Lions @ Argos Post game thoughts

[Lionut]

Good win, but if they had lost, we would once again be talking about Wally's terrible game management. The 2 point convert at the start of the 4th quarter was incomprehensible. There was absolutely no reason to do that. It directly impacted the next TD as well since it required them to go for two after that. It is alarming that the Lions basically have to survive at least one monumental Wally Bonehead call per game. Putting in Lulay was also ridiculous. Lulay looked completely lost out there. Jurious some times takes a while to warm up but when he does, look out. Wally should have a longer leash for him.

I'll take the win, but that doesn't excuse the poor game management, this game and for most of the entire season.

Wally Buono has a terrific eye for talent, and puts together a tremendous football operation. He is also about the worst game day head coach I have ever seen. We should really put together a Wally greatest hits on bad strategic decisions, rather like those NFL Top Ten Lists. Number one would have to be the late game punt in the 04 Grey Cup. I have number two as the time he decided to try for a field goal on first down in OT against Saskatchewan. BT is absolutely right -- at least once a game, Wally will make a bad strategic decision that hurts the team. For whatever reason, success rates on two point converts in the CFL are low. Therefore, you should only go for two very late when you absolutely have to. When you go for two earlier and you miss, you end up chasing that missed point for the rest of the game, as the Lions did there.

Gutsy comeback and a lot of positives, but the game day management of our head coach just makes me insane...

[hwgill]

I don't think putting Lulay in was a bad idea. It gave him some much needed game experience, but I think it also made Jackson realize that if he isn't performing, he is replaceable. I think that may have settled JJ down in the second half, and when he is settled down, man, can he perform. The way that JJ stretched the field in the second half got the Argo defence to realize that they can't go all out pass rush, otherwise they will lose the long ball. The Leos need to continue stretching the field, then, and only then, will they get back on a real winning streak.

The D played poorly yesterday, we were lucky that one TD was called back for holding, though when I watched the game the second time, it wasn't Murphy who should have been called for holding, but rather the right side tackle who was blatantly holding Johnson. I thought that the first time, but the second time confirmed that for me.

[Toppy Vann]

I have made a lot of criticisms of the coaching decisions but the 2 pt conversions made sense in this game. Questioning it is nuts.

[hwgill]

It shouldn't be so hard to get penalty stats. Well, at least now I know where they are...

144 4 Argonauts J. SHIVERS Forward Pass Interference 31 Accepted
143 4 Argonauts J. YOUNGER Forward Pass Interference 10 Accepted
139 4 Lions K. BANKS Offside 5 Accepted
137 4 Argonauts R. MURPHY Holding 10 Accepted
120 3 Lions B. MILES Unnecessary Roughness 15 Accepted
98 3 Argonauts C. PICKETT Time Count 5 Accepted
87 2 Argonauts D. PICARD Unnecessary Roughness 15 Accepted
70 2 Lions D. VALLI Procedure 5 Accepted
66 2 Lions K. BANKS Unnecessary Roughness 15 Accepted
63 2 Lions D. MARSH Forward Pass Interference Declined
56 2 Argonauts A. DURIE No Yards 15 Accepted
41 2 Lions J. GIBBS Offside 5 Accepted
31 1 Argonauts J. MEDLOCK Illegal Punt 10 Accepted
29 1 Lions B. JOHNSON Offside 5 Accepted
9 1 Lions J. YURICHUK Procedure 5 Accepted

7 for 96 yards for the Argos, 8 for 55 yards for the Leos. Not too bad for us I think. Though the two unnecessary roughness calls were dumb. But if all we have are a couple of procedure/offside calls per game, I think the team has at least learned to play a disciplined game.

[Rammer]

I have made a lot of criticisms of the coaching decisions but the 2 pt conversions made sense in this game. Questioning it is nuts.

The first one didn't make sense at that time of the game IMO, and the second one was necessary only due to the first one being blown. The reason to wait on the two point from the Lions perspective, is mainly due to our limited results with JJ in that position, as the short pass isn't his forte. Plus that there was almost the entire 4th quarter to go, you may need that point in the end to gain the two points your team is looking for.

However with all that said, had we not gone for the two points to begin with, the Lions are likely looking at a being happy with a tie, by being behind it put us in our attack position and the Argos on a prevent mode. We win the game due to our own ineptitude on punching in the two point converts.

