The Lions have the talent right now to win a GC, this season, if they could only generate a little momentum and thus confidence, but that simply rarely happens with our coaching. If its not a defence that allows the opposition to regularly have 8-12 play drives (sucking the focus and interest out of the Offence), or Special Teams that commit turnovers and are regularly fooled by fakes, its a predictable offence. Until the COACHING of this football team drastically changes NOTHING will improve here, and if Wally continues to lose out on FAs, conduct horrible drafts, and not add key INT personnel until the mid point of the season, then things will only get WORSE, not better.
MLF
I hope Harris stays in BC but if Cortez remains OC in 2016 then the boring, predictable, empty backfield spread offense with little or no running game will likely remain. Just watch the fan base dwindle without Harris on the roster. Pretty scary stuff but Wally's stubbornness and ego are also scary.
DanoT
If the run game is not working between the tackles because the Esks are stacking the box, then the Lions should be trying to run to the perimeter, screen passes to Harris, shovel passes- they did it once I think, use motion and misdirection, move the pocket and roll out the QB who can then throw a short pass to Harris.
One way or another the Lions, if they expect to win games, MUST get the ball into the hands of their best player.
DanoT
Last game most of Harris' 6 runs were for negative yardage and only got a total of 2 yards on those 6 carries . One of those carries went for a whole 3 yards to get the average into the black . After each run attempt they were left in second and 11 to 12 , the same as getting sacked that many times .Would they have got way more if they had gone to Harris 12 more times in that game ? Or just more 2and outs ? If you do get way more 2and outs you get less opportunities for more attempts .It would have been nice to see Harris have a great game , but he also has to produce as does the Oline blocking and this is not a Dorazio coached Oline anymore . A team can't afford to keep taking those shots if they all get stuffed , mostly for losses . This last game wasn't lost because BC had no run game , they were in the lead right up to the end after all . They played Edmonton right to the wire and the Esks are the top team , with the Number one defence.
pennw
The topic of our running attack has been a long standing one. Over the years we've seen it be excellent at times (for example, we led the CFL in rushing in 2007, with a run focused offence, averaged over 200 yards per game running the football over a number of games, including the semi-final playoff game against the Riders, in 2013, with both Harris and Logan rotating in the backfield. In our 2012 season, using JaquesBall we led the CFL in rushing yards.
We've had many games in which we have rushed the football very well over the years and we've had many games in which our running attack has been completely stuffed. That dichotomy, either from season to season or game to game is frustrating as well as confusing to some fans, for good reasons.
But it shouldn't be. The ability for our Leos to run the football successfully or very unsuccessfully has depended mainly on two things - how we are being defended and how we are attacking a defense. It mostly has come down to strategy rather than talent.
The spread offence, which our Leos team has mostly used since 2005 (exceptions -2007, 2011/2012, and part of 2013) makes it more challenging to run the football. With only 5 blockers and one running back, spread offences are mostly stuck running the football between the tackles unless they are innovative. Defenses knew and still know that. Its why defenses adapted and went with big powerful defensive tackles, for example.
The spread offence orginated at the U.S. college level as an attempt for lesser football programs to counter the big U.S. colleges who could draft blue chip lineman and great running backs and therefore have dominant running games. The spread meant that those colleges who could not recruit as well didn't need stud lineman and a dominant running back. Instead they spread the offence out, went pass first,and threw quickly from the pocket. For stupid reasons, the college teams that didn't need to do that began implementing the spread offence too. The spread offence 'spread' to the CFL, with Hufnagel adapting it to the CFL game in Calgary and NFL offences began using it too as the West Coast and the Pro Offence took a back seat.
However, as with many offensive systems that become popular, defenses become familiar, adapt their personnel and develop strategies to shut the offensive system down.
Right now, in the NFL, there is no one offensive system that is "in". Most teamsl led initially by New England, are using multiple formations and have integrated the West Coast, the spread, and the Pro offence into an offensive philosophy. The tight end has returned, teams use fullbacks and they also use the spread on certain passing downs at times. They go shotgun, pistol, and the quarterback takes the snap under center.
However, CFL offenses are still stuck in the shot gun snap, except for quarterback sneaks. Why don't CFL offences (quarterbacks) take a direct snap under center and still hand off or even pass in short goal line situations? We're still stuck in a certain mindset.
