Leos/Argos Post Game Thoughts

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!

Moderator: Team Captains

Blitz
Team Captain
Posts: 9094
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:44 am

As for last nights game, there were at least two opportunities where two TD's likely would have resulted. The Iainuzzi play and the drop by Arceneaux which I think was about the 4 yard line. Proper execution on those two plays and I think the game would have been perceived very differently. They seemed to be a little off last night. The passes weren't always on target or crisp, the tackling wasn't necessarily the greatest at a couple of points and the Oline seemed to be pretty awful as well but in the end, Toronto seemed to struggle as much as we did. Shore up the Oline, keep the running game and the balance on passing, add some quicker developing plays and I think we will continue to have success. Lot of room for improvement but even working about %75 of efficiency and we are capable of beating any team in the league right now. Hopefully Wally and co will figure out a way to shore up the OLine somehow. That appears to be the biggest problem we currently have. Sir Percival
There are always key plays in a close game that could have changed the outcome of the game. For the Argos, it was the Foley touchdown that was called back for a penalty and their punt return penalty. They would have had the football on our 30 yard line, with five minutes remaining on the clock and instead they began on their own 46 yard line, after the penalty was marched off. The Argos also dropped an easy interception in their own end zone and that cost them a field goal.

For our Leos, there was the drop by Arseneaux in the first quarter and the missed throw to Iannuzzi from Arseneaux on a well-designed gadget play. No one expected Arseneaux to throw the football.

Outside of the final drive of the game, there were a number of key plays, most of them defensive ones. One play that has gone under the radar was the punt return by Rainey just prior to our final drive. Rainey fielded the Toronto punt on our eight yard line and returned the football 18 yards to our 26 yard line. Instead of operating under the shadow of our own end zone, our offence had a little more room to begin its final drive of the game.
In defense of the Lions O, you can probably make this statement about most teams when you take away their starting QB. Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa (kind of in reverse) all struggled without their best QB at the helm. Winnipeg was doing horrible with Willy at the controls but I doubt their playbook changed significantly with Nichols.

This isn't to dispute what you say about limited schemes, old schemes and strategies. These are the same issues that have sort of been with the Lions since 2011. What it does show however is that sometimes, it isn't the strategy, it is the players executing it. If you don't have enough players on a team doing enough things right, you aren't going to be very successful
My point came from a different perspective Sir Percival I was comparing Jennings running our offence in comparison to having a vet like Lulay behind center. I think the results would not be as good with Lulay and possibly even dismal.

Wally always focuses responsibility on execution. Therefore, the matter of winning becomes 'a matter of execution'. The onus is on the player In this thought process. This notion says that if you execute at a high level you should win. Yes, quarterbacks need to make accurate throws when they have the time to get rid of the football, receivers have to run the correct pattern well and catch the football, and offensive lineman need to choose the correct defender to block and execute the block.

Of course, opposing coaches focus on execution too.

But you can execute a play perfectly and not be successful. For example, on an inside read running play, a safety blitz or a nickel back run blitz can blow up the play and nail the tailback at the line of scrimmage. Or a defense may run a perfectly executed blitz but a screen pass has been called to the blitz side and the offence gets a big gain.

An offence can pass block perfectly on a pass play, the receivers can run execute their routes perfectly but if the defense sends six rushers against five offensive lineman, and there is no quick pattern for the quarterback to to throw to no safety valve on the play, purrfect execution means nothing.

What has separated the NFL's greatest coaches, such as Paul Brown, George Hallas, Vince Lombardi, Bill Walsh, and Bill Belechick and others has been or is attention to systems and x and o's. Most pro coaches can get their talent to execute their talent close to the players maximum level.

Why has Bill Belechick been able to reach 10 AFC Championship games in a salary cap era with the draft each season designed to create parity? Because he has constantly changed offensive strategy and out prepared other teams in terms of strategy, game planning, and play calling. Belechick could not been close to being as successful as he has been for so long, based on talent and execution.

Lombardi was using zone blocking schemes decades before they became the recent vogue in the NFL. His success involved much more than just executing the celebrated and well executed Green Bay power sweep. Bill Walsh not only brought the West Coast offence into the NFL but he, like Lombardi, was considered a master strategist and a football genius because he concocted novel offenses.

