About our defence - Wally is sounding like the Lions DC

[MexicoLionFan]

What I find most frustrating about this defence is that, aside from Bighill's short-yardage stop last week, no one seems to step up and make timely sacks, interceptions or knockdowns in key situations. Even facing second and long, opponents have been able to make plays and move the ball against the Lions. Going into this week, the Lions ranked second last in stopping opponent second down conversions, giving up a first down or touchdown 60.9% of the time. Saskatchewan's defence was marginally worse in that situation at 61.2%.

By my count, the Riders converted on 4 of 11 second down situations in the first half last night when the Lions were playing straight up and 10 of 14 situations in the second half when the Lions were trying to protect the lead. Messam and Dressler are the Riders' most dangerous weapons but they both had over 125 yards from scrimmage, and most of Messam's yards came in the second half when the B.C. linebackers left him alone underneath and dropped into deep zones.

This is true, but its hard for a LB to consistently step up and make a key play when he's 20-25 yards from the LOS...Washington is running the same CHEAT that he ran last year, but teams exposed him late in the season. If he doesn't have a new wrinkle to adjust to , then this offensive barrage against is only going to continue!

[WestCoastJoe]

Bringing this into the discussion of defence thread ...

DEFENSE

Its not easy to find a lot of positives regarding our defense, after giving up over 500 yards of net offence to the Riders. Yes, Chap's offence was excellent in the Riders first two games of the season before we played them and was rolling up the huge yards on the ground and in the air (Glenn is leading the league in passing and has an impressive 110.7 quarterback efficiency average) but our strategy in playing Chap's offence and Glenn was baffling.

The Riders are averaging over 500 yards of offence per game this season, in their first four games and they lead the CFL in most offensive statistics. But our Lions defense did not do anything to change the Riders success in their first two games and allowed them to carry on with their offensive success, even with seeing a lot of tape on them in their first three games, including last weeks game.

Yes, playing zone has become more necessary with the new pass interference rules but playing soft zone against a possession style passing game is not wise. We were fortunate that the Riders did not score touchdowns earlier and more often in this game because they moved the ball very well against us. Its really been individual plays, such as the tackle by Eliminian, who came from nowhere to tackle Messam, with a huge open field in front of him, that kept the score down. Its really individual talent, rather than scheme, that is allowing our defense to play as well as it is, at times.

Why we didn't play tighter zone, as well as more effectively blitz the middle on occasion to create penetration and get a player in Glenn's face is baffling. Most of the time we gave Glenn a vanilla look, dropped the linebackers very deep, and allowed the Regina offence to now exactly what we were doing. Roh had an early sack up the middle and his pressure also led to an interception by Lee but too often we didn't break down the pocket quickly enough on Glenn.

Secondly, when we did blitz, our blitzes were so obvious and so badly executed, it was almost embarrassing to watch. Our run defense, most of the time is atrocious, as it was last season.

Too many are blaming our defensive line. But our defensive line had Taylor and Mitchell or Taylor and Westerman at tackle last season and the result was the same.

Give us Stubler back at defensive coordinator, with this same line or last year's defensive line, and the result would be different. Stubler isn't coming back but something has to change. I would love us to hire Dave Ritchie as a defensive consultant, as we hired Hufnagel in that same role in 2007 with our offence. Likely won't happen. But Washington, as really a Buono deciscion to be our DC, is a Buono/Benevedes clone, in terms of defensive philosophy. But you just can`t play soft vanilla in today`s CFL and we really need the defensive brain power of a Ritchie or a Stubler or Washington has to change tracks and develop and quickly (if he can). If we didn`t have such a great linebacking corps in Sol E. and Bighill, along with Hoffman-Ellis and Lokombo rotating in and some talented defensive backs we would be in big trouble.

It`s also tough on a defensive line when they have to constantly pass rush vanilla, with the ends containing and the tackles coming straight up field. We rarely stunt, loop, off-set, or do anything to advantage them.

