investigation is the height of ignorance."
TheLionKing wrote:There's an old saying "Don't beat yourself". Make the opposition drive the entire length of the field to score.
Yep, many times the old sayings are still sayings because they're right. The downside of turning the ball over at mid-field far out-weighs the benefits of gaining a first down on the 50. 3rd and 4 is probably a 50% play at best. With a 3-score lead make your opponent earn their opportunities...don't give it to them and that was the downside of the gamble.
Another factor is our punter was likely to boom a 60-yarder deep into the endzone...and not directionally pooch it out of bounds at the 5, like McCallum often did. So the ball would likely come out to the 35...not that far from the gamble position. So from that perspective it might make more sense.
Tedford is trying to put his brand on the team. Showing that level of confidence in the team could still reap benefits. The players know he believes in them and will try their darnest to prove him right. But If the coach really wants to bond with his players perhaps he could buy them an ice cream after a hot practice session?
This fan prefers that we do not go quietly into the night, playing it safe all over the field.
Close game. Down to the wire against a very good team, with an excellent coach in Milanovich. We will be lucky if of our league can keep him for a few more years, IMO.
The Argos had to pull off a tremendous comeback to get the win. They had to climb out of a deep, deep hole. Three point victory. And it was no sure thing near the end. Full credit to them.
Our guys played their tails off. No complaints from this quarter, aside from wishing for a more aggressive approach on defence, and for growth in self-discipline and unselfish play.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.
Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.
Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
David wrote:
As for Williams and Banks, we made an offer for Chris Williams in the off-season but not surprisingly in this Wally Buono era, came up a day late and a dollar short. Just the kind of player that could give this team/organization a shot in the arm too.
DH
I don't think I heard that anywhere; did that show up in the media or do you have an inside source?
I find Wally's recent dismissive statements regarding the viability of the free agent market a bit befuddling. The team in 2011 had some valuable members that arrived via free agency: Keron Williams, Anton McKenzie and Ben Archibald. So there has been some obvious successes along with the missteps (that d-lineman from Edmonton that Stubler wanted....forget his name).
Now it seems like signing more than one free agent will break the bank, never mind acquiring a player of game-breaker potential.
I'm afraid that you'll have to take my word for it. I posted about this on April 22, but I didn't mention where I read it. It was either the Sun, Province, or Lowell's blog.
I read this morning that the Leos' put in an offer, rumoured to be $80K short (so likely $140K-$145K).
Great to read so many Lionbackers analysis of our disappointing loss to the Argos.
We blew a 21 point lead, our offence began the game impressively, taking advantage of two interceptions and an excellent early offensive game plan to take a commanding lead. However, our offence went stone cold in the second half of the game, our defense gave up 398 yards (an improvement from our usual 440 yards but nothing to celebrate), allowed Trevor Harris to complete 30 of his 40 passes, and folded like a tent in the fourth quarter. Our defense allowed the Argos to drive for a late fourth quarter touchdown (aided by 25 yards of penalties) and then allowed the Argos to drive for the winning field goal, with time running out on the clock. Our Lions offence did nothing with what could have been a game winning play as Murray Lawrence returned a kickoff to the Argos 35 yard line and our offence sputtered twice, on second and 3, and third and 3, on our last offensive drive.
Here are some post-game thoughts.
OFFENCE
A GREAT START
Our offence was on fire early due to the following:
1. We targeted Andrew Harris for both our running and passing attack. Our offensive line opened up some nice holes inside for Harris, as the Argos spread their defensive line to defend the potential of Lulay keeping it on the read option. We also isolated Harris on a linebacker in the passing attack and strategically froze that linebacker inside or used rub routes against him.
2. Our play calling was excellent. Most of Lulay's throws were first read throws and our receivers were open. Lulay had completed 11 consecutive passes at one point. We often used double tights on first down and wisely threw out of that formation. We took advantage of Leonard underneath, after we sent him deep early.
3. Our second touchdown of the game was an excellent example of excellent play design. We ran a fake fly sweep with Murray-Lawrence and came off it with a counter. Olofoye pulled and Harris ran against the flow of the play. Olofoye didn't even need to block anyone and Harris went into the end zone untouched.
WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO OUR OFFENCE
1. The Argos adjusted to our early offensive success with a spy on Harris. Harris, as our major weapon early needed to be given special attention and the Argos adjusted to to that. Our Lions decided to attempt to take what the Argos were giving us. We took some deep shots and struggled to complete them and our offence got completely out of sync.
2. Travis Lulay's mechanics went to hell. There was nothing wrong with his arm. He was still throwing with velocity in the fourth quarter. However, he stopped stepping into his throws or he was throwing stationary or he was throwing off his back foot. When Lulay does those things his accuracy goes to hell. Lulay was not even stepping into his long throws most of the time. Lulay has always been a streaky quarterback but the reality is that when he is on, his mechanics are excellent. When he is not on, his mechanics are not good.
When Lulay does not step into this throws (and I thought Tedford had corrected this as evidenced by Lulay's great passing game against the Riders at home this season) we need to start using some quick sprint outs to force Lulay to start stepping into his throws again.
