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!
Toppy Vann wrote:Yes the DEF didn't make the stops late in the game and certainly no coach seemed to step up and prepare the D to stop Durant's running. By that time in the game they knew what Bighill was doing and Durant just ran as he was not going to pass. The Lions just let it go on. Where is the coaching staff in the 4th?
But let's not let the Offence off the hook either as it seemed the Chaps couldn't remember some of his creative signals when Lulay was clearly running out of gas as he has not played a game since mid September.
Radio callers calling for Chap's head and Moj and Burns suggesting Vigneault as a model for stale. BUT. Why not force a RB on Chaps? Why not get more input on play calling when Chaps runs out of ideas. He was brilliant for 3 Q's on the mix of plays. But it ended as the same old Lion offence in the 4th that didn't get them a home playoff date.
I notice that Hamilton used both their QBs successfully or they'd have lost with Burris alone. Lions went right back to the ONE QB system.
I agree with you about the Offence and the play calling by Chaps. I don't think it's a stretch to say it was brilliant for three quarters. They played with an impressive sense of urgency. But they seemed to lose that a little in the fourth, playing it a bit safer, which is essentially playing not to lose.
As for the one QB system.......when would the Lions have put Buck in the game.....in the fourth?? It's possible Lulay was running out of gas a little, as you suggest, but I don't know exactly when, or how, you take the game away from him at that point.
TheLionKing wrote:I guess the quarterback draw is the play that Rod Black alluded to that is "unstoppable"
I read in the paper that the blogger was Rod Pedersen that referred to an unstoppable play. Point well made. I wondered the same thing. With SolE at home, it was an unstoppable play it seems....
Toppy Vann wrote:Yes the DEF didn't make the stops late in the game and certainly no coach seemed to step up and prepare the D to stop Durant's running. By that time in the game they knew what Bighill was doing and Durant just ran as he was not going to pass. The Lions just let it go on. Where is the coaching staff in the 4th?
But let's not let the Offence off the hook either as it seemed the Chaps couldn't remember some of his creative signals when Lulay was clearly running out of gas as he has not played a game since mid September.
Radio callers calling for Chap's head and Moj and Burns suggesting Vigneault as a model for stale. BUT. Why not force a RB on Chaps? Why not get more input on play calling when Chaps runs out of ideas. He was brilliant for 3 Q's on the mix of plays. But it ended as the same old Lion offence in the 4th that didn't get them a home playoff date.
I notice that Hamilton used both their QBs successfully or they'd have lost with Burris alone. Lions went right back to the ONE QB system.
I agree with you about the Offence and the play calling by Chaps. I don't think it's a stretch to say it was brilliant for three quarters. They played with an impressive sense of urgency. But they seemed to lose that a little in the fourth, playing it a bit safer, which is essentially playing not to lose.
As for the one QB system.......when would the Lions have put Buck in the game.....in the fourth?? It's possible Lulay was running out of gas a little, as you suggest, but I don't know exactly when, or how, you take the game away from him at that point.
UB... you got that right.
If you were going to use two QBs in this game it had to be Buck to start or as Blitz noted when this first came up - it was not likely they 'd take out Lulay if he was not sharp. He was not the problem but he did start to fade and miss his open guys (not see them).
For me, Travis was brilliant but like a starting pitcher in baseball their first game back, he was not going to do 9 innings unless he was pitching a purrfect game and his pitch count was down. A game like that takes a mental toll I am sure but also JC got as you say got 'playing not to lose' or as Paris J. put it - they get off their game plan making it sound routine for them.
These are fixable issues but devastating in the one game play off.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
TheLionKing wrote:I guess the quarterback draw is the play that Rod Black alluded to that is "unstoppable"
I read in the paper that the blogger was Rod Pedersen that referred to an unstoppable play. Point well made. I wondered the same thing. With SolE at home, it was an unstoppable play it seems....
It becomes almost unstoppable if your nose tackle (Eric Taylor) is held and tackled at the point of attack.
I thought yours was the better team today, but that would have been against the fairytale script the league and media have been writing again this year in regards to the Grey Cup home team.
Next week the Stamps will go down as well, with some tight somewhat dubious calls "not affecting the outcome", while the League and TSN laugh their way to record $$$$.
Toppy Vann wrote:........For me, Travis was brilliant but like a starting pitcher in baseball their first game back, he was not going to do 9 innings unless he was pitching a purrfect game and his pitch count was down. A game like that takes a mental toll I am sure but also JC got as you say got 'playing not to lose' or as Paris J. put it - they get off their game plan making it sound routine for them.
