Lions 28 - Argos 15, Post Game Comments ...

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

User avatar
BC 1988
Legend
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:58 pm
Location: BC (since 1988)

pennw wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:21 pm
Just looking at the game stats at CFL.ca and see that the attendance was 11,219 . Pitiful , while watching the game I couldn't believe how many empty seats there were .
Yes it looked empty, especially when the players first came out on the field. The more disturbing thing is that week 1 vs HAM only had 2,364 more. Typically many more Tabbie fans than that make the trip up the QEW.
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

pennw wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:38 pm
Sir Purrcival wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:59 am
As glad as I am of the win, this game was not a real confidence inspiring effort. Yes, they managed to plod along until the 4th quarter where they finally started to get some offensive gravitas but how many games are gonna fall that way? Playing decently for 1 quarter isn't going to get it done most nights nor can we count on other teams stumbling as much and as often as did our team last night. Anybody here really think that if this had been Calgary that we would have been in a position to win the game in the 4th playing the way we did last night?

The Offensive line protection for JJ is still nowhere near good enough. We are engaging in wishful thinking if we believe that sooner or later, some of the heat that JJ is taking isn't going to result in some kind of injury. If our Oline is going to be so sieve like, then we need to call a few more roll outs and screens just to keep the opposition honest and hopefully keep JJ on his feet a little more.
Yes the dline was better last night, but it wasnt' amazing either. A credible effort is what I would describe it as. I don't know how well regarded the Toronto Oline is but I'm not sure that it is in the upper echelon's of that category so I take the increased pressure with a bit of a grain of salt for now.

So, two games in and we have put forth two mediocre games, one lost and one won, the latter could have been a play or two away from being the former last night. Yes, the receivers seem to be heating up and our running game seems to be in good shape for now so it is something to build on. Our biggest priority as I see it right now is better blocking on the Oline. If they have to hold Rolly and JJohnson in the back field more to add protection, then they had better do it. They should probably add a few more quicker developing plays to the recipe as well to take some pressure off the line.

Kicking has already been mentioned in this thread, no need to repeat what has already been said but if Long is struggling with directional punting, then abandon it for now. Just kick away, giving away gobs of field position trying to fit a square peg in a round hole is stupid. If he is struggling with that part of the game, then don't ask him to do it.

Still 1-1 is better than 0-2 so hopefully momentum starts here.
I would suggest you may be discounting the opposition . The two games we played were not against push over teams . The Esks I believe are an upper echelon team . The Argos completely demolished Hamilton last week. Yes a few plays going differently could have maybe changed the out come last night . But the same could be said about last weeks game . We came out 1-1 against 2 very good teams . Calgary on the other hand has had all they could handle from what was a sub 500 team last year. I guess their fans are right to despair about their suspect team .
I don't know that I would go as far as calling Toronto with one win a "very good team". That remains to be seen. As for Edmonton, they came into our barn on the opening game of the season and left with the W. A game where the Lions killed themselves so yes, they were mediocre games. I'm not discounting the opposition but I think you would be hard pressed to say that Toronto played a strong game last night and still it was very much in doubt until part way through the 4th Q. where Toronto made a very crucial fumble on their own 20. Maybe the defense did a very good job of taking away the Argo's O. I thought they were credible, not overpowering. Ricky Ray just looked off last night. How else would you explain a career night a week ago and what we saw last night. I highly doubt that our D is that lights out better than Hamilton so I am inclined to go with the "off game" theory more than our overpowering D.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
Ballistic Bob
Legend
Posts: 2657
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 4:39 pm
Location: North Vancouver

I suggested on the Team post game the biggest problem was the attendance. Rogers was better attended in previous years. Very disconcerting all things considered. The Sun had an article about attendance. Are we back to an eight team league soon? BB
Wear orange or wear nothing
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Ballistic Bob wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 5:04 pm
I suggested on the Team post game the biggest problem was the attendance. Rogers was better attended in previous years. Very disconcerting all things considered. The Sun had an article about attendance. Are we back to an eight team league soon? BB
Toronto --> The Big Smoke --> Still insecure enough to have NFL envy. Lots of people still prefer the NFL. Fine. But after watching both since the Willie Fleming era, this fan prefers the CFL. Wake up, Toronto. Support the Argos and the CFL. 32 mostly very boring teams in the NFL.

The last NFL game I attended was in Miami, long before Cam Wake arrived there. Boring beyond belief. Baseball and curling are more interesting by far.

Yes, yes, the Patriots, etc.

Just IMO ...