3. George Cortez favors the vertical passing attack. The reason that Regina dumped him in the off-season was because the Riders receivers were getting too old for that style of passing attack. They went for Chap, who is more of a possession style of passing coordinator. However, our Lions don't have a great long ball thrower in Lulay nor the receiving crew with deep speed to make that work consistently. The Argos defense was weakened by spying Harris in the second half, in both the run and pass game and a vertical passing attack was the best weapon to exploit it but we didn't have the weapons to do so. Arsenault is our only real deep threat and the Argos knew that.
4. Lulay was not helped by some receiver drops. When Lulay finally did make a good deep throw to Arsenault in the second half he dropped it. For the second game in a row Collie also had butter fingers, which is very surprising for a receiver, who when he played in the NFL, was known as an excellent route runner with great hands.
5. We should have gone with Lulay keeping the football on the zone read in the second half on occasion. With the Riders spying Harris it could have been effective and kept them more honest.
Lulay was 5-15 in his last 20 throws, our offence only managed 24 yards from the mid-point of the third quarter, and looked staler than a loaf of bread weeks past its best due date. Our last series of the game was a reflection of how off the rails it was.
WHERE IS THE MOTION?
Our offence was so stationary for most of the game that it looked worse than an NFL offence, that is regulated at the snap of the football. The CFL was made for motion. Complain all one wants to about Chap's offence but he used motion with excellent innovation in his last 3 seasons with our Leos and is doing the same in Riderville this year. All we did on offence was waggle our slotbacks in this game and at times we didn't even do that. We're using Leonard as a slotback rather than moving him around and creating mismatches.
We are not taking advantage of one of the most important advantages the CFL gives an offence. Motion can put a defense in bad postions, create confusion, and create mismathches and favorable situations.
DEFENCE
What can one say that hasn't already been said. You just knew our defense would not stop the Argos in that fourth quarter. Our defense got two early picks and they were fortunate that Parks and Tillman anticipated and stepped underneath a couple of Harris' throws because the Argos were moving the football.
OUR DEFENSE GIVES UP TOO MUCH YARDAGE
Our defense is on the field too long because they give up long drives. If our offence goes two and out, we're in big trouble. Our defense once again was undisciplined. Bazzie's penalty was a momentum changer and resulted in an Argo's touchdown. Josh Johnson took a bad facemask penalty that was complety unnecessary in that we had the Argos back surrounded. Johnson is one of the main cullprits on our defense for taking penalties but he's not alone. It's a tackling issue as much as its a mental error issue that stems back to last season. On the last Argos touchdown drive, we gave up 25 yards in penalties on one play (defensive holding and a Sol E. facemask penalty). Our red zone defense is bad and for a defense that rarely blitzes and is supposed to be focused on not giving up the big play often does.
WASHINGTON IS TOO FOCUSED ON COVERAGE
Mark Washington was a defensive back and a defensive back coach before he took over as DC. He is over-focused on pass coverage. It's like that is all he knows. Defense is a lot more than pass coverage. We have Bighill playing too often as a second safety on the short side. We rush vanilla. We blitz badly when we do blitz. We don't overload, stunt, or change formations enough. All we try to do is cover, cover, cover.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Leone gave us great punts against the Argos, averaging over 52 yards a punt, with good hang time. Murray-Lawrence is an exciting kick returner who should be given opportunities to return punts.
WRAP
I keep reading that we have a lot of new faces and that we are a young team. But its not our new faces, for the most part, that are the issue. On offence our core has been around for a while (Lulay, Harris, Arsenault, Gore, Taylor, Olofoye) and new starters Foster, Draheim, and Player have been impressive, as has Leonard in his first two starts.
On defense, our only new starters from last season are our defensive tackles and safety Rwabukamba, who has experience at the position. Brooks has been solid at defensive tackle. Lee and Westerman are playing new positions while Parks has returned to the wideside corner, where he excelled in 2013. Most CFL teams have made similar or more changes to their starting lineup. The changes are being used an excuse.
There is no question that our second half ineptitude significantly contributed to this loss but our offence did put up more points than the average that the Argos have given up this season and 27 points and a 21 point lead should have been enough to win and would be with a solid, tough defense. The early lead forced the Argos to become more one dimensional and we should have been able to pin our ears back and come at the Argos offence. But that is not our defensive style.
The reality is that our defense is playing the same way as they ended last season. The problem will not get resolved just by personell change or more experience. This is just a soft, vanilla defense with too much talent to play the way they ended last season or have started this season.
On offence, we need to start using more motion and if we are going to use a hybrid tight end, then its a waste to just line up a 250 plus athletic tight end like Leonard as a slotback. We might as well just use a standard type import receiver who could provide a second deep threat if we're going to use our tight end in that way. Cortez practiced a lot of deep balls in practice this week, anticipating that the Argos, at some point would stack the box but we weren't able to implement it successfully.
Cortez needs to realize that this is not a deep threat offence despite his vertical penchant (which I favor with the right personnel - its attack, aggressive football in that situation). If he wants to have the ability to go vertical, he needs to have a second deep threat to compliment Arsenault because Taylor, Gore, and Collie are not that style of receiver.
Our offence had a great first half and a very poor second one. But I think that we have the ability to rebound offensively from that sad second half. Our offensive line can open holes and protect our quarterback and with that, we are so far ahead from past seasons.
But the problems on defense are more deeply imbedded. We really haven't had a good defensive game in a long time now. That has to change.
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