When one looks at the CFL, Don Matthews success was grounded on innovative defense. He gave the CFL the plethora of zone blitzes, the 'tweener' linebacker that evolved into the nickelback, the sixth defensive back, etc. Wally made his chops in Calgary based on Hufnagel's spread offence that was ahead of his time in the CFL. Dave Ritchie introduced multi-formational defence, 'personnel packages', the two, three, four, and five man defensive line, and complex combination man/zone pass coverages.

What really separates Calgary right now from the rest of the pack. Is Bo Levi Mitchell that much better a quarterback than other CFL quarterbacks? Not to me he isn't. Is Calgary's talent that much better than our Leos? I believe we have as much talent as Calgary and maybe even more talent. We beat Calgary at home, lost to them in overtime in a game in which we looked like the much better team, and then were dominated offensively and defensively the last time we played them. Was it a matter of Calgary out executing us. I beg to differ. Wally recognized it too when he said "We were out coached" in that game. We were and badly.

Ricky Ray completed over 82% of his passes against us last night. He executed the Toronto game plan very well. But it still was not enough to win the game because Washington's defensive strategy reigned supreme. Washington was awarded the game ball from his defense due to his work.

Over the course of a season superior talent usually wins. But when two teams are close to each other in talent line up over the course of a season, the team that uses superior strategy usually comes out on top. One may out execute the other in a single matchup. Execution mistakes, turnovers, missed assignment, big plays effect the outcome. But systems, pre-game scouting, strategy, scheme, game planning, sequence of play calling, play calling have much more of an impact than most realize.

Football is the most strategic of all sports. A big part of this is the unique feature that each game is 100-150 or so unique trials—the plays. This gives rise to the art and science of play-calling. Its most often the big difference maker.

The difference maker in winning the Toronto game was the difference in strategy on that final drive. On our two previous drives we had been forced to punt. The difference was not that we executed that final drive better than on our previous drives but that we utilized quicker and shorter on four of our five completed passes on that final drive.
"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)
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

Well, I have finally figured out Wally's game winning strategy: Keep the real O under wraps and play predictable football for most of the game while at the same time building up the opposition D's over confidence. Then late in then game take the wrappers off the O and march down the field seemingly at will to score the winning points. :yahoo:
TheLionKing
Hall of Famer
Posts: 25103
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Vancouver

Sir Purrcival wrote: They seemed to be a little off last night. The passes weren't always on target or crisp, the tackling wasn't necessarily the greatest at a couple of points and the Oline seemed to be pretty awful as well but in the end, Toronto seemed to struggle as much as we did.
In defence the Lions, they were playing their 2nd game inside of a week. Remember the days when teams play 2 games in 3 days ?
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Blitz wrote: But if we want to have a great shot at winning it all this season, we need to have a scheme and build a team that can upset a very, very good football team like Calgary. Calgary is so good because it has a huge offensive line that can play smash mouth football and pass block inside to give Mitchell time in the pocket. It also has a passing scheme that will attack a defense short inside and the flats. It can play the high percentage passing game or beat you intermediate and deep, if it is open. Its an offence that doesn't ask too much of its quarterback but relies on him to make good reads, gives him time to throw the football, and provides him with safety valves, making him very difficult to sack. It focuses on always making positive plays.

Our offence relies on our quarterback to play lights out, to throw under heavy pressure, to make difficult throws, and provides him with few safety valves. To have a decent chance of beating the best in the playoffs this season, we need to get our offensive line to be bigger, meaner, and better. We need to be able to play smash mouth in the running game, just like Calgary does. We also need our passing attack to take advantage of Jennings great arm, to allow him to attack downfield, but to also to give him outlets, if under pressure, as Calgary does for Mitchell.

If we could do that, over the next 8 games, I think we will have a great chance in the playoffs. If not, we will be relying on Jennings to play over his head and our receivers to make sensational plays. That is a lot to ask when its not necessary.
We have been harping on these themes for a few years, Blitz.

* Part of this is scheme. Little attention seems to be paid to pressure release planning in the passing game. Hot routes and the like, as discussed. And that is on Khari. One wonders how much authority and status Khari has, as a relatively unproven OC.

* Part of the tsunami effect facing our QBs is a lack of basic pass blocking skills. Wally is loyal to Dan D. Dan seems to work in his own bubble. Part of it is change, change and more change. Experiments, so to speak. Try this philosophy. Try another. Try this guy. Try another. Part of it is a focus on stuff that can mess up an athlete's mind: little details, hand position, foot position. Better to keep it simple, and just get the job done. IMO ...