CFL :thup:
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.
TheLionKing
Hall of Famer
Posts: 25103
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Vancouver

Maybe it's time the league rescind Toronto's franchise. I don't for a minute believe those that say the league will fold without Toronto. The league will survive and might even thrive without the Argos. If fans in Toronto want the NFL let them sit at home and twiddle their thumbs waiting, waiting, waiting. Ottawa lost their franchise for a number of years due to declining attendance and look at them now. The poor attendance is a blight to the league and is continually bringing negative attention.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12579
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

TheLionKing wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:18 pm
Maybe it's time the league rescind Toronto's franchise. I don't for a minute believe those that say the league will fold without Toronto. The league will survive and might even thrive without the Argos. If fans in Toronto want the NFL let them sit at home and twiddle their thumbs waiting, waiting, waiting. Ottawa lost their franchise for a number of years due to declining attendance and look at them now. The poor attendance is a blight to the league and is continually bringing negative attention.
Fans in Toronto don't want the NFL. They stopped showing up to the annual Bills games at Rogers Centre several years before that experiment was scrapped.

The Argos and other CFL teams are on the right track in trying to attract a young, urban demographic and young families with kids. The formula has worked to a great extent in Hamilton and Ottawa but those are smaller markets. It's much tougher to create the same buzz and develop a new generation of fans in big cities. Most longtime fans who used to go to Lion and Argo games would rather sit in their man caves and watch for free on their HD big screens, drinking their own beer and eating their own snacks.
User avatar
CardiacKid
Legend
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:46 am
Location: Under Christmas Hill, Saanich

With a name like the Argonauts, the team could be a good fit in a nautical location. Say..........Halifax?!?!
User avatar
David
Team Captain
Posts: 9364
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 10:23 am
Location: Vancouver (Kitsilano)

pennw wrote:
Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:02 pm
I thought Tommie Draheim from the year before last was better than Johnson . Kevin Palmer i think was supposed to be the starter at RT now , but is out at the moment . Foucault is looking good where he is now so I think I would want to leave him where he is , just fix the right side by other means. That is an international spot now so there is a huge pool of international OL out there down south , can't see why they should not be able to recruit some more should Palmer not turn out any better than Johnson. And Fabian can always be replaced by Vallaincourt if need be .

Not to be a buzz kill on an impressive victory, and I don't like to pile on, but Antonio Johnson just isn't the guy to play right tackle. I know he played there last year and the results weren't too bad, plus Shawn Lemon and Odell Willis are among the best in the CFL, but.....whether it's Dan's complicated blocking schemes in his head, not coming to camp in the best shape - I don't know - but he's just continually getting beaten out there like a dusty rug. He's just way too slow coming out of his stance. A 4-year old can see that.

I don't usually advocate wholesale changes on the O-line as it's a position group that needs continuity, but If Kelvin Palmer is out for another couple of weeks, why not put Foucault at right tackle, and Vaillancourt at left guard? I can't believe the results could be worse. And it would give us additional roster flexibility. Something has to be done to shore up the right side of the line, or JJ is going to get a separated shoulder.


DH :cool:
Roar, You Lions, Roar
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

I agree with shifting Foucault to RT, provided he has played/practiced at the position before as I have never been too big on A. Johnson, or his line coach for that matter. However I doubt Wally will make any roster changes (other than if forced to by injury) in the middle of a road trip.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

So some guys are struggling under Dan D's coaching approach. Nothing new there. Johnson. Vaillancourt. Fabien. Steward seems OK with it. Husband seems OK with it, aside from some snapping issues. Might be best to leave Foucault right where he is beside Steward. Dunno. This is all up to Dan.

Do we miss rock steady Jovan Olafioye? Yes.

Possible position change solutions offered by this fan? Nope. Having watched for years this fan thinks some previously confident O Line guys lose that confidence under Dan D. Does Dan know what he wants down to the tiniest details? Yes. Can every guy play with confidence and clarity for him. Methinks not. Run blocking --> Yes. Pass blocking --> Got some issues.

Just IMO ... And Dan has his fans.
.......

I used to attend football and basketball coaching clinics. I recall one coach, mixed success in his resume, talking about breaking down basketball players' shooting technique in detail. Wrist position, everything. I know I would not do well with that kind of breaking down of technique. Does the ball go in the basket? LOL ... Minor tweaks, big picture direction, always aware of keeping the confidence up. Give them as much as they can absorb. Not more. What has worked for them to get them to the pros? Obviously a lot has worked for them to get to where they are. You gonna change that, tear that down, rebuild them according to your blueprint?
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
pennw
Legend
Posts: 1921
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:50 am
Location: Chilliwack

WestCoastJoe wrote:
Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:20 pm
So some guys are struggling under Dan D's coaching approach. Nothing new there. Johnson. Vaillancourt. Fabien. Steward seems OK with it. Husband seems OK with it, aside from some snapping issues. Might be best to leave Foucault right where he is beside Steward. Dunno. This is all up to Dan.

Do we miss rock steady Jovan Olafioye? Yes.

Possible position change solutions offered by this fan? Nope. Having watched for years this fan thinks some previously confident O Line guys lose that confidence under Dan D. Does Dan know what he wants down to the tiniest details? Yes. Can every guy play with confidence and clarity for him. Methinks not. Run blocking --> Yes. Pass blocking --> Got some issues.

Just IMO ... And Dan has his fans.
.......