Our Lions have the lowest average time of possession in the CFL, because our defense is on the field too long, were giving up the most average yards per rush in the CFL, we`re eight in terms of average length per completion against, we`re giving up an average of 420 yards per game so far (eighth) and were 7th in average points per game against (that`s not bend but not break)

Tedford is going to need to focus more on our defense, in one way or the other, going forward.

[WestCoastJoe]

And this ...

As usual, Blitz, I look forward to your comments and analysis.

Bang on.

The offence, under the leadership and vision of Jeff Tedford, along with George Cortez and Doug Malone looks very promising.

Agreed that the defence is very, very conservative in its approach, and agree that such is the way to many scores given up in the CFL.

It is certainly in line with what Wally has always wanted, and that Benny favoured. So it seems logical that Mark W would follow in their footsteps. He has not called it any other way. Wally has been outspoken in his preference: Make them complete 12 excellent plays on the way down the field. Well, they are doing it to us now.

One could say the dam has not broken, but it is full of leaks.

Media and the fans could not help but notice Mark W getting the early meeting with Jeff Tedford at the time of his hiring. Fair enough. Wally believes in Mark W. The defensive players seem to believe in Mark W. Many fans still seem to believe in Mark W. This fan would like to believe in him. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, at some point one has to call it that way. We play soft zone D. In the CFL, that is a scary thing.

I have heard Mark W speak to kids. Outstanding message and delivery. One can understand his players buying in with him. His philosophy of defence? Attack or react? Aggressive or conservative? It seems to me much evidence is building up indicating the vulnerability of his defence. For me, the jury is out.

Allowance for adjustment to the rule change? Sure.

As the season goes on, we will see how it shakes out.

This fan would like to believe in him. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, at some point one has to call it that way. We play soft zone D. In the CFL, that is a scary thing. WCJ

Loved the line above as pertaining to our defence WCJ. The time of possession stat is an important one, as MLf reinforces. Our defense is on the field too long and over time that is not a good thing. You want your offence out on the field making long drives and your defense out on the field for as little as possible. That is the winning formula.

The key thing to me is the trend is not our friend. Our defence started off well last season, likely in part due to the carry over effect of Stubler from the previous season but progressively got worse and fell apart at the end of the season. We've started this season on defence very poorly, giving up the most average rushing per game, the most yards per pass, and we're eighth in the CFL (only Winnipeg's defense is worse) in giving up an average of 422.5 yards per game. To contrast that stat, Ottawa, a second year team, is only giving up an average of 270 yards per game...a huge difference.

The notion that we're bending but not breaking is not showing up in our average points per game against...so that argument is not valid.

Its obvious that Washington has not made any strategy changes with an entire off-season to do so.

Therefore, if we are going to see change in Washington's philosophy, approach, strategy, etc. its going to have to come from Tedford. It would seem that Tedford has focused more on the offensive side of the football so far. That's his strength and Tedford had a lot on his plate to start as HC of B.C. I'm sure Wally sold Tedford as a younger DC with the potential of genius just like he tried to sell all of us that Benevedes, as his protégé, was the answer.

We never should have jettisoned Stubler (Hufnagel snapped him up IMMEDIATELY) and if we wanted to go with a younger DC Barrin Miles was the choice I would have made.

[Toppy Vann]

While I commend Wally for wanting to bring on former CFL players as coaches and new coaches - his blemish is his selection criteria.

I agree with great Sir Alec Ferguson who a few years back while still running Man United tore a public strip off owners of other Premier Clubs for firing their coaches far too quickly. His point was that they needed time to develop. But fans want blood.

I thing Blitz's point about the def consultant role to save jobs and improve your team is the way to go. When WB got Hufnagel it was made clear he wasn't here to take over as a coach. A Dave Ritchie would be precisely who they should go to with ONE PROVISO. The DC has to 1) fully embrace the idea 2) must listen, learn and develop. Results have to be there fast.

If the Lions paid Ritchie properly - he'd likely still be here and they'd have a few more rings.

