The Original BC Lions Football Fan Forum since 99
https://www.Lionbackers.com/bc_lions/
I didn’t notice the substitution pattern when Pipkin came in last week but it’s likely that David Mackie came in as a blocker, replacing field WR Keon Hatcher. That’s an easy substitution, and it can open up more of the rushing and short passing game.Hambone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 11:50 amThe challenge with platooning is it would require a double switch every time O'Connor went out an Pipkin went in. Having to do so certainly isn't a show stopper, but is a consideration. With Pipkin in they'd have to pull either one of the 3 American OL, Butler or one of the American receivers who at least until Rourke's injury were all on pace for 1000+ yard seasons.
You raise a very interesting question about the over-reliance and lack of success with the long ball during Reilly's last few seasons here. While I was a fan of our tough QB, it did get rather tedious watching many two-and-outs which often included a low-percentage long ball (or a coverage sack!) - instead of take-what-they-give-you short stuff and decent drives. My big question was whether this was down to the OC or if Reilly himself, who carried a lot of clout, simply preferred the long ball.Toppy Vann wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 11:12 amI too briefly thought of Michael Reilly but only for a brief moment as that was too painful to watch and it seemed that the OC called far too many deep balls that weren't connecting.
This team seems better prepared in all facets.
I also wondered if Rick Campbell was now asking himself if he should have given O'Connor some more game reps as he took the view that Rourke needed reps as he's a first year starter.
If trade or a new QB from out of the blue aren't options then another internal solution could be O'Connor starting and Antonio Pipkin maybe platooning. His dad certainly was a master at more one than QB but at that time the Esks had an abundance of talent at QB.
Some really innovative run packages and the greater use of the FB could help here.
Something tells me that Reilly himself has moved on and would not be interested in a return to football. He seems like the kind of guy who once he makes a decision that’s it. Remember he still had a year left on his contract when he retired, so this was not a case of him retiring to save his legacy rather than face a free agent market where his value might have diminished greatly.Walt67 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 2:47 pmYou raise a very interesting question about the over-reliance and lack of success with the long ball during Reilly's last few seasons here. While I was a fan of our tough QB, it did get rather tedious watching many two-and-outs which often included a low-percentage long ball (or a coverage sack!) - instead of take-what-they-give-you short stuff and decent drives. My big question was whether this was down to the OC or if Reilly himself, who carried a lot of clout, simply preferred the long ball.Toppy Vann wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 11:12 amI too briefly thought of Michael Reilly but only for a brief moment as that was too painful to watch and it seemed that the OC called far too many deep balls that weren't connecting.
This team seems better prepared in all facets.
I also wondered if Rick Campbell was now asking himself if he should have given O'Connor some more game reps as he took the view that Rourke needed reps as he's a first year starter.
If trade or a new QB from out of the blue aren't options then another internal solution could be O'Connor starting and Antonio Pipkin maybe platooning. His dad certainly was a master at more one than QB but at that time the Esks had an abundance of talent at QB.
Some really innovative run packages and the greater use of the FB could help here.
Same situation as last week. Short yardage I'm sure included both Canadian fullbacks.Hambone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 11:50 amThe challenge with platooning is it would require a double switch every time O'Connor went out an Pipkin went in. Having to do so certainly isn't a show stopper, but is a consideration. With Pipkin in they'd have to pull either one of the 3 American OL, Butler or one of the American receivers who at least until Rourke's injury were all on pace for 1000+ yard seasons.
Short yardage is simple. Mackie would always be on the field for that although sometimes Cottoy comes out when he goes in. And of course there's always the option of a 6th OL in lieu of a receiver. Where platooning is more challenging is if they want to put Pipkin out there to run the regular offense for a few plays or a series.CrazyCanuck89 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 8:05 amSame situation as last week. Short yardage I'm sure included both Canadian fullbacks.Hambone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 11:50 amThe challenge with platooning is it would require a double switch every time O'Connor went out an Pipkin went in. Having to do so certainly isn't a show stopper, but is a consideration. With Pipkin in they'd have to pull either one of the 3 American OL, Butler or one of the American receivers who at least until Rourke's injury were all on pace for 1000+ yard seasons.
I'm thinking given his druthers he'd go back to the USFL were he can make USD$45K + bonuses for their 10 game season or the XFL which I think pays a bit better. That as opposed to coming up here where after a minimum 2 or 3 weeks of PR pay he could make maybe CAD$23K for at best 6 games of CFL play. That's if he comes up almost immediately. USFL and XFL options allow NFL cuts to take their time making such a decision hoping maybe another NFL opportunity pops up.
O'Connor and Thomson alternated at second-team reps from day to day at training camp. O'Connor was the better passer, which is probably what the Lions need most. Thomson was the better runner, a skill that Pipkin also bring to the Lions.
Yes indeed BCF. Thomson definitely showed some excellent wheels when you and I were there in Kamloops.