These are fixable issues but devastating in the one game play off.
Yup, Toppy Vann that is how I saw Travis' play today too.
All in all the more I think about it we (Lionbackers) were a little off in our previews to this game. And what we said prior to the game made sense.
For e.g. Win the turnover battle. I think we did (did the Lions turn the ball over?). I guess you could argue that we lost the turnover battle simply because there were clear TURNOVERS to be had that we did NOT take advantage of.
Stopping Sheets. I was happy with the effort by the Lions on Sheets but it wasn't enough.
Would Lulay play well if at all? Certainly our starting QB was not the problem, IMO....
Of course there were a few things we got right too, I'm sure. I know at least one poster wondered about McCallum's day. I wouldn't say it was awful but it wasn't one of his stellar games either......
A fitting end to a train wreck season for the Lions...blame should never be shouldered by one person, and this is the case with the Lions...there were lots of culprits...however, that said, the Lions players outplayed the Saskatchewan players over the 60 minutes, simply put, once again, the Lions were OUTCOACHED by the opposition especially when it counted...
First, Chapdelaine had a great game plan, and his players executed it wonderfully throughout the game...did their execution drop off in the 2nd half?? Was it the players fault that the offensive momentum went away in the 2nd half??? If you believe this, then you don't truly understand the game of football...and that's great, it takes all kinds to make up a fan base...but upon closer examination the reality today was that the Lions out played SSK, but SSK MADE THE IN GAME ADJUSTMENTS and the Lions didn't...sound like a broken record? That's because it is...all the Lions had to do today was change things up on first down in the 2nd half, keep the Riders guessing, and the Lions talent would have done the rest...just one play, just one drive...it didn't happen because SSK KNEW what was coming and the Lions simply didn't change...now, if you want these types of heart breaking losses to continue, then by all means bring back JC...he's your man...and why is it that no one here was angry at JC today??? Great game plan right??? OK, where was this all season? Sure we didn't have Logan all season, but designing aggressive run plays, where the OL simply push their man off the LOS and sticking to the run no matter what aren't late season changes...they are the core of successful offences...haven't any of you noticed the similar pattern with JC, that is only getting worse??? Teams KNOW our tendencies and stack against what we like to do, and changes ONLY come after consistent failure and calamity...then there are threats and then there are offensive changes...this year was NO DIFFERENT...why was Lulay 19 of 25 today? Because he was asked to do what was possible...to take what the defence was giving...not forced to force the football downfield against extreme pressure...BC's best 2nd half offensive play??? A broken play in the backfield and Lulay taking off with the ball...and if he were in better game shape he might have scored on the play...why??? Because SSK wasn't expecting Lulay to keep the ball...just like in the first half...but we didn't continue with this and exploit the weakness in SSK defence...NO SPY ON LULAY...and late in the game, when we finally got the ball back, you saw JC at his best...with an offence on the sideline for 10 minutes knowing they are going to get the ball back with little time left, JC sent the offence out with ONE PLAY CALLED!!! And I am biased in my criticisms of JC??? WTF???
One play called with 28 seconds left and it wasn't a 12 yard out...incredible...the SSK corners were playing 20 yards off the LOS...they were giving up the out, which would have STOPPED THE CLOCK FROM MOVING...then on 2nd down, JC is sending in F%CKING hand signals that Lulay needs 15 SECONDS TO UNDERSTAND...if you don't believe me, go back and watch the last minute again...the ball was snapped with only 11 seconds on the clock, the Lions had completed a 5 yard pass with 28 seconds to go with SSK's defence in massive prevent, and then let the clock run off 7 seconds before the ball is snapped...unfreaking believable...so who's fault is it? Lulay's because he can't read JC's hand signals??? EVERY other pro football team uses the QB headset, but not with JC...but Chapdealine doesn't have an ego or stubbornness problem...incredible...as I posted earlier in the year...its called Scotoma, the mind sees what it wants to see...
Out coached did I say? How about our defence, that seemed to have SSKs offence under wraps, except for the 2nd half when their offence made adjustments...Durant could not throw the ball consistently well, so they just decided to run the football, and continual, predictable runs...QB and RB draws...BCs answer to this weak adjustment??? NOTHING...no spy for Durant, until wait for it, on 2nd and 8 on our 25 yard line with 58 seconds to play...then we lined up in a new formation with only Bighill in the middle designed for him to SPY ON THE QB...and guess what? It worked...