[Dusty]

A lot of emphasis is placed on Washington's role with the defence and rightly so as he is the DC and sets the direction and (presumably) makes the calls. But he has a staff of role coaches to help him in carrying out the plan. Robin Ross (DLine) was hired by Tedford; Johnny Holland was a cary-over from last year and was well thought of by this Forum and his players. Willie Fields (Asst. D-Backs) is a new hire this year and presumably Tedford signed off on his hire.

So, if Washington is DC and D-Backs coach, he is starting from his comfort zone and relying on his history of playing in the Lions backfield when soft zone was almost a constant. I doubt that he has any experience as a player in attacking other than an occasional safety blitz or watching Kerry Banks come off the side. I do not think he has played in a variety of defensive schemes let alone coached in them. What we see is what Washington knows.

There is still a part of me that hopes that once the backs get used to playing in coverage with the new no-contact rules we could see a slight change to a more attacking style, especially if Washington enlists the DL and LB coaches in scheme development. As Blitz so accurately points out, the blitzes are amateurish when they do happen and the variety of "push" from the line is not there. I guess we wait and see if this year was the make-over year for coaches or a year of growth in the coaches...especially the DC/Back coach and more importantly, the HC. Tedford is known for is Offensive Coaching skills..... I hope this year he becomes known for his Defensive Coaching or perhaps more accurately, "mentoring" skills.

[WestCoastJoe]

A lot of emphasis is placed on Washington's role with the defence and rightly so as he is the DC and sets the direction and (presumably) makes the calls. But he has a staff of role coaches to help him in carrying out the plan. Robin Ross (DLine) was hired by Tedford; Johnny Holland was a cary-over from last year and was well thought of by this Forum and his players. Willie Fields (Asst. D-Backs) is a new hire this year and presumably Tedford signed off on his hire.

So, if Washington is DC and D-Backs coach, he is starting from his comfort zone and relying on his history of playing in the Lions backfield when soft zone was almost a constant. I doubt that he has any experience as a player in attacking other than an occasional safety blitz or watching Kerry Banks come off the side. I do not think he has played in a variety of defensive schemes let alone coached in them. What we see is what Washington knows.

There is still a part of me that hopes that once the backs get used to playing in coverage with the new no-contact rules we could see a slight change to a more attacking style, especially if Washington enlists the DL and LB coaches in scheme development. As Blitz so accurately points out, the blitzes are amateurish when they do happen and the variety of "push" from the line is not there. I guess we wait and see if this year was the make-over year for coaches or a year of growth in the coaches...especially the DC/Back coach and more importantly, the HC. Tedford is known for is Offensive Coaching skills..... I hope this year he becomes known for his Defensive Coaching or perhaps more accurately, "mentoring" skills.

Points well made, Dusty.

This might be a case where one can see the advantage of having coached in a number of systems. Mark W has been with Wally and Benny for years. Coaches go with what they know, and with their comfort zone. How many coaches have the all in attitude of Don Matthews or even Chris Jones?

It is relatively early in the DC career of Mark W. Will he incorporate more of an attack style, a deceptive style? Dunno ... But lots of evidence is accumulating that soft zone is what we get.

Is soft zone OK for the CFL? In the right hands it might be. But you need to mix it up, as does Stubler. And you need to disguise.

Do those fans that want an attack style defence from Mark W still have hope? Dunno ... Maybe ... Dunno ...

As noted, he seems to have the buy in from players. Without that buy in, one could expect a shambles. If the players start to doubt ... Ouch.

[TheLionKing]

I think we've seen enough of Washington's work to conclude he will never implement an aggressive attacking defence despite his promises.

[B.C.FAN]

I think we've seen enough of Washington's work to conclude he will never implement an aggressive attacking defence despite his promises.

Agreed. It's early to be drawing a lot of conclusions after three games, especially when two of those games were against the offensive genius of Jacques Chapdelaine and Kevin Glenn (sorry, I just had to throw that in ) but we're seeing the same patterns that emerged last year. The Lions play a lot of soft zone defence but it's not the bend-but-don't break defence that Rich Stubler ran. The Mark Washington defence breaks more often than not. Consider:

- The Lions rank last in stopping opponents in the red zone. They give up TDs 78% of the time when opponents penetrate inside the 20 yard line.
- The Lions rank last in stopping opponents from converting on second down, giving up a first down or TD 60% of the time.
- The Lions also have given up the second most big plays, despite playing one fewer game than many teams.