This fan will be surprised, pleasantly so, if the OL becomes quietly efficient. Some fans advocate for three changes in OL personnel. Steward, Vaillancourt and Johnson in. As do I. But even there, because of time spent with three other guys, we have more change.

I guess we just kick back and watch how things unfold.

My concern though is the physical and mental pressure we put on Jennings. Injury is always right there in front of you when you take too many sacks. Uncertainty looms when one wonders what can I do? No time to look. Do I risk a throw downfield into coverage? Do I try to make the long throw out of bounds, over outstretched arms, while off balance. Do I eat the ball? Do I try to run and create space? As noted, Bo Levi has a well planned package of antidotes to pressure. Outlets. Solid pass blocking. Game planning and play calling.

Not much to complain about this year. But it could be a very special year, if we make some adjustments. And some say the pro coaches know better; don't change anything. LOL Can't go there. It seems to this fan that even the old fox, Wally, has made adjustments this year. More free agents of top quality. Solid, no nonsense drafting. More attack on defence, perhaps due to trust in the preferences of Mark W, who has earned his trust. Perhaps a lighter touch with players, less of an authoritarian tone. It has been good to see.
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.
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

It all goes hand in hand Blitz. I think we are on the same page. You are right, innovative coaching, play calling, proper use of the talent you have can be critical to being successful. You can have all that and still lose if the players don't execute properly. On the other hand, you can have the most talented personnel of all time and they can execute perfectly and you can still lose because the play calling was inappropriate to the defense on the field. I guess that is why we are always talking about in game adjustments and in the case the Lions are usually being critical that when adjustments are made (or if), they are made too late in the game to be useful. That lack of flexibility on the part of WB is probably the biggest blight on what has otherwise been an outstanding coaching career. His name should rightfully be in the company of some of the names you mentioned above so he must have been doing a lot of things right over the years. Could he have done better? Maybe but even Huff would have a long way to go to equal the number of cups and Grey Cup appearances and I can't even remember how many wins Wally has over all the current CFL coaches combined. I agree with you totally that Lulay would not be getting the same out of this offense as Jennings is. That was kind of what I was saying but that is true of pretty much any team you can name (Calgary with Tate maybe an exception).
At the end of the day, I don't think it is a stretch to say that WB has been the best coach in the history of this team. I don't always like what he does and how he manages things and I do wish he would think outside the box more often but on balance, he does more right than wrong. Hopefully, Khari can be more innovative going forward. We are seeing some better uses of personnel and some more innovative play calling. Just snippets mind you but you see possibilities and hopefully enough to keep the opposition from dialing in on the O.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
Lionsfan65
Starter
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 9:12 am

Good to get the win in a tight defensive game against a Stubler defence.

Jennings was solid again, but as mentioned earlier, sometimes he tries to do too much. There are times when the best thing you can do is swallow the ball and take the sack.

Offensive line was not good at all. Husband's first holding penalty was the result of O'niell getting blown up and beaten on the inside, forcing Husband to pick up the block from a bad angle. I understand that Adcock was paid good money in free agency, and it was the plan since the start of the season for him to play Right tackle, but this isn't working, We could bring Mantyka out of retirement and he would do a better job. As far as I can remember Adcock wasn't much of an impact guy in Saskatchewan either. Bring back Johnson.
User avatar
pennw
Legend
Posts: 1921
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:50 am
Location: Chilliwack

Sir Purrcival wrote:
Quite frankly, take Jennings out of the offensive equation, and we would see a very different outcome with our offence. Each game, he makes many very difficult throws while under incredible pressure. He escapes and buys time. He runs the football very well. But as poised as he is and as tremendous as he is, with his limited experience, he is asked to do far too much. Bo Levi Mitchell is not expected to make the throws that Jennings has to make or buy the time that Jennings has to buy, or to run like Jennings has to run. Bo Levi Mitchell always has an easy throw to make if he experiences pressure.
In defense of the Lions O, you can probably make this statement about most teams when you take away their starting QB. Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa (kind of in reverse) all struggled without their best QB at the helm. Winnipeg was doing horrible with Willy at the controls but I doubt their playbook changed significantly with Nichols. In that case it came down to having a QB who was getting the job done vs one that wasn't. 4 games later and you wonder what the Bombers record would be if they had started the season with Nichols. This isn't to dispute what you say about limited schemes, old schemes and strategies. These are the same issues that have sort of been with the Lions since 2011. What it does show however is that sometimes, it isn't the strategy, it is the players executing it. If you don't have enough players on a team doing enough things right, you aren't going to be very successful.