What was Stubler thinking, or not thinking? How about our raw-raw HC? Engaged in the game? Making comments or suggestions to his ASSTs??? Nope...just the look of utter shock as SSK continued to have success doing the same thing over and over again...great coaching and leadership...
The fact of the matter is that the Lions have far more talent than SSK and were the better team...but BC lost because we were out coached, especially at crucial times of the game...credit MUST be given to both JC and Stubler for coming up with very good game plans...but this is professional football in the 21st century!!! Adjustments are being made on the fly, and you must be ready to adjust your game to continue taking what the opposition is giving...but we didn't do this and we lost the game. Didn't Stubler ever think to continue rushing 4 DLinemen if he wasn't going to spy on Durant, instead of continuing with only 3???
And one final comment...who were BC's two best players today??? Andrew Harris and Travis Lulay...the two players targeted by genius Wally Buono to send "messages" to in season...When Travis was taking a sh$t kicking during the first half of the season trying to throw to delayed routes with 9 players blitzing in his face, Wally was busy blaming Travis for not being a leader...
Yep, your right...no changes need to be made with the Lions...as part of a circus, their team is perfectly equipped!
"Condemnation Without Investigation is the height of ignorance."
If you were going to use two QBs in this game it had to be Buck to start or as Blitz noted when this first came up - it was not likely they 'd take out Lulay if he was not sharp. He was not the problem but he did start to fade and miss his open guys (not see them).
For me, Travis was brilliant but like a starting pitcher in baseball their first game back, he was not going to do 9 innings unless he was pitching a purrfect game and his pitch count was down. A game like that takes a mental toll I am sure but also JC got as you say got 'playing not to lose' or as Paris J. put it - they get off their game plan making it sound routine for them.
These are fixable issues but devastating in the one game play off.
That alternative did cross my mind, but I just don't think Buck would have been as effective as Travis was early on.
So IMO, the one thing the coaching staff nailed with this game was starting Travis, even if he may have faded a little at the end. I think the Jacques critics might argue Travis did not fade, but suffered from less creative play calling in the fourth. And I wouldn't necessarily disagree.
Last edited by Upper Bowl on Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wholesale changes are not necessary looking ahead to 2014. Fabien will be back at full speed. Here's what we will need: (a) stronger D-line--with two starting true tackles and two starting DEs. Smith should be back; Taylor may be fine; Westerman is fine; maybe Wilson or K. Williams back. So a couple of big, strong additions; (b) safety; (c) several new O-linemen--replace Archibald with an import O tackle; move Norman to guard or get a couple of NI guards and leave Norman at center. Get a little younger. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater....
notahomer wrote:For e.g. Win the turnover battle. I think we did (did the Lions turn the ball over?). I guess you could argue that we lost the turnover battle simply because there were clear TURNOVERS to be had that we did NOT take advantage of.
We turned it over on the last play on the last of a series of last-gasp laterals that Tyron Brackenridge hauled in (I guess that counted as a fumble instead of an INT since it was a lateral). The only other TO I recall was when Ssk turned it over on downs in 3Q so it was a wash. I recall a game early last year where Mtl thought it was only 2nd down (it was actually 3rd and about 2 or 3 and only in the first half), didn't really call the highest percentage play, didn't get the yards and turned it over on downs. Durant on their 3rd down play was in shotgun and handed off to Sheets deep in the backfield. It wasn't even close (never even had to measure) and the formation/play call almost made me wonder if Ssk lost track of the downs, too.
I think I agree on your spin, though. Bell could have had two picks in the first half and then on Sheets's TOD we did pretty much nothing with it. We went two and out, punted from the Ssk 45 and McCallum booted it into goal for a single to put Ssk on their 35. So we got one point (our last score of the game) and a minimal shift in field position out of that turnover.
I was initially surprised to see the attendance was only a season-low 30,942. This was lower than their regular season low of 32,701 for their final (meaningless) home game against Edm and even their preseason game (32,003) but I guess this was the only game without a province-wide (standard def) blackout and this prob made the difference. I would have expected a much higher crowd for a playoff game in Ssk given that they had two 40k+ crowds this year.
To sum up what lies ahead for the Lions...
[video][/video]
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
sj-roc wrote:
I was initially surprised to see the attendance was only a season-low 30,942. This was lower than their regular season low of 32,701 for their final (meaningless) home game against Edm and even their preseason game (32,003) but I guess this was the only game without a province-wide (standard def) blackout and this prob made the difference. I would have expected a much higher crowd for a playoff game in Ssk given that they had two 40k+ crowds this year.
