Page 3 of 4

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:13 am
by Wakesbetterthanyou
Toppy Vann wrote:Wakes, Ricky Ray dumps as many passes to his backs in one game as Buck has all season.

Those Ray dump offs have led to huge yardage for the Esks and a lot of first downs.

As far as Buck goes, no QB is purrfect in all games and some games might even be called poor. I can't think of a single top CFL QB which Buck himself is on the way to becoming who has not had bad years let alone bad games. He is a legit starter in this league and despite tonight will be just fine next week.

He didn't get much play calling support either or line play.
agreed, but u didnt get the meat of my post. Buck CAN NOT just throw underneath passes, otherwise the safties will play shallow and the underneath stuff will be all covered. He seems afraid to throw deep and you need a few of those, even if they are incomplete to stretch the defense and keep them honest. Buck has not done that recently hence the more pressure he gets. if a qb cant throw it out quick on second and long he's gonna be on his bck all night. You also have to realize that the shmoes ran the ball a helluva lot more times than we did and ricky ray threw some deep balls. he kept the d honest and kept the safties deep. you cant throw short all game, just like you cant run draws on every play. Its this type of vanilla play calling that was getting us in trouble early.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:18 am
by Toppy Vann
Buck executes what is called by the OC. Agreed they need to get some balls deeper and keep the D backs honest. His inclination is to protect and control the ball vs JJ who looks first for the long ball.
That style of play led to Dickenson having a long good career. The Lions need to make the play calling that both keeps the ball and also that stretches defences. This game JC got in a rut.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:20 am
by Wakesbetterthanyou
Toppy Vann wrote:Buck executes what is called by the OC. Agreed they need to get some balls deeper and keep the D backs honest. His inclination is to protect and control the ball vs JJ who looks first for the long ball.
That style of play led to Dickenson having a long good career. The Lions need to make the play calling that both keeps the ball and also that stretches defences. This game JC got in a rut.
JC has no call on where buck throws, just the play. on almost all passing plays you will have a deep man, for us is usually simon. Even tho jarious missed simon (barely) his throws stretched the defense and allowed jarious to go underneath for many of those 3rd down converstions. I am not ragging on buck, but he needs to play with what the defense was giving him and he did not.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:35 am
by notahomer
Dan_Payne_fan!! wrote:what happened in the endzone near sec 17?
Thanks for asking that, I wanted to find out TOO. It looked kinda wild down in that area tonight. Sorry to get Dontaylorish on you but, there was some kinda broohaha with FANS being chickenwinged out of the area.

Our section was pretty quiet based on the Paris jackson inspired fight last game. The DOOFUS who caught the ball (Zac Champion's first CFL TD pass) brought a CFL ball to the game. Not sure if its the one or what? Sure seemed proud of himself. I was hoping he'd smarten up and give Zac the ball. The Lions offered him two other CFL balls (probably with autographs), but I heard he wanted the game used ball (it had blood on it :shock: ).

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:59 am
by Wakesbetterthanyou
notahomer wrote:
Dan_Payne_fan!! wrote:what happened in the endzone near sec 17?
Thanks for asking that, I wanted to find out TOO. It looked kinda wild down in that area tonight. Sorry to get Dontaylorish on you but, there was some kinda broohaha with FANS being chickenwinged out of the area.

Our section was pretty quiet based on the Paris jackson inspired fight last game. The DOOFUS who caught the ball (Zac Champion's first CFL TD pass) brought a CFL ball to the game. Not sure if its the one or what? Sure seemed proud of himself. I was hoping he'd smarten up and give Zac the ball. The Lions offered him two other CFL balls (probably with autographs), but I heard he wanted the game used ball (it had blood on it :shock: ).
That guy is a tool. They wouldnt need to offer me one other ball. I'd hand it back in a heartbeat. Its not like its barry's 775 home run or whatever the # was. ITs worth next to nothing anyways.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:13 pm
by gizmo fan 2
SammyGreene wrote: Wally blew the call. He said in the post-game show that he knew the Lions needed two scores, but forgot the Esks could scrimmage after the field goal, not allowing the on-side kick. Wally admitted he made a mistake. Under CFL rules, I believe the Esks could of also elected to kickoff TO the Lions after a Lions TD, rather than receive the kick and allow an on-side kick attempt from the Lions.