As for last nights game, there were at least two opportunities where two TD's likely would have resulted. The Iainuzzi play and the drop by Arceneaux which I think was about the 4 yard line. Proper execution on those two plays and I think the game would have been perceived very differently. They seemed to be a little off last night. The passes weren't always on target or crisp, the tackling wasn't necessarily the greatest at a couple of points and the Oline seemed to be pretty awful as well but in the end, Toronto seemed to struggle as much as we did. Shore up the Oline, keep the running game and the balance on passing, add some quicker developing plays and I think we will continue to have success. Lot of room for improvement but even working about %75 of efficiency and we are capable of beating any team in the league right now. Hopefully Wally and co will figure out a way to shore up the OLine somehow. That appears to be the biggest problem we currently have.
shoring up the Oline would be very easy if there was simply the will to do it , just go back to our season opening line up and it's done . The problem seems to be Dorazio being to stubborn to admit he's wrong about his experiments and his prized free agent signing . Maybe us Lionbackers could circulate a petition to WB to order the changes and cut Adcock immediately .
User avatar
CardiacKid
Legend
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:46 am
Location: Under Christmas Hill, Saanich

If the change or the upgrade via going retrograde doesn't happen by the next home game, I suspect it never will. At least not by choice of the coaching staff. The timing of doing it this trip probably wasn't very viable but with being home with an extended lay-off for the next game, you would think that would help make the decision easier to make.
The protection simply hasn't been there; that is apparent when looking at sacks against during the eastern road swing. And when zeroing in on Adcock, he just seems slow all around. Slow footwork, slow getting off the line....certainly when comparing him to Olafioye.
Now maybe the pneumonia really did him in and what we have seen isn't a true indicator of his abilities. But if that's the case, sit him out on the IR, let him get back to that potential upside and let Jennings survive the season.
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

pennw wrote:
Sir Purrcival wrote:
Quite frankly, take Jennings out of the offensive equation, and we would see a very different outcome with our offence. Each game, he makes many very difficult throws while under incredible pressure. He escapes and buys time. He runs the football very well. But as poised as he is and as tremendous as he is, with his limited experience, he is asked to do far too much. Bo Levi Mitchell is not expected to make the throws that Jennings has to make or buy the time that Jennings has to buy, or to run like Jennings has to run. Bo Levi Mitchell always has an easy throw to make if he experiences pressure.
In defense of the Lions O, you can probably make this statement about most teams when you take away their starting QB. Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa (kind of in reverse) all struggled without their best QB at the helm. Winnipeg was doing horrible with Willy at the controls but I doubt their playbook changed significantly with Nichols. In that case it came down to having a QB who was getting the job done vs one that wasn't. 4 games later and you wonder what the Bombers record would be if they had started the season with Nichols. This isn't to dispute what you say about limited schemes, old schemes and strategies. These are the same issues that have sort of been with the Lions since 2011. What it does show however is that sometimes, it isn't the strategy, it is the players executing it. If you don't have enough players on a team doing enough things right, you aren't going to be very successful.

As for last nights game, there were at least two opportunities where two TD's likely would have resulted. The Iainuzzi play and the drop by Arceneaux which I think was about the 4 yard line. Proper execution on those two plays and I think the game would have been perceived very differently. They seemed to be a little off last night. The passes weren't always on target or crisp, the tackling wasn't necessarily the greatest at a couple of points and the Oline seemed to be pretty awful as well but in the end, Toronto seemed to struggle as much as we did. Shore up the Oline, keep the running game and the balance on passing, add some quicker developing plays and I think we will continue to have success. Lot of room for improvement but even working about %75 of efficiency and we are capable of beating any team in the league right now. Hopefully Wally and co will figure out a way to shore up the OLine somehow. That appears to be the biggest problem we currently have.
shoring up the Oline would be very easy if there was simply the will to do it , just go back to our season opening line up and it's done . The problem seems to be Dorazio being to stubborn to admit he's wrong about his experiments and his prized free agent signing . Maybe us Lionbackers could circulate a petition to WB to order the changes and cut Adcock immediately .
The underlined part should have had a smiley to indicate sarcasm because Wally listening to the fans is not going to happen in a million years.