I was also very surprised to see so many empty seats in the end zones. Maybe scalpers snapped them up and were charging exorbitant prices, or maybe Sask fans are budgeting for the Grey Cup. Whatever the case, it wasn't an impressive showing for "the football capital of Canada."
I think the attendance had a lot to do with Grey Cup. The same thing happens to every hosting City/Town. It definitely happened to us when we hosted in 2011. The cost of living has skyrocketed in the last 10 years and most people just don't have the disposable income they once enjoyed. Add the fact that the price of attending games has also seen it's inflation and it really doesn't surprise me how a lot of people chose to pass on the Semi game and instead chose to participate in the Grey Cup festivities. It is just the reality we live in right now.
I found it ironic that the D, which held the team together for most of the season, were a big disappointment late in the game when they couldn't stop Durant's running.
Lulay looked a lot better than i expected, but way too many punts by the Lions in the 4th quarter.
The bounces just didn't go the Lions way plus they didn't really have any finish on O or D in the 4th quarter.
A lot of Rider holding went uncalled. How does the generally accepted worst Reffing crew, lead by Proulx, get to work in the playoffs?
The Riders controlled the ball for 9 minutes in the fourth quarter. The Lions had only two possessions before the final minute. They produced first downs both times. The first drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the 55 after Dwight Anderson broke up a short crossing route by Arceneaux. The second drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the Rider 48 after Lulay missed Harris in the backfield. Those were 2 of only 3 incompletions in the second half by Lulay. Both drives needed just 1 or 2 first downs to put the Lions in scoring position. I felt confident the Lions could score again if they got the ball back in time. The defence just couldn't get it to them.
B.C.FAN wrote:The Riders controlled the ball for 9 minutes in the fourth quarter. The Lions had only two possessions before the final minute. They produced first downs both times. The first drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the 55 after Dwight Anderson broke up a short crossing route by Arceneaux. The second drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the Rider 48 after Lulay missed Harris in the backfield. Those were 2 of only 3 incompletions in the second half by Lulay. Both drives needed just 1 or 2 first downs to put the Lions in scoring position. I felt confident the Lions could score again if they got the ball back in time. The defence just couldn't get it to them.
I didn't see us being outcoached most of this game at all. In fact I thought we won the coaching battle for most of this game. Both teams wanted to establish the run and we were the team that did. The Riders couldn`t stop our run, even though they said stopping it as their Number 1 priority coming into this game... while we held Sheets to 68 yards.
The major coaching error in the game came in the 4th quarter. We usually shut down Sheets on first down but allowed Durrant to run with the football time and again on second down and for huge gains. Our defense allowed the Riders to make 3 long drives in the fourth quarter. Change that and we win the game. The big question is why did we allow it or not adjust when it became obvious. It was the difference between going to Calgary next Sunday or packing our bags for the season...and we are packing our bags.
"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)
B.C.FAN wrote:The Riders controlled the ball for 9 minutes in the fourth quarter. The Lions had only two possessions before the final minute. They produced first downs both times. The first drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the 55 after Dwight Anderson broke up a short crossing route by Arceneaux. The second drive ended with a punt on third and 6 from the Rider 48 after Lulay missed Harris in the backfield. Those were 2 of only 3 incompletions in the second half by Lulay. Both drives needed just 1 or 2 first downs to put the Lions in scoring position. I felt confident the Lions could score again if they got the ball back in time. The defence just couldn't get it to them.
I didn't see us being outcoached most of this game at all. In fact I thought we won the coaching battle for most of this game. Both teams wanted to establish the run and we were the team that did. The Riders couldn`t stop our run, even though they said stopping it as their Number 1 priority coming into this game... while we held Sheets to 68 yards.
The major coaching error in the game came in the 4th quarter. We usually shut down Sheets on first down but allowed Durrant to run with the football time and again on second down and for huge gains. Our defense allowed the Riders to make 3 long drives in the fourth quarter. Change that and we win the game. The big question is why did we allow it or not adjust when it became obvious. It was the difference between going to Calgary next Sunday or packing our bags for the season...and we are packing our bags.
Elimimian loss was a huge factor in that final quarter for the D. But I would also say that the Lions were conservative on O as well. Instructions to Lulay probably included that when in doubt put the ball in the safe spot, don't turnover the ball.