Overall, the most defining characteristic of this defence is that when they need a stop, they don't get it. Jeff Tedford mentioned on his coach's show on TSN 1040 tonight that the offence has to do a better job of sustaining drives to keep the defence off the field, and the defence has to do a better job of making stops and getting off the field. Will we see a change of philosophy or do we have to be patient until the new starters adjust to the game and start making plays? When asked about teams picking on TJ. Lee, Tedford expressed confidence in him. He just said the players in the secondary have to make sure they're on the same page in zone defence, an apparent reference to Lee and Yell's communication problems in the home opener. For now it seems, the team is counting on the young starters to settle down and come through as the season goes on. We'll see if that's enough.

[B.C.FAN]

Mike Beamish has a good feature on T.J. Lee, who faced Weston Dressler two weeks in a row and now must face Chad Owens, who destroyed the Lions at B.C. Place last year. It doesn't get any easier. Some excerpts:

Lee’s resilience was tested in back-to-back games during the past two weeks when he was asked to cover Weston Dressler, the Saskatchewan Roughriders’ artful dodger. Lee and the rest of the Lions’ secondary were exposed when Dressler scored on a 45-yard touchdown in the first quarter July 10 at BC Place, a game in which the Lions eventually prevailed 35-32 in overtime.

“It was a miscommunication, and they beat us deep,” Lee said. “They did a pretty good job on him after that (Dressler had only 21 of his 122 receiving yards over the final three quarters).”

Bending a little, but never breaking, was the Lions’ defensive philosophy in the fourth quarter of that game; up 27-11, they were prepared to yield short yardage in favour of shutting off the long gainers. But, with the Lions ahead 27-17, with 1:39 to play, Glenn was going long ball to Jamel Richardson. They connected on a 49-yard play at Lee’s expense that led to another Roughrider touchdown — and a nervous 27-24 Lions’ win that was closer than it should have been.

“I was supposed be deep in that coverage — and I got my eyes caught by looking at another receiver on the short side,” Lee explains. “That’s stuff I still have to learn. I’m working on being consistent. The more I’m learning, I’m noting the game is becoming slower. It want it to become like The Matrix (the movie with stylized body movement and slow-motion action sequences). I want to be able to play and not think as much.”

On Friday, he’ll be matched against another dangerous receiver — Chad Owens of the Argonauts. The Flyin’ Hawaiian had eight catches, 117 yards and a touchdown in Toronto’s last visit to BC Place, a 40-23 win that ended an 11-game losing streak in Vancouver.

“I know they’re going to be targeting him, which means they’re targeting me,” Lee says. “Chad’s got agility, quickness and great top-end speed. But I believe in my athletic ability, and he’s human. When you look at it, they’re targeting me with their star receivers — Dressler, the Flyin’ Hawaiian, S.J. Green. When you prepare and do the best you can, you’ve got nothing to worry about.”

It's been a rough start for Lee in his first year as a starter, playing the most difficult position in the secondary. He showed in preseason last year and with his interception last week that he can be a play-maker. Eliminating mental mistakes and getting accustomed to playing with boundary corner Ronnie Yell is the first hurdle. Owens will capitalize on any mistakes.

Thrown in stone cold tests Lee’s resiliency on defence

[WestCoastJoe]

As posted by Blitz in the Argos preview thread, LU wrote about our defence ...

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/footb ... story.html

Some excerpts ...

But what’s also keeping him awake is the abundance of yards being surrendered that is making the early portion of the season look a lot like the last month of the 2014 campaign, which resulted in the removal of head coach Mike Benevides and triggered a major team overhaul.

The whopping 517 yards given up in the Lions’ last game, and the combined 959 yards surrendered over two contests to the Saskatchewan Roughriders are nicely masked by a pair of wins.

Hard to justify giving up 517 yards to the Riders, or to any team, it seems to me. You don't get stops. You wear down your defence. You are running your defence ragged.