The part about Dorazio not not willing to admit he is wrong must be correct because if he truly believes that Adcock is better right now than Johnson, then he is a worse coach than I thought. The O line starting lineup for the next game should be quite revealing.
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

CardiacKid wrote:If the change or the upgrade via going retrograde doesn't happen by the next home game, I suspect it never will. At least not by choice of the coaching staff. The timing of doing it this trip probably wasn't very viable but with being home with an extended lay-off for the next game, you would think that would help make the decision easier to make.
The protection simply hasn't been there; that is apparent when looking at sacks against during the eastern road swing. And when zeroing in on Adcock, he just seems slow all around. Slow footwork, slow getting off the line....certainly when comparing him to Olafioye.
Now maybe the pneumonia really did him in and what we have seen isn't a true indicator of his abilities. But if that's the case, sit him out on the IR, let him get back to that potential upside and let Jennings survive the season.
On 1040 today, they were saying that he lost about 20lbs and still isn't back 100% so why we are even playing him right now is a bit of a mystery.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
TheLionKing
Hall of Famer
Posts: 25103
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Vancouver

[quote="DanoTThe underlined part should have had a smiley to indicate sarcasm because Wally listening to the fans is not going to happen in a million years.

The part about Dorazio not not willing to admit he is wrong must be correct because if he truly believes that Adcock is better right now than Johnson, then he is a worse coach than I thought. The O line starting lineup for the next game should be quite revealing.[/quote]

He did in 2011 :wink:
Blitz
Team Captain
Posts: 9094
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:44 am

TheLionKing wrote:[quote="sunderlined part should have had a smiley to indicate sarcasm because Wally listening to the fans is not going to happen in a million years.

The part about Dorazio not not willing to admit he is wrong must be correct because if he truly believes that Adcock is better right now than Johnson, then he is a worse coach than I thought. The O line starting lineup for the next game should be quite revealing. He did in 2011 :wink:
The areas of offensive line, offensive scheme, etc. often don't get a ton of in-depth discussion on most football websites. Its good to see the attention that our offensive line is getting on Lionbackers.

Obviously, we all want our offensive line to play great football so that we can run the football successfully, so that our quarterback can have the necessary time to throw the football successfully, so that we can avoid momentum killing sacks, etc.

But there is also the big picture. Playing in the spread offence in B.C. since the latter part of 2004, for the most part, with Dorazio at the helm of our offensive line, (with the exception of 2015) our Leos gave up the most sacks in the CFL. That stat does not reflect hits and pressures on our quarterback but they would likely reflect the most pressures and hits on our quarterbacks too.

When you look at our history during that time, we don't get a lot of games out of a starting quarterback until he is injured. Dickenson was signed in 2003 and missed almost all of the 2004 season. He was also injured in 2005, 2006, and missed most of 2007 before being released. Printers played injured in 2004 and had a serious rotator cuff injury in 2005 (he practiced throwing underhand for the last 6 games of that season, while he was starting). Buck Pierce had so many injuries during his time here one one couldn't count them (and most were not due to his running the football). Jarious got injured a few times. We signed Printers part way through 2009 as our fourth string quarterback and he was starting for us a few games later because all three of our quarterbacks got injured.

In 2010, Printers suffered a knee injury early that season and played on it. After he was released part way through that season, he had to get full knee reconstruction surgery. Travis Lulay became our starter in 2011, hurt his shoulder part way through 2012, reinjured it in 2013, forcing us to go with DeMarco and aquire Pierce. In 2014, with Lulay still on the shelf, we traded for Glenn and he was injured that season. In 2015, Lulay injured his knee and Beck was gone for the season, after starting two games.

Jonathan Jennings is an exciting young quarterback and a treat to watch playing the quarterback position for us. We already put toomuch pressure on his shoulders due to our offensive scheme. We need to do our very best to protect him. We need to ensure that he is hit and sacked the minimum amount of times. Its frustrating that we don't provide him with the safety valves, hot reads, short routes, etc. that a team like Calgary provides Bo Levi Mitchell. But its even more frustrating to watch Lemon just blow by Adcock untouched to sack Jennings when its more than obvious that he is not getting the job done and allowed to keep starting.