At least Wally had the courage to admit it. But just another mistake in an evening full of them.

A guy sitting three rows below us got up and left at the start of the 4th quarter holding his nose. That pretty much summed up the game. Just a dreadful performance. Only a replay call and the Sanchez penalty prevented it from being over at halftime.

Wally admitted the game plan evolved around the Eskimos playing man coverage and instead they went to zone all night. That explained why Buck seemed so confused and threw a lot into coverage. Still they had time to adjust and basically didn't and that was against a banged up secondary that was without Sanchez for the entire 2nd half.

Defence was on the field too long but the Eskimos opening march immediately put the Lions on their heels. We saw their pass coverage exploited just like it was earlier in the season and it's no coincidence it was the first time they have faced one of the league's elite QBs since August.

The Lions will come out of this long weekend sitting 3rd (Riders will lose to Stamps). Can't see them winning at Commonwealth next week as they will take the usual one or two quarters to adjust to the slick surface as Ray goes to town on the secondary again.
Stranger things have happened, however, the Lions should be doing some soul searching after that stinker.
Just FYI, Davis Sanchez is in MTL now. Our safety's name is Siddeeq Shabazz.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:32 pm
by sj-roc
JohnHenry wrote:.G. wrote:
OH! And can someone explain the logic behind the field goal? Was it for point differential? I figure the win loss differential is more important, but I'm just a fan...
Wally blew the call. He said in the post-game show that he knew the Lions needed two scores, but forgot the Esks could scrimmage after the field goal, not allowing the on-side kick. Wally admitted he made a mistake. Under CFL rules, I believe the Esks could of also elected to kickoff TO the Lions after a Lions TD, rather than receive the kick and allow an on-side kick attempt from the Lions.
Thanks for pointing that out; I wasn't tuned in. I remember someone raised that very point on here in the last few weeks in specific reference to a comeback scenario in another (non-Lions?) game at that time; when you're down by ten that late you need the major first to force the onside kick. It's not like the NFL where you always kickoff after a FG; in their league under those circumstances you would pretty much always kick the FG to keep yourself alive in a last down scenario, provided you're in kicking range. Hard to believe the all-time second-winningest head coach in our league would blunder like that, though I give him credit for owning it. But what also baffles me is why not one of the assistant coaches (say, the special teams coach, but any of them ought to have known) was able to point out his flawed strategy before it was too late.

I believe you're right about the Eskimos' option to do the kickoff themselves to us, though I'm not sure there's any advantage under last night's circumstances.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:54 pm
by Rammer
sj-roc wrote:
JohnHenry wrote:.G. wrote:
OH! And can someone explain the logic behind the field goal? Was it for point differential? I figure the win loss differential is more important, but I'm just a fan...
Wally blew the call. He said in the post-game show that he knew the Lions needed two scores, but forgot the Esks could scrimmage after the field goal, not allowing the on-side kick. Wally admitted he made a mistake. Under CFL rules, I believe the Esks could of also elected to kickoff TO the Lions after a Lions TD, rather than receive the kick and allow an on-side kick attempt from the Lions.
Thanks for pointing that out; I wasn't tuned in. I remember someone raised that very point on here in the last few weeks in specific reference to a comeback scenario in another (non-Lions?) game at that time; when you're down by ten that late you need the major first to force the onside kick. It's not like the NFL where you always kickoff after a FG; in their league under those circumstances you would pretty much always kick the FG to keep yourself alive in a last down scenario, provided you're in kicking range. Hard to believe the all-time second-winningest head coach in our league would blunder like that, though I give him credit for owning it. But what also baffles me is why not one of the assistant coaches (say, the special teams coach, but any of them ought to have known) was able to point out his flawed strategy before it was too late.