[Lionut]

I would really like to find out what the success rate is on two point converts in the CFL. It strikes me that it is pretty low for all teams, which is why I am not a big fan of going for it too early...

[David]

I would really like to find out what the success rate is on two point converts in the CFL. It strikes me that it is pretty low for all teams, which is why I am not a big fan of going for it too early...

Could it be that teams don't practice it enough? I don't really know; just a thought.

Another from the "I can't prove it's true, but I am positive it is....." department: do we not seem to scrimmage on the other team's 1 yard line (or at the very least, inside the 5) more than other CFL teams? I mean, really. Maybe I am just sensitive to our short yardage challenges down there, but it sure seems like we get (at least) one a game, yet I don't recall us having to defend too many of them ourselves.

DH

[Lions4ever]

I have made a lot of criticisms of the coaching decisions but the 2 pt conversions made sense in this game. Questioning it is nuts.

It's nuts? That's kind of a negative (*mod edit*) thing to say. But then, one has to consider the source. Please. Tell us why it's "nuts".

[cromartie]

Good win, but if they had lost, we would once again be talking about Wally's terrible game management. The 2 point convert at the start of the 4th quarter was incomprehensible. There was absolutely no reason to do that.

When you are down 15 in the fourth quarter, the chart, and all teams have a chart, tells you to go for two.

Now, if it's quarters 1-3, you ignore the chart. In the fourth quarter, you have to go for two at least once.

Let's assume your team's track record inside the 5 is pretty sketchy. Do you kick it then, and go for two later? Or do you go for two then, know that if you fail then you'll have to score twice. And if you do have to score twice, give yourself 10+ minutes to do so, rather than, oh, three minutes in the latter scenario.

Probably not the best decision, maybe not even the one I would have made. But not horrible by any means.

[Toppy Vann]

I would really like to find out what the success rate is on two point converts in the CFL. It strikes me that it is pretty low for all teams, which is why I am not a big fan of going for it too early...

Could it be that teams don't practice it enough? I don't really know; just a thought.

Another from the "I can't prove it's true, but I am positive it is....." department: do we not seem to scrimmage on the other team's 1 yard line (or at the very least, inside the 5) more than other CFL teams? I mean, really. Maybe I am just sensitive to our short yardage challenges down there, but it sure seems like we get (at least) one a game, yet I don't recall us having to defend too many of them ourselves.

DH

I say they do practice this as they run plays in all sessions from all places on the field including their no huddle offences/defences and red zone plays.

Making a decision to go for a two pointer is based on two things:
1. how well your team is doing at the time (hot hot they've been getting to there - a good long drive, vs one bomb is a better sign) and how much you need 2 vs. 1 point.
2. how much the D is now on its heels as your team has the upper hand at that point in the game.

Although the Lions got to score with some PI calls, the score said go for 2. I also felt the Argos looked to be collapsing and lacked confidence.

It has nothing to do in my mind with trying to prove the coach has confidence in his guys. It is situational both on how their team was playing at the time, the benefit of 2 versus 1 pts at that stage of the game, and how the Argos were starting to fold.

What I think teams including the Lions should practice more is that last minute play when you must go the length of the field to score as this is the last play of the game.

Matt Dunigan had his Stamps score off that play in BC Place only to have refs call it back (wrongly) or the Lions had lost that game. Actually that was the kick off they took but I think teams need to do both at practice (despite the risk of injury - they can reduce the hitting just go 3/4's- no big hits). Just kind of play keep away with the ball being lateraled.

"The Stampeders desperate for a win and with the clock winding down executed perfectly an on side, open field kick, an exciting play that saw a receiver steps behind the kicker rush down the field and collect the ball for a touchdown. Only problem is that Jake Ireland’s crew didn’t catch the all important placement of the receiver and instead called a no yards penalty. Adding insult to injury, Ireland then turned the ball over to the lions as well as the win.

An extremely upset Matt Dunigan could be heard screaming at the officials about the botched call but to no avail. A subsequent protest of the game was received by the league office, but turned down. In effect, the league said we screwed up but what’s happened has happened, time to move on."

The CFL has been experimenting with the idea of official review this season, giving the officials the chance to examine the tape on occasions this year as a test.