Western Final-Getting Ready For The Stamps!!!

[mightybuck]

That seems to be a philosophical change from pinning a loss on the defense

Not really. In that thread Buck was getting the blame (from some) and I pointed out it was defense that lost that game consisting of 12 men. Sure, it didnt help with a couple of ints, but if we had won it would have been a moot subject. Once again for some the win or loss was placed on one player. My point is that it goes beyond one man. Its the offense, the defense or the entire team. When the Lions win saturday you will not hear me say that Buck Pierce was the reason they won. It will be because he played well enough, the receivers made the catch, the line blocked, the defense played well, good playing calling and execution - it all has to work

I dont believe I have ever said on here that the sole reason for a win was because of Buck, and for some to set Buck up that if they lose its all his fault - that he was the only weak link is not right

My response here is to the extreme wording that the lions are good enough to beat Calgary at every position except QB - what a difference to Ullriches opening comments - thats all

Dont get distracted from the issue I have with what Willes wrote

Go Lions -

[mightybuck]

anyways

thats all I have to say on the subject and I am done

you all know where I stand in support

Just looking for fair and balanced treatment. Buck doesnt win the game or lose the game alone. The defense can play well and the offense not - or vise versa - but its not one person fault or glory - it is team as a whole

The team that showed up against the past calgary games can not be the same team that shows up this saturday.

over and out

[Tighthead]

That seems to be a philosophical change from pinning a loss on the defense

Not really. In that thread Buck was getting the blame (from some) and I pointed out it was defense that lost that game consisting of 12 men. Sure, it didnt help with a couple of ints, but if we had won it would have been a mute subject. Once again for some the win or loss was placed on one player. My point is that it goes beyond one man. Its the offense, the defense or the entire team. When the Lions win saturday you will not hear me say that Buck Pierce was the reason they won. It will be because he played well enough, the receivers made the catch, the line blocked, the defense played well, good playing calling and execution - it all has to work

I dont believe I have ever said on here that the sole reason for a win was because of Buck, and for some to set Buck up that if they lose its all his fault - that he was the only weak link is not right

My response here is to the extreme wording that the lions are good enough to beat Calgary at every position except QB - what a difference to Ullriches opening comments - thats all

Dont get distracted from the issue I have with what Willes wrote

Go Lions -

I disagree. You were pinning the loss on the defence, and absolving Buck of all blame despite two picks and a third down run that came up woefully short. That is not saying you win or lose as a team. It is picking and choosing who is blameworthy, and advocating for a player.

If the team had won, the performance of the D would have also been MOOT but that didn't mean you weren't ready to lay blame at their feet.

I don't think people were pinning the entire loss on Buck, but you were using stats to defend a marginal performance and place all blame on the defence.

[mightybuck]

then I apologize for how it came across

But I still disagree with what willes wrote and that was the reason for this post in the first place

[Lion Guy]

then I apologize for how it came across

A word of wisdom from an (semi) old timer: if you are going to support any QB in this league you will need a thick skin. Regardless of who does what the QB wins or the QB loses.

Just the way it is with people.

[B.C.FAN]

Buck played well against Calgary this year, aside from a couple of costly turnovers in his last outing. Overall, his numbers matched up well with Burris's, even though Buck played only one complete game against the Stamps.

Pierce:
June 26: 9 of 14 (64%), 160 yards, 1 TD, 0 INTs in 2 quarters
Aug. 22: 8 of 13 (62%), 103 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT in 2 quarters
Nov. 1: 26 of 42 (62%), 346 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs in 4 quarters
TOTAL: 43 OF 69 (62%), 609 yards, 5 TDs, 3 INTS in 8 quarters

Burris:
June 26: 22 of 32 (69%), 274 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT in 4 quarters
Aug. 22: 18 of 30 (60%), 282 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT in 4 quarters
Nov. 1: 11 of 18 (61%), 165 yards, 1 TD, 0 INTs in 2 quarters
TOTAL: 51 of 80 (64%), 721 yards, 5 TDs, 2 INTs in 10 quarters

There are three reasons B.C. lost three games to the Stamps this year. In no particular order, they are lack of intensity, turnovers and an inability to make defensive stops when necessary.

[Lions4ever]

Well, the D was awful that day. I'm pretty sure I read quotes from WB saying as much. But BP threw 2 paricularily egregious pix and you're right that his decision to run in that situation was a poor one.

But I take MB's point about the EW comment. To say the WF comes down to one thing - who's better, BP or HB is ridiculously simplistic. Besides, at this point in their respective careers IMO it is obvious who is the better QB right now : HB. He just is. And he's been very well coached up this year and eliminated a lot of his typically HB mistakes. But the Lions can win if BP plays smart (and I think he will) and BC comes into Calgyra with a good defensive game plan and execute it.

If it's close, the better question is who has the better kicking game. PMcC has been the bomb this season, but I would still give the edge to the Stamps there.

[Larry Key]

I would like to see some 3-4 with one ILB spying Burris, and one blitzing on passing downs. Calgary is going to try to burn us with the QB draw.

I also love a blitz out of the 3-4 where the ILB and OLB from the same side rush the QB. There isn't much 3-4 in the league so it can really throw the o-line off as it permits so much creativity.