Steward was benched for a borderline penalty and one missed running game block. It seems like we just wanted an excuse to start O'Neil. Adcock got the start in Toronto when he had played horribly in his two previous games.

We've started O'Neil in place of Steward, when Steward was playing well overall, while transitioning to left guard. We stayed with Fabian, after Vaillencourt was healthy again, and he not only won the job in training camp but played very well in his first two games. Both Steward and Vaillencourt are bigger, meaner, more aggressive, and more athletic offensive lineman than O'Neil and Fabian.

It almost seems like we need to justify the salaries and free agent decisions to sign O'Neil and Adcock. But in particular, with Adcock, it's plain dangerous for Jennings health, for us to keep playing Adcock.

After Jennings was sacked 6 times in Ottawa (and it could have easily been 12-14 sacks) I thought we would at least fly in Antonio Johnson for the Toronto game.

Sometimes the justification for change coming out of Leo land begs some questions. Steward was starting and took a fourth quarter penalty and he was demoted and yet other offensive linemen had committed worse sins or had been penalized more often.

Even stranger was the decision to fly in Courtney Taylor for the Toronto game. Boldewijn said on Tuesday, that he felt fine and was looking forward to playing. Yet, after his comment, we still brought in Courtney Taylor all the way across the country, after driving from Seattle to Vancouver. We could have started Adekolu. It seems as if we could have started Boldewijn. I wouldn't be surprised if Taylor starts our next game, even though Boldewijn caught four passes in Ottawa and looked good in that game.
According to the Lions, Boldewijn was placed on the “disabled list” with a non-football related malady, after coming down with a stomach virus. On Tuesday, however, Boldewijn told Postmedia: “I’m good. Ain’t no worries about me. I’m playing tomorrow (Wednesday).” Asked about his illness, Boldewijn responded, “It’s up to the coach. I can’t answer that or the circumstances. I’m ready to go.”
But getting back to our offensive line. The priority is to protect Jennings. Lose him to injury and things will look very different. If Adcock is not game ready or not good enough he shouldn't be playing. When you have a star young quarterback, you can't just keep hoping that your right tackle will eventually start playing decent football, especially when you have a right tackle on the roster who can.

After Week 6 our Lions had only given up 9 sacks, second best in the CFL. Calgary had given up 8 sacks, best in the CFL. We were doing a very good job of protecting our quarterback with Steward and Johnson as our starters.

After Week 11, five weeks later, Calgary has only given up 10 sacks. Bo Levi Mitchell has only been sacked 2 times since then. However, since that time, after we inserted O'Neil and then 3 games ago, we also inserted Adcock, we've given up 14 sacks. We now have given up 23 sacks on the season, more than twice the number of sacks that Calgary has.

We ran the football better with Steward and Johnson staring. We protected the quarterback better with Steward and Johnson starting.O'Neil was a backup guard in Hamilton the past two seasons.

Quarterbacks get injured and they especially get injured in spread offences...one of the reasons many NFL teams have moved away from the spread.

But if we want to be a spread offensive team, then we not only have to provide Jennings with safety valves and quicker options if needed but we also need to give him the best offensive line possible.

There seems to be different standards for different players. O'Neil can take bad penalties, miss assignments, or be unable to handle a pass rusher and all is ok. Adcock can struggle, completely whiff on a pass rusher time and again, and keep on starting.

It sure begs some questions. :thdn:
"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)
Blitz
Team Captain
Posts: 9094
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:44 am

WestCoastJoe wrote:
Blitz wrote: But if we want to have a great shot at winning it all this season, we need to have a scheme and build a team that can upset a very, very good football team like Calgary. Calgary is so good because it has a huge offensive line that can play smash mouth football and pass block inside to give Mitchell time in the pocket. It also has a passing scheme that will attack a defense short inside and the flats. It can play the high percentage passing game or beat you intermediate and deep, if it is open. Its an offence that doesn't ask too much of its quarterback but relies on him to make good reads, gives him time to throw the football, and provides him with safety valves, making him very difficult to sack. It focuses on always making positive plays.

Our offence relies on our quarterback to play lights out, to throw under heavy pressure, to make difficult throws, and provides him with few safety valves. To have a decent chance of beating the best in the playoffs this season, we need to get our offensive line to be bigger, meaner, and better. We need to be able to play smash mouth in the running game, just like Calgary does. We also need our passing attack to take advantage of Jennings great arm, to allow him to attack downfield, but to also to give him outlets, if under pressure, as Calgary does for Mitchell.