I believe you're right about the Eskimos' option to do the kickoff themselves to us, though I'm not sure there's any advantage under last night's circumstances.
I am not so sure that the strategy was flawed, the point differential just got dropped to 12 points, meaning the Lions need to beat the Eskimos by 13 points to take the season series. Had we not got the 3 points, that number became more than two TD's. Wally may say that to deflect the concept of his team having to win by a certain point total, but to me that game wasn't going to be tied in the final 35 seconds with a TD and a FG, so take the points, and get prepared to give redemption.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:55 pm
by sj-roc
Rammer wrote:
sj-roc wrote:Hard to believe the all-time second-winningest head coach in our league would blunder like that, though I give him credit for owning it. But what also baffles me is why not one of the assistant coaches (say, the special teams coach, but any of them ought to have known) was able to point out his flawed strategy before it was too late.
I am not so sure that the strategy was flawed, the point differential just got dropped to 12 points, meaning the Lions need to beat the Eskimos by 13 points to take the season series. Had we not got the 3 points, that number became more than two TD's. Wally may say that to deflect the concept of his team having to win by a certain point total, but to me that game wasn't going to be tied in the final 35 seconds with a TD and a FG, so take the points, and get prepared to give redemption.
:???: It was definitely flawed if he was looking to win the game. But I don't dismiss you point; if I understand you correctly, you're thinking that he wasn't? That Wally may have lied about his "blunder" on not realising the Esks could simply scrimmage after the FG, to disguise the fact that he was (a) resigning himself to the loss and (b) simply doing damage control for the next game's point differential by kicking?

That would actually explain why the rest of the coaching staff acquiesced on the kicking call (another reason I'm not being dismissive). I concede the clock was rather tight; had there been, say, a full minute left on the kick I would definitely believe kicking to be a sincere blunder.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:47 pm
by Blitz
Rammer wrote:
sj-roc wrote:[ wrote:
OH! And can someone explain the logic behind the field goal? Was it for point differential? I figure the win loss differential is more important, but I'm just a fan...
Wally blew the call. He said in the post-game show that he knew the Lions needed two scores, but forgot the Esks could scrimmage after the field goal, not allowing the on-side kick. Wally admitted he made a mistake. Under CFL rules, I believe the Esks could of also elected to kickoff TO the Lions after a Lions TD, rather than receive the kick and allow an on-side kick attempt from the Lions.
Thanks for pointing that out; I wasn't tuned in. I remember someone raised that very point on here in the last few weeks in specific reference to a comeback scenario in another (non-Lions?) game at that time; when you're down by ten that late you need the major first to force the onside kick. It's not like the NFL where you always kickoff after a FG; in their league under those circumstances you would pretty much always kick the FG to keep yourself alive in a last down scenario, provided you're in kicking range. Hard to believe the all-time second-winningest head coach in our league would blunder like that, though I give him credit for owning it. But what also baffles me is why not one of the assistant coaches (say, the special teams coach, but any of them ought to have known) was able to point out his flawed strategy before it was too late.

I believe you're right about the Eskimos' option to do the kickoff themselves to us, though I'm not sure there's any advantage under last night's circumstances.
I am not so sure that the strategy was flawed, the point differential just got dropped to 12 points, meaning the Lions need to beat the Eskimos by 13 points to take the season series. Had we not got the 3 points, that number became more than two TD's. Wally may say that to deflect the concept of his team having to win by a certain point total, but to me that game wasn't going to be tied in the final 35 seconds with a TD and a FG, so take the points, and get prepared to give redemption.[/quote]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I actually thought Wally was trying to reduce the point differential and going conservative, as he often does near the conclusion of games. Wally has made mistakes in the past, in pressure situations, and will again. However, this game was not lost by Wally's call to go for the field goal.