Exactly what I was thinking TH. They have two rookies on the line (both tackles I believe) and if we throw a couple new wrinkles, that might help us get to Hank quicker. Ty and Aaron need to push that pocket back further allowing our DE's the right angle to come in at Hank.

[zark]

This is a team game dispite what manure chucking Rider fans think. Buck is our leader and our team's leader. All plays revolve around him and as leader takes the blame.Burris has evolved into a great player and Rider fans still cry about his going to a better team.
I don't think Burris gets as flustered from pressure as he used to and won't make those mistakes we're expecting.Buck has to mature as a QB right now. His receivers has to be there for him. Jarius is right there behind him to back him up and as a team member,I'm sure he's happy to fill that role.
If they do their best we'll cheer. If they lose, we won't get rid of them 2 days later. Do your best guys.

BC vs AC Grey Cup

[#1 Lions Fan in SK]

MB, I know where you're coming from. I've been saying all along, Michael Bishop had a bad game but so did alot of other players. As for Buck, I am a huge fan and I don't think it is even really fair to compare him and HB. Henry has had the team all year and has been a starting quarterback for many years. Buck is young as is Jarious. I think the two complement each other greatly and I think that is a huge benefit that BC has right now. When Jarious came in on short yardage on Saturday, I was thinking --- go for it, Saskatchewan won't see it coming --- and they didn't. I think Buck is a patient, accurate great passer. Jarious is more of the big play guy. One of the things I don't like about Jarious is too much going deep. It's too obvious to the defence. Personally, I think the Lions that played on Saturday can beat the Stamps this Saturday. I also think the Stamps may be looking past the Lions due to their record this season.

On a last note, I expect great things out of Buck on Saturday and I can't wait to watch and cheer him on and have him make all the naysayers look bad.!!!!

[zark]

And if he doesn't?

[Blitz]

Calgary has averaged 31.5 points per game against us in their three victories this season. That is either due to the excellent play of Burris and their offence or the inabilty of our defence to stop their offence. There are two ways of looking at it. However, going into this game, our defense has a very difficult task against the highest scoring team in the West this season. Our defence may be able to play lights out football but the odds are that Calgary, boasting the West's MOP representative in Henry Burris, the leading rusher in Joffrey Reynolds, the top receiver in the league in passing yards. The Stamps are going to score. They will be much tougher to hold off the scoreboard than Saskatchewan's offence and the Stamps tied our Leos for best in the league in the giveaway/takeaway stats.

That puts pressure on our offence to score. In our last game against Calgary Stefan Logan ran for 138 yards and caught passes for an additional 88 yards. Outside of Grice-Mullen, Logan was most of our offence, racking up 228 yards. However, that wasn't enough to win the game. To win this game it's going to take an improved performance from both our offensive and defensive units.

In terms of Buck, who will lead our offence against Calgary, my hope is that Buck will have a green light and feel comfortable to go out and play more aggressively than he did against the Riders. I go back to Buck's first two starts this season, when he became our starter again. His first two games against Montreal and Hamilton, he passed for a 79% and 80% average, He did that while throwing the football short, intermediate, and deep.

In his last game Buck played a different style. He played a style that focused on managing the game, avoiding errors, and playing a very low risk style in the passing game. That turned out to be a good strategy, especially the way Burris and the Riders offence imploded. However, against Calgary, who will likely put up more points on the scoreboard than the Riders, Buck may have to play less conservatively. He has the ability to do that. Unless our defense can figure out how to shut down an experienced quarterback (our "D" struggled against Ricky Ray, Anthony Cavillo, and Henry Burris) our offence will have to at least match. One thing that can't be avoided is the pressure on a quarterback in the playoffs. As Wally said in today's Sun, "We sometimes say the NFL asks the quarterback not to lose games, the CFL asks the quarterback to win games

Calgary also plays a lot of press coverage and plays a lot of man defence. That style of defence is designed to make the short passing attack more difficult but does provide more opportunities to go over the top. Calgary will do whatever it can to minimize Stefan Logan while also trying to take away our short passing game. We may need to open it up in the passing attack.

However, there was less than one touchdown difference between the two teams difference in terms of average score in our three games. That's not a lot. We have momentum, we'll be at game speed right away, and our timing should be better than Calgary's to begin the game. There are two styles we can go into Calgary with. On defence we can play conservatively or play an attack style defence. On offence we can do the same. We can either go into this game hoping to avoid mistakes or go into this game with an approach of going after it both defensively and offensively. I hope we choose the latter!

[TheLionKing]

In terms of Buck, who will lead our offence against Calgary, my hope is that Buck will have a green light and feel comfortable to go out and play more aggressively than he did against the Riders. I go back to Buck's first two starts this season, when he became our starter again. His first two games against Montreal and Hamilton, he passed for a 79% and 80% average, He did that while throwing the football short, intermediate, and deep.

The big question is whether Chapdelaine would allow him to be more aggressive. After all, he calls the plays.

[zark]

I don't think we''ll get as many turnovers, (4 turnovers 7 pts) but we'll have to do alot better at capitalizing on them.

[Blitz]

I don't think we''ll get as many turnovers, (4 turnovers 7 pts) but we'll have to do alot better at capitalizing on them.

No question....these teams are too close....so if there are any turnovers we'll need to really take advantage of them!!!

The excitement builds!!!! I think we'll see more crossing patterns this game from our offence, with Calgary playing man defence!