I used to attend football and basketball coaching clinics. I recall one coach, mixed success in his resume, talking about breaking down basketball players' shooting technique in detail. Wrist position, everything. I know I would not do well with that kind of breaking down of technique. Does the ball go in the basket? LOL ... Minor tweaks, big picture direction, always aware of keeping the confidence up. Give them as much as they can absorb. Not more. What has worked for them to get them to the pros? Obviously a lot has worked for them to get to where they are. You gonna change that, tear that down, rebuild them according to your blueprint?
I'm in agreement with you Joe on maybe it's best to leave the left side intact . The left side seems that it may gel into a formidable combination and to keep the continuity there , while fixing the right side .

Would we be better had we kept Olafoye here ? That would mean no Foucault here , so on that basis I think no. Jovan here would no doubt see him at LT , so that hardly would fix the right side. And that would have us still playing 2 internationals on the line . Basicaly the same line as last year and right now the right side is the same as last year .IMO we would be no better than we are now. From what I recall last season Jovan got turnstiles his fair share just like the rest.

I think Foucault is going to become a very good Nat OL for us , with great size and athleticism , who could in time become a great Tackle . Would I like to see BC trade back Foucault for Olafoye straight up now? I have no hesitation in saying no.

The problems we have now are fixable. How hard is it to recruit RT candidates from down south ? It's an international spot already , so a big pool should be available .
Just my opinion.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

pennw wrote:
Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:21 pm

I'm in agreement with you Joe on maybe it's best to leave the left side intact . The left side seems that it may gel into a formidable combination and to keep the continuity there , while fixing the right side .

Would we be better had we kept Olafoye here ? That would mean no Foucault here , so on that basis I think no. Jovan here would no doubt see him at LT , so that hardly would fix the right side. And that would have us still playing 2 internationals on the line . Basicaly the same line as last year and right now the right side is the same as last year .IMO we would be no better than we are now. From what I recall last season Jovan got turnstiles his fair share just like the rest.

I think Foucault is going to become a very good Nat OL for us , with great size and athleticism , who could in time become a great Tackle . Would I like to see BC trade back Foucault for Olafoye straight up now? I have no hesitation in saying no.

The problems we have now are fixable. How hard is it to recruit RT candidates from down south ? It's an international spot already , so a big pool should be available .
Just my opinion.
Yes, pennw, Olafioye is gone. And we got a very highly rated NAT for him. :thup:

Leave the left side alone? Agree.

Dunno about dumping Johnson. The next guy might be as unsure of himself in this system, and he would be well behind in his adaptation to Dan D's methods. Dunno ... Maybe the light will go on for Johnson about playing for Dorazio. I guess Palmer goes back in when he is healthy. We've been down this road before. Thankfully Steward seems to keep his confidence and clarity up. Foucault seems to play well beside Steward. Would Foucault be good at right tackle? Maybe down the road. Change now? Ughhh

Run blocking = good.

Pass protection blocking? Got some issues.

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.
User avatar
pennw
Legend
Posts: 1921
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:50 am
Location: Chilliwack

The thing about changing now , is while the left side seems like it will good with some time to gel , switching Foucault to RT will bring about a comlpete change to both sides . And then a wait see period for success . Maybe AJ gets better again , he was our RT last year and seemed okay there. But then we brought in Palmer who seemed to be ahead of AJ prior to hurting his ankle . I wish we could get Tommie Draheim back here , as he seemed pretty decent in his time here with good agility for a tackle .
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8173
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.

Leave Foucault where he is. He and Steward could be not just good but dominant given a chance to work together for a few games. IMO you only move him to RT if you want to make it permanent and right now BC doesn't have the NAT depth for that. If the thought is to move him there temporarily until Palmer is 100% that IMO is a mistake as it takes Foucault away from valuable playing time with Steward in the position you're looking at him play permanently.

As for JO of course he's missed but $200K is far too much to pay for an INT RT. The other thing that has to be considered is the salary difference between him and Palmer or Johnson. It would have to be north of $100K. In the tight finances of the CFL's cap that is big money than can make the difference in 4 or 5 other FA signings or keeping other core players. Keeping Olafioye could''ve cost them Burnham or Steward or maybe even both.
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
pennw
Legend
Posts: 1921
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:50 am
Location: Chilliwack

Hambone wrote:
Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:19 pm
Leave Foucault where he is. He and Steward could be not just good but dominant given a chance to work together for a few games. IMO you only move him to RT if you want to make it permanent and right now BC doesn't have the NAT depth for that. If the thought is to move him there temporarily until Palmer is 100% that IMO is a mistake as it takes Foucault away from valuable playing time with Steward in the position you're looking at him play permanently.

As for JO of course he's missed but $200K is far too much to pay for an INT RT. The other thing that has to be considered is the salary difference between him and Palmer or Johnson. It would have to be north of $100K. In the tight finances of the CFL's cap that is big money than can make the difference in 4 or 5 other FA signings or keeping other core players. Keeping Olafioye could''ve cost them Burnham or Steward or maybe even both.
You are right Hambone and some astute managing by Wally B .
Post Reply