With regard to our offensive game plan being based upon Edmonton playing more man than zone....well, our offensive coaches and Wally should have known that Edmonton would zone us up huge underneath, because that's the best way to play us, switching up with a little man to keep us honest. However, quarterbacks and receivers see both zone and man every game and receivers know how to adjust their patterns against both. I don't buy that as an excuse.

With regard to the comments about play calling and the quarterback's choices....our Leos like to go through a succession of reads on each passing play, with progressions. Therefore the quarterback goes with the football, based upon what scheme the defense is in and going through those reads. Therefore the quarterback is controlled to a degree by the offensive coordinator's play call. Some plays like screens, hitch screens only have one read and misdirection play action rollouts are basically controlled with only two reads. However, the quarterback also has less discretion when pressure comes quickly, because the quarterback doesn't have time to get past his first and second reads. Jarious sometimes just ignores his progressions and looks deep. Buck sometimes misses seeing deep receivers in his reads because he doesn't glance deep first...whereas Jarious glances deep a split second too long, taking him there.

However, there is no question that the underneath game opened up against Edmonton for Jarious because he did threaten deep and that forced Edmonton to give more room and stop cheating. Buck can go deep and needs to get back to threatening deep again, now that defenses are starting to overplay his tendancies.

As for Dickenson, yes he had a very productive career with our Leos and was very good against most teams, except Saskatchewan during regular season play. However our playoff losses in 2004, 2005, and 2007 were in part, caused by defenses overplaying Dickenson's nickel and dime stuff. I don't want to see Buck just become a nickel and dimer and want him to be a complete quarterback like Ricky Ray. To do that he needs to be able to be successful in every area of the passing attack. He can be that quarterback!!

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:48 pm
by Rammer
sj-roc wrote:
Rammer wrote:
sj-roc wrote:Hard to believe the all-time second-winningest head coach in our league would blunder like that, though I give him credit for owning it. But what also baffles me is why not one of the assistant coaches (say, the special teams coach, but any of them ought to have known) was able to point out his flawed strategy before it was too late.
I am not so sure that the strategy was flawed, the point differential just got dropped to 12 points, meaning the Lions need to beat the Eskimos by 13 points to take the season series. Had we not got the 3 points, that number became more than two TD's. Wally may say that to deflect the concept of his team having to win by a certain point total, but to me that game wasn't going to be tied in the final 35 seconds with a TD and a FG, so take the points, and get prepared to give redemption.
:???: It was definitely flawed if he was looking to win the game. But I don't dismiss you point; if I understand you correctly, you're thinking that he wasn't? That Wally may have lied about his "blunder" on not realising the Esks could simply scrimmage after the FG, to disguise the fact that he was (a) resigning himself to the loss and (b) simply doing damage control for the next game's point differential by kicking?

That would actually explain why the rest of the coaching staff acquiesced on the kicking call (another reason I'm not being dismissive). I concede the clock was rather tight; had there been, say, a full minute left on the kick I would definitely believe kicking to be a sincere blunder.
That is where I was headed with my post, it is a lot easier to take the blame for a "blunder" rather than place the pressure of winning the next game by "X" amount of points. Had there been a minute left, then yes I would have been mad at the decision, but the time was to tight to expect us to try and tie it. The football gods would have had to given us the green light and had to put the red light in the face of the Stamps to have pulled that game out of the fire.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:55 am
by Solar Max
JohnHenry wrote:I believe there was 32 seconds left when the field goal was attempted. Which is still enough time to score a TD, recover the on-side kick (if they allowed us to kick), with perhaps 5-10 seconds on the clock...enough time for one sideline pass, then the FG attempt. While there may have been some attempt by Wally to "absorb" some of the criticism for the Lion's loss by admitting his mistake, I frankly doubt he said it to save face about trying to make the point-spread closer as the game was a lost cause?