“It’s really been a breakdown here or there; nothing fundamental or schematically is an issue. When we break down the passing yards, around 60 per cent of it (in Regina Friday) came on four plays. We’re pretty good except for those four plays.”

All of those 2nd down conversions did not come on those four plays. Guys also get beat in coverage when the QB has all the time in the world.

Some see the scheme, and the philosophy, as an issue. Vanilla. Soft zone. That does not really stop anything, if the offence is sharp. No pressure. No mistakes forced.

But the Lions are also last in the league so far against the run, an oddity for a team that has linebackers like Solomon Elimimian and Adam Bighill in the lineup. In their last seven games over two seasons they have given up in excess of 100 yards on the ground six times.

How does one explain away the worst run defence in the league?

Having Biggie and Sollie 25 yards deep in a soft zone? That is a head shaker. That is taking the conservative approach to the max.

They’re also at the bottom of the league this year allowing 448.6 average yards per game overall, and have the worst red zone defence after the first month. It’s also worth noting that no defence has been on the field for more time than the Lions.

How does one explain away the worst red zone defence in the league?

“(Linebackers coach) Johnny Holland said ‘don’t get too good back there, they’re going to ask you to do it too much,’ ” said Bighill. “It’s good to be able to bring more flavour to the defence. Ideally I’d like to be in the box too. The thing we want to give to teams is the feeling I could be anywhere.”

Bighill should be in the box, not 25 yards downfield, it seems to me. Mark W is going all in to stop the pass, but it is not working when you give up 300 yards through the air. How about turning the focus around and getting after the quarterback? That can create chaos for the offence and cause turnovers, which is something of a rarity for us in this defence.

“We didn’t back the dogs off. You can also attack without blitzing,” he said. “With that being said, there’s also been some execution breakdowns. We have a young team and an extremely young defence.”

6 is the most receivers that an offence can send out. Try sending 6 pass rushers, with one unaccounted for. 6 pass rushers versus 5 blockers. I like those odds. Build from that premise. Afraid to blitz? Well some coaches do very well with the blitz.

“We didn’t back the dogs off. You can also attack without blitzing,” he said. “With that being said, there’s also been some execution breakdowns. We have a young team and an extremely young defence.”

Didn't back the dogs off? Heck the dogs are not even barking. And how can you attack with four men against five blockers? Execution breakdowns did not cause 517 yards of offence. It was soft zone that caused that.

"You can also attack without blitzing.” -- Mark Washington

This is a revealing quote IMO. Mark W does not like to blitz. He does not like to blitz.

"You can also attack without blitzing." ???

4 rushers against 5 blockers? That is attacking? I don't think so. The only thing softer is going with a 3 man rush.

That is not attacking. That is sending a minimal force as you attempt to play it safe. You are hoping the offence is not sharp. You are hoping the offence makes a mistake.
...............

After two exhibition games and three regular season games, are we seeing the defence we will have? Probably.

No pressure = no turnovers.

What the fans think only matters to the buy in of the viewing public. What matters is results on the field. Those results will all be there on tape as the season progresses. So if we make adaptations, those will be evident. No changes? If there are no changes, I expect sharp QBs and sharp OCs to carve up our defence.

That is just IMO ...

[B.C.FAN]

Jeff Tedford's comments to LU suggest he's not fully aware of the problem.

“There were no defensive offsides,” he said. “We kept things in front of us. There were numerous times when we were in a situation to get the quarterback and guys pulled off. I thought we made a huge improvement that way.

“We have to improve in certain areas no doubt, and we’ve given up too many yards, but we’ve held pretty firm in the red zone.”

Held pretty firm I the red zone? Giving up touchdowns a league-worst 78% of the time isn't holding firm. Last year's defence ranked third in the red zone, giving up TDs only 48% f the time. Saskatchewan was last at 67%.

[sj-roc]

“It’s really been a breakdown here or there; nothing fundamental or schematically is an issue. When we break down the passing yards, around 60 per cent of it (in Regina Friday) came on four plays. We’re pretty good except for those four plays.”

All of those 2nd down conversions did not come on those four plays. Guys also get beat in coverage when the QB has all the time in the world.

Some see the scheme, and the philosophy, as an issue. Vanilla. Soft zone. That does not really stop anything, if the offence is sharp. No pressure. No mistakes forced.

I had another look at Ssk's 2nd down offensive numbers from last week. This is just my own arithmetic so it might differ slightly from numbers appearing elsewhere but...

In the first half on 2nd down, Ssk's O gained on our D an average of 7.1 yards per play (all rush and pass attempts combined). Throw out Allen's 40yd nothing run at EOH and it's only 3.8 ypp.

In the second half, it ballooned to 12.4 ypp on 2nd down, which included a 2nd & goal from our 1YL on their final drive that went for a TD. Until we got into victory formation our O ran a meagre five plays in the entire final quarter. The first was a 2yd TD rec on a drive that had started in Q3. The last four were a pair of 2 & outs that gained a total of 7yds.

[sj-roc]

Jeff Tedford's comments to LU suggest he's not fully aware of the problem.

“There were no defensive offsides,” he said. “We kept things in front of us. There were numerous times when we were in a situation to get the quarterback and guys pulled off. I thought we made a huge improvement that way.

“We have to improve in certain areas no doubt, and we’ve given up too many yards, but we’ve held pretty firm in the red zone.”

Held pretty firm I the red zone? Giving up touchdowns a league-worst 78% of the time isn't holding firm. Last year's defence ranked third in the red zone, giving up TDs only 48% f the time. Saskatchewan was last at 67%.

That could be just spin on his part. For public consumption. Even when they know it, coaches aren't always going to come out with, "Boy, we flat out suck!" The 2-1 record, and still ranking among division leaders buys him some freedom (for now) to hide certain deficiencies. We might easily be 1-2 or 0-3 and I don't think he'd be talking about holding pretty firm.

[DanoT]

“It’s really been a breakdown here or there; nothing fundamental or schematically is an issue. When we break down the passing yards, around 60 per cent of it (in Regina Friday) came on four plays. We’re pretty good except for those four plays.”

All of those 2nd down conversions did not come on those four plays. Guys also get beat in coverage when the QB has all the time in the world.

Some see the scheme, and the philosophy, as an issue. Vanilla. Soft zone. That does not really stop anything, if the offence is sharp. No pressure. No mistakes forced.

I had another look at Ssk's 2nd down offensive numbers from last week. This is just my own arithmetic so it might differ slightly from numbers appearing elsewhere but...

In the first half on 2nd down, Ssk's O gained on our D an average of 7.1 yards per play (all rush and pass attempts combined). Throw out Allen's 40yd nothing run at EOH and it's only 3.8 ypp.

In the second half, it ballooned to 12.4 ypp on 2nd down, which included a 2nd & goal from our 1YL on their final drive that went for a TD. Until we got into victory formation our O ran a meagre five plays in the entire final quarter. The first was a 2yd TD rec on a drive that had started in Q3. The last four were a pair of 2 & outs that gained a total of 7yds.

The Lions were out played in the 4th Q but Riders ran out of time due to taking too long on scoring drives and really would have won the game had they not just run out of time.

So the best you could say about the Lions D is that they were out played and couldn't stop the Riders on 2nd and long but forced them to eat up the clock. Yup a top notch thumbs up to a clock eating D from Wally.

I fear that Trevor Harris and his Argos are going to have their way with the weak Lions D. I hope to be wrong.

[B.C.FAN]

I re-watched the first half of last week's game. The B.C. defence played a great half, using a lot of man coverage and keeping Bighill and Elimimian in the box. They held the Riders to 11 yards net offence in the first quarter and 174 yards overall in the half, 40 of which came on the last play as time expired.

In the second half, when the Lions were playing a soft zone to protect the lead, the Riders picked up 327 net yards and 16 first downs.

This defence can be effective when allowed to play straight up. I hope that as the new DBs settle into their roles and make fewer mistakes, the coaches will not see the need to give them extra help.