The CFL, due to the wider field and a lack of innovation, stayed with the spread for a longer period of time. But CFL offenses began to run the football again. Hufnagel began to use the running game more often in Calgary. Offenses began using more tight end sets. They introduced the fly sweep to get outside with the running attack. They also rotated in a speed back to get outside with the run. Quarterbacks ran the zone read and took off outside when a defensive end crashed down. They got away from zone blocking all the time and began to pull lineman again and began to use different blocking schemes.
Chapdelaine, part way through 2011, was the first CFL offensive coordinator to really go multi-dimensional. He used a lot of single and double tight end sets part way through that season as well as a lot of motion and misdirection. In 2012, we led the CFL in rushing, first downs, and total offence. He still used the spread but it was no longer our exclusive offence.
But defenses adapted again. They realized that they could stack the box to stop the run on first down and use run blitzes that could serve as pass blitzes if we passed on first down. They also realized that our tight ends were not tight ends but were offensigve lineman or a slow fullback who would not be a threat if we passed. Therefore, if we went play action on first down, they had few receivers to cover in our tight end sets.
Defenses also realized that we most often went spread on second down. They blitzed like crazy (and do even more now) knowing that we had few anti-blitz strategies. Our only anti-blitz strategy, really, was to dump to Harris, so they spied him.
When Khari Jones took over, we struggled because we went back to the spread offence again. Cortez also went spread offence exclusively this season, even though we recruited tight ends but never used tight end formations. (Lately, he has begun to use tight end formations more often, now that we don't have any pure tight ends anymore - crazy|)
MLF is right - we have enough talent and with Jennings we have a quarterback who can make all the throws and only needs experience. We have a running back in Harris who not only is a National but is a dual threat tailback who can run and catch.
But what we lack is a system that can take advantage of what defenses are doing to us. The concept of having an HBack/Tight End system was brilliant and what was needed. It would have helped us run on first down, pass block on first down, and also play action, at times, to a tight end who could catch and also have to be accounted for by the defense.
A second Achilles heel has been our anti-blitz strategies. The best way to counter the spead offence is to blitz it. Having five or six recievers out on pass patterns is useless if your quarterback only has time to read one of them. Cortez wanted to burn blitzing defenses deep. Good strategy if you have the recievers to go deep and a quarterback who can make the deep throw but at that time we didn't.
Harris was spied and covered in the pass game. What we should have been doing was not only to have a receiver or two going deep but we needed to have recievers running shorter routes to take advantage of blitzing linebackers and defensive backs. We didn't. We started to keep Harris in more often to block, since he was spied, rather than using him more often to take a linebacker outside and then hitting a quick crosser underneath to a slot back in the area the linebacker vacated.
Running Harris inside, into a wall of defenders who have stacked the box, doesn't get it done. Using tight ends who are lineman doesn't work because they are not defended so the linebackers and defensive backs either blitz or over play our run. If our quarterback would run the zone read and keep it at times it would help. If we used more fly sweeps it would help. If we integrated a speed back into our backfield to attack the perimeter with speed it would help. If we ran the pitch toss more often and attacked the perimeter it would help. But attacking the perimeter against a defense who is stacking the inside and the outside against our run on first down is difficult, as pennw, points out.
What we need to do is to go play action on first down and be successful. The best way to do that would have been to go with single and double tights with at least one pure tight end and fullback who can play tight end and be a receiving threat. But even without that, we need to be able to attack the defense with options of both short and deep on play action on first down.
That way we won't be facing second and 12 by running the football into a wall or into a blitzing defensive halfback. We could look for the deep ball first and then come underneath If he deep ball is not there. We could also screen on first down to Harris, which would allow us to block the spy.
We would have more second and short plays, which would help negate the blitz. If we are in second and longer, we need to attack defenses, knowing they are blitzing. That means layered routes, quick crossing patterns as well as deep balls, bubble screens (we did that with Rainey with success the game before on a quick crosser and a bubble screen and then never used him in that way against Edmonton).
A successful passing attack would eventually open up the run game as defenses would be forced to adjust and bring defenders out of the box.
Our offense is not designed to exploit how defenses are playing us. Run blitz and stack the box on first down, blitz on second down. We know what they are going to do and we coach as if we are surprised all the time. We run the football into stone walls and our passing game strategy is designed as if we are expecting a four man rush or we can throw deep successfully every time.
Our players take most of the heat for the losses and we are handicapping them. Harris is frustrated, our quarterbacks have to throw deep balls under incredible pressure, and our lineman are expected to run block or pass block more defenders than they can possibly take on. We are making some adjustments (eg: we used Hawkins on a quick crosser last game and exploited a blitzing linebacker but our changes happen at a glacier pace).
This is just not smart football.
"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)