As bad as the Lions played, they still might of beaten the Ti-Cats or Argos that night. We should tip our hats to the Esks, who played a great game on both sides of the ball. Our defence, which was on the field for over 20 min. in the first half alone, was facing a formidable QB in R. Ray. He was able to evade sacks and get the ball away quickly under pressure better than C. Pickett, Q. Porter or M. Bishop had been able to do in the previous weeks.

The Lions need to establish the running game on the slick grass next week in Edm. Perhaps they should try giving the rock to C. Roberts 20 times and see what he can do? If he can get the Lions 100 yds, that might open up the play-action and intermediate passing attack. While we could use L. Green in short yardage, we need to get Roberts and Logan going as we have a few big prairie games upcoming and will need a reliable running game.

I have full confidence in Buck (if he is healthy) to bounce back and lead us on to victory! :beer:
While I completely agree regarding the Esks performance, and Ricky Ray in particular, the Esks D was stellar IMO, the schemes Campbell came up with stymied and confused Buck and the offence for close to 3 quarters. One of the few bright lights late in the game WAS the use of Logan, and to put a back such as Roberts in there with his poor blocking skills and small rushing average would be a step backward, IMO.

Logan can get 100 yards at CW, but using Green out of the backfield in tandem would help a great deal, because Green can catch, carry and most importantly BLOCK. Roberts has shown no great aptitude for that.

For 2008, the Roberts experiment must be considered a failure, IMO.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:37 am
by Blitz
Solar Max wrote:
JohnHenry wrote:I believe there was 32 seconds left when the field goal was attempted. Which is still enough time to score a TD, recover the on-side kick (if they allowed us to kick), with perhaps 5-10 seconds on the clock...enough time for one sideline pass, then the FG attempt. While there may have been some attempt by Wally to "absorb" some of the criticism for the Lion's loss by admitting his mistake, I frankly doubt he said it to save face about trying to make the point-spread closer as the game was a lost cause?

As bad as the Lions played, they still might of beaten the Ti-Cats or Argos that night. We should tip our hats to the Esks, who played a great game on both sides of the ball. Our defence, which was on the field for over 20 min. in the first half alone, was facing a formidable QB in R. Ray. He was able to evade sacks and get the ball away quickly under pressure better than C. Pickett, Q. Porter or M. Bishop had been able to do in the previous weeks.

The Lions need to establish the running game on the slick grass next week in Edm. Perhaps they should try giving the rock to C. Roberts 20 times and see what he can do? If he can get the Lions 100 yds, that might open up the play-action and intermediate passing attack. While we could use L. Green in short yardage, we need to get Roberts and Logan going as we have a few big prairie games upcoming and will need a reliable running game.

I have full confidence in Buck (if he is healthy) to bounce back and lead us on to victory! :beer:
While I completely agree regarding the Esks performance, and Ricky Ray in particular, the Esks D was stellar IMO, the schemes Campbell came up with stymied and confused Buck and the offence for close to 3 quarters. One of the few bright lights late in the game WAS the use of Logan, and to put a back such as Roberts in there with his poor blocking skills and small rushing average would be a step backward, IMO.

Logan can get 100 yards at CW, but using Green out of the backfield in tandem would help a great deal, because Green can catch, carry and most importantly BLOCK. Roberts has shown no great aptitude for that.

For 2008, the Roberts experiment must be considered a failure, IMO.
and I believe that Wally realizes it...by the number ot times Roberts hit the field on Friday night.