If we could do that, over the next 8 games, I think we will have a great chance in the playoffs. If not, we will be relying on Jennings to play over his head and our receivers to make sensational plays. That is a lot to ask when its not necessary.
We have been harping on these themes for a few years, Blitz.

* Part of this is scheme. Little attention seems to be paid to pressure release planning in the passing game. Hot routes and the like, as discussed. And that is on Khari. One wonders how much authority and status Khari has, as a relatively unproven OC.

* Part of the tsunami effect facing our QBs is a lack of basic pass blocking skills. Wally is loyal to Dan D. Dan seems to work in his own bubble. Part of it is change, change and more change. Experiments, so to speak. Try this philosophy. Try another. Try this guy. Try another. Part of it is a focus on stuff that can mess up an athlete's mind: little details, hand position, foot position. Better to keep it simple, and just get the job done. IMO ...

This fan will be surprised, pleasantly so, if the OL becomes quietly efficient. Some fans advocate for three changes in OL personnel. Steward, Vaillancourt and Johnson in. As do I. But even there, because of time spent with three other guys, we have more change.

I guess we just kick back and watch how things unfold.

My concern though is the physical and mental pressure we put on Jennings. Injury is always right there in front of you when you take too many sacks. Uncertainty looms when one wonders what can I do? No time to look. Do I risk a throw downfield into coverage? Do I try to make the long throw out of bounds, over outstretched arms, while off balance. Do I eat the ball? Do I try to run and create space? As noted, Bo Levi has a well planned package of antidotes to pressure. Outlets. Solid pass blocking. Game planning and play calling.

Not much to complain about this year. But it could be a very special year, if we make some adjustments. And some say the pro coaches know better; don't change anything. LOL Can't go there. It seems to this fan that even the old fox, Wally, has made adjustments this year. More free agents of top quality. Solid, no nonsense drafting. More attack on defence, perhaps due to trust in the preferences of Mark W, who has earned his trust. Perhaps a lighter touch with players, less of an authoritarian tone. It has been good to see.
My concern WCJ is also the physical and mental pressure we put on Jennings too, as well as the potential for injury.

Dan Dorazio is an interesting guy. His life is football and church. He works a rigorous schedule during the season. He works 18 hour days. He wakes up at 1:30 a.m. so he can prepare for the team's practice. He attends mass every day and is a lector on Mondays and Tuesdays.

Sometimes I wonder if he overthinks things. Mike Beamish wrote "After 12 seasons with the Lions, Dorazio established himself as an O-line savant — we’d call him the “lineman whisperer” in describing Dorazio's return this season. But Dorazio's results in rushing the football and protecting the quarterback do not establish that rep.

We have until next Friday to make some changes on the offensive line. The trend from Week 6 to Week 11 is not our friend, in terms of protecting our quarterback.
"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)
User avatar
cromartie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5004
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 2:31 pm
Location: Cleveland, usually

Sorry for being late to this party, but this game coincided with vacation. Just a couple of notes from the notebook....

1) Those of you who assert that this is a very basic offense that ill suits the personnel have a point. Our run game is based on a largely between the tackles rushing attack and a QB who sits almost exclusively in the pocket. There was exactly one rush/rollout play, and that was a designed 2nd and short run by Jennings in the fourth quarter. Jennings did not, by my recollection, have a designed rollout which seems like an egregious misuse of his talent.

Against Toronto, at least, we used a TE on exactly one series, otherwise it was five offensive linemen straight up for the entire game. Lumbala was in as a Fullback on first down for one series the entire game.

Correspondingly, I'm impressed at how our defensive line is able to generate pressure with a four man rush. We're doing a much better job this year of zone blitzing than we have in previous years and the play that led to Ray's INT was really neat; two guys were lined up as down linemen and three other guys rushed standing up.

Not a big fan of what passes for the club experience at BMO, they were out of poutine before the game even started.

All in all, as others have indicated, it was a close win which, with better execution, could have been an even bigger win, but there's always room for improvement and, as a team, I'm glad these guys could go out east, stay out east, and come away with two wins for once.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12579
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

cromartie wrote:Not a big fan of what passes for the club experience at BMO, they were out of poutine before the game even started.
Aside from the poutine, how was the fan experience at BMO?
Post Reply