Lionbackers.com

I'm really surprised the 'lack of respect' interviews of Stampeders. WHO CARES? Do you really want to be recognized as a CFL All-Star or would the highlight of your season be something else? Deep down I DON'T think the Stamps care about the 'respect'. Considering I saw Hufnagel also complaining about 'respect', I really doubt the Stamps care. He knows what all-star selections are worth compared to what they are trying to get done this weekend.

notahomer wrote:I'm really surprised the 'lack of respect' interviews of Stampeders. WHO CARES? Do you really want to be recognized as a CFL All-Star or would the highlight of your season be something else? Deep down I DON'T think the Stamps care about the 'respect'. Considering I saw Hufnagel also complaining about 'respect', I really doubt the Stamps care. He knows what all-star selections are worth compared to what they are trying to get done this weekend.

Hufnagel is just trying to motivate his team. He knows that a two week layoff isn't the best scenario!! He could care less about how many players made the all-star team. Probably helps with having to pay out less bonuses...

Blitz wrote:

Tighthead wrote: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.

Ritchie was a huge fan of the 3-4 defense and the ability to blitz out of that formation from different positions in creating problems for the offensive line. Using both a 4-3 and a 3-4 has some advantages. We've lost to Calgary all three times this season and we have to change the recipe a little if we want to defeat the Stamps.

Chris Jones, as the Stamps new defensive coordinator, has taken a defence that was last against the run and turned it into the league's best run defence. However, Calgary, which mostly plays man pass defence, can be beaten in the air. The Stamps like to use a blitz package with one free defender coming of each edge. Block that effectively, and you can have find open receivers downfield. We had them open last game against Calgary but missed them. This time we need to burn them!!!!

Calgary benefits defensively against the run by being out in front on the scoreboard. Not trailing much if at all, places the opposition O in the stance of throwing the ball. Certainly teams aren't trying to run out the clock with their RB late in the game, as was the case for the Lions D last season, they can just expect a pass in the last quarter.

I guess the Lions can make the Stamps D look more ordinary by jumping out in front of the Stamps, a position that they are not at all familiar with. Then by throwing on Browner with a long ball or three, thrown short will either allow our receiver to adjust and grab the ball or take a PI from Browner who doesn't worry too much about the ball if a receiver is going long. To me Logan gets a huge amount of yards once we gain the lead, the Stamps D will be tested like never before by the Lions if we can accomplish that. Easier said than done, but expect it to get done this Saturday.

Remember when JJ came in off the bench and threw a TD pass to whoever , just because he can? Usually Geroy of coarse. More of that if you please Buck.

Ball control and error free play are keys to this game.

The longer our O is on the field, the shorter Burris is. Passing is important but so is the run. Without the threat of run, passing becomes much harder so I think it important to try and establish the run early and keep with it throughout. Get a lead, keep the pressure on the Stamps and we have a good chance. Start slow, give Burris time and we are dead.

zark wrote:I agree that Buck has to throw more. . I've never believed that Geroy can't get open. We have some good weapons at our disposal and I've seen Geroy becoming very effective on short routs. Buck can't hold onto the ball for too long or their D will get to him.
Our D will take care of Burris

BC vs AC Grey Cup.

It always comes down to block and tackle baby... with a dash of Clermont to open up things.

Tighthead wrote: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.

I agree. Calgary burned us a number of times on the qb draw two weeks ago. Bishop also had success with it last week, it was surprising Sask didn't go to it more often. It is a play that we need to stop to take away the momentum of calgary's drives.

As long as the Lions can contain Burris, you'll make him one-dimensional. He can beat you with his arm and his legs - keep him contained and don't allow him to roll out or run the bootleg, you'll limit him to the pass and the QB draw.

lion rampant wrote:

Tighthead wrote: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.

I agree. Calgary burned us a number of times on the qb draw two weeks ago. Bishop also had success with it last week, it was surprising Sask didn't go to it more often. It is a play that we need to stop to take away the momentum of calgary's drives.

Sask didn't go for it as much as they'd have liked - we were playing catch-up ball all game long - we had to air it out and not run it. One of the other reasons you didn't see a bunch of Cates running.

Still trying to figure out why we never threw the screen more...

Vern Halen wrote:

lion rampant wrote:

Tighthead wrote: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.

I agree. Calgary burned us a number of times on the qb draw two weeks ago. Bishop also had success with it last week, it was surprising Sask didn't go to it more often. It is a play that we need to stop to take away the momentum of calgary's drives.

Sask didn't go for it as much as they'd have liked - we were playing catch-up ball all game long - we had to air it out and not run it. One of the other reasons you didn't see a bunch of Cates running.

Still trying to figure out why we never threw the screen more...

You actually ran the quarterback draw 3 times in the first half. The screen pass, early was a good call to try to take away some heat from our defence was tipped by Brent Johnson and Ty Williams intercepted it. Guess you were reluctant after that play.

Our Leos may use Nande in a 3-4 at times to limit the draw. I wouldn't be surprised to see some blitzes off the edge as well. If Calgary goes tight end on Wake's side we'll need to bring an extra blitzer from that side.

What you say is true, but once we were into the second half, we had to alter the game plan to play catch up. MB also seemed to "lock" onto a receiver - Buck looks off the receiver more before throwing.

A couple pump fakes might have also stopped the Lion D-Line from being so eager to leave their feet.

While the Stamps have a decent O-line, the Lions are going to make Burris feel the pressure - when he's pressured, he makes more mistakes. If the Lions D plays this Saturday like they did last Saturday, I'll be one happy dude.

"In the end, it all comes down to Pierce. The Lions are good enough to beat the Stampeders at every position except quarterback. The Western final then comes down to one question: Is Buck Pierce good enough to beat the Stamps?" (Ed Willes, Vancouver Province)

This is absurd. Of course Buck is good enough. But talk about putting the whole win or loss on Bucks shoulders is nuts. This a team sport and they will win or lose as a team. There has already been discussion on this board that too much of the win/lose is given to the QB and this is a extreme example of that. To say that the lions can beat Calgary at every position except QB is nuts and totally unfair. What pressure that puts on Buck. You talk about scrutiny from the press and the people on this board who have always questioned Buck or think JJ should be the guy? Man, it doesnt matter now what Buck does out there - if we lose - its his fault - period. 42-41 Calgary and buck throws for over 300 yards 4 TDs and no ints and we lose and its still Bucks fault - "see we were good at every position but QB - Burris threw for 5 - yea but the Lions Defense gave up 5 and Calgary gave up 4 which means our D was not as good - sorry but these are frustrating quotes and posts

There has already been discussion about the riders and throwing Bishop under the bus and how bad the fans are in the treatment of him. Well lets not do the same here. Lets have alittle bit more reason to our posts and realize that this is a team sport. yes the CFL is a QB driven league, yes a lot is placed on the QB - but the entire win/loss picture does not reflect the play of the QB alone. What about the D-back who fails to knock down a burris pass or the lineman who let someone run wild? I truly believe that most on this board takes a honest - balanced a fair approach to the win/loss reason.
There are those who will never like Buck until he wins the cup, there are those who he will never satisfy, I realize that - and then there a guys like me on here who have all the confidence in the world in Bucks ability. But sound thinking is required here, really "every' position ??? except QB? from every lineman on both sides - every position is better than calgary except the QB - wow.

Buck Pierce is good enough - but the entire lion team has to show up too. When the ball hits you in the hands or between the numbers if have to catch it. you have to block and not give up the sacks, you have to play defense like you did last week and not like you in previous games. Team !!

When the Lions win on Saturday Willes will say "yes Buck was good enough" however you know as well as I do, there will be those on this board and the media that will also say - yes he was good enough to win - but ....................."

You know. I can handle the thought that so much rides on the shoulders and the arm of Buck. I can buy that, yes he has to be sharp. But to say "every position - except" - sorry - just not right - if the lions lose - its all Bucks fault - nope

And as far as Buck having to go further than 8 yards - well maybe thats true - but maybe there was a reason for the short passes last week - huh? and Buck Owens? what a insult to Buck, to Jarious and the rider defense

Lowell Ullrich, The Province
Published: Wednesday, November 12, 2008
It can't happen again, right?

There were three games during the CFL regular season where the Lions were either hopelessly outmatched or were slapped around by reserve players -- every time they played the Calgary Stampeders.

The simple truth is that if the Lions turn in a similar effort Saturday in the West Division final at Calgary, they will lose a fourth time, possibly in spectacular fashion.

Now here is sound reasoning

mightybuck wrote:

"In the end, it all comes down to Pierce. The Lions are good enough to beat the Stampeders at every position except quarterback. The Western final then comes down to one question: Is Buck Pierce good enough to beat the Stamps?" (Ed Willes, Vancouver Province)

This is absurd. Of course Buck is good enough. But talk about putting the whole win or loss on Bucks shoulders is nuts. This a team sport and they will win or lose as a team.

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

http://lionbackers.com/bc_lions/viewtop ... =2&t=16289