Simon nor Clermont had a pass thrown to them in the first half of the game and it took a fourth quarter pass from Jarious to Simon to keep Simon's stretch of 102 games in which he's caught a pass intact. Of course, Geroy, after the game, while emphazizing that our Leos played terrible...he also pointed out that he 'graded out well" Receivers are an interesting breed! :wink:

As for Wally' late game calls..the best thing that Wally could ever do at the end of a close football game, with two minutes left to play, is go the bathroom for a leak. It would improve our chances. He's often terrible in these situations and he's made a lot of errors over the years in close situations. This comment of course will be considered sacriligious but it's true. Any time anyone criticizes Wally on Lionbackers we get the same usual statement about what Wally has done for our Leos since he got here. We all know what he's done and he's received tons of accolades for turning our Leos into a successful franchise for an extended time. Us long in the tooth Leo fans have crawled through the desert without water most of the time during our time cheering for our Leos.

The rare Dave Scrien years of 1963-64 and the Don Mathews era (and a Cup in '85 were our only two periods of stable success. We won a Cup with Burratto and Damon Allan but that was during an 8-10 win regular season. Wally is an excellent organizational man, sets up a winning structure and atmosphere, usually hires good people around him, and is good at assessing talent. He is not a great game day coach and he's especially not a great coach in preparing his team in the playoffs. He goes too conservative. Near the conclusion of tight games, he overinterferes, causes confusion at times, and on more than one occasion makes questionable decisions. He did that again on Friday night..although the odds would say it most likely didn't effect the outcome of the game.

It's just something one has to put up with in the bigger picture of his success. He takes responsiblity most of the time, when he does make a mistake, which I like. He said that about the way he handled the Dickenson/Printers quarterback situation, underestimated our offensive line talent in 2005, and will likely say that he overestimated Charles Roberts abilities in time as well. The one thing he has never done is admit that he made the wrong decision in 2004, 2005, and 2007 in going with Dickenson being inserted without adequate playing time before a playoff game..but it was obvious that he'd had enough of trying to go to that well without success when he jettisoned Dickenson at the end of last season.

However, Buono has his work cut out for him this season. He obviously misses Ackles and O'Billovich was a guy who Wally knew could bring him in specific talent (outside of import receiver) when he needed it. The league has improved. He thought Chapdelaine would improve this year's offence and he hasn't. The higher number of completed passes masks a lower gain per pass and provides an illusion for fans. The fact is that our offence is down from first last season to third this season in scoring, even though our defense is better this year and has provided more turnovers. Calgary and Edmonton and Montreal have improved. The Riders are playing with mirrors when you look at their injuries. Other teams are catching up...it's not as if we're getting worse.

It really doesn't have a lot to do with who our starting quarterback is...whether it's Buck or Jarious and their different styles. It has more to do with our ability to give them time to throw (Buck will complete more, Jarious will make big plays). It has to do with our ability to run the football well, when we need the tough yards. It has a lot to do with our red zone offence. It has a lot to do with how Chapdelaine game plans or adjusts, within a game, strategy wise, when defenses play Buck tough in his shorter passing game or how we adjust, when teams overplay Jarious's deep ball. It has to do a lot with how effectively we use Logan. It has a lot to do with players like Coleman making a catch when we need him to.

We likely have a decision to make for next game, with Clermont hurt again. We're going to eventually lose Clermont if we keep running him inside on crosses or drag patterns. We really need to start using him differently in our offence. What we should do is bench Roberts and insert an import receiver like Ryan Grice-Mullen into the lineup for our game aginst the Eskimos on Friday night at Commonweath.

Re: Oct. 10 - Edmonton Eskimos at BC Lions Game Day Thread

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:35 am
by Lionheart
Blitz wrote:[
As for Wally' late game calls..the best thing that Wally could ever do at the end of a close football game, with two minutes left to play, is go the bathroom for a leak. It would improve our chances. He's often terrible in these situations and he's made a lot of errors over the years in close situations. This comment of course will be considered sacriligious but it's true.
I guess it means your off the bandwagon? Well leave the pom poms abord then.

You may be right about a lot of his late desisions, but he sure surprised me with a great call earlier with the third down run late in our end. :beauty: