Lions 26 Stamps 7 Stats and Post Game Comments

[Toppy Vann]

SOUTH PENDER:

"Frankly, Toppy, I'm not sure just what your point is in all of this. First, you say that Wally's comment that “Yes, he’s [DeMarco] got to step up his game but the people around him have to step up their game, too” "sounded like it was aimed at the Lions coaching staff" (the latter quote yours). Why, necessarily? Couldn't it just as easily mean that the "people around him" are the players that are in there with him? For example, if Harris was doing a better job of running the ball, or the O-line was giving better protection, DeMarco would be able to have greater success?"

South Pender -
You have some audacity to accuse me of putting my OWN words into Ed Willes' article when I provided the link with it where you could have checked if you had doubts and done this before making a serious accusation like that.

I did not post the whole story as that is a violation of the rules allowing fair quotes from stories BUT not the entire story. I take this stuff seriously.

I did not alter the story and what was in the quote box was directly from the story.

The fact that I did not put quotes around the entire story does not excuse from making such a serious and FALSE accusation for what purpose I am not sure.

However, there is a bit of a disturbing patter and pattern to your debate in this forum and I find that very distasteful as it is personal and in this case clearly you are wrong.

This is the headline and the quote in question does not contain any of my words.

OK, Toppy, I apologize for making that mistake. I assumed that the inference was yours because it was printed without the quotes that would identify it as someone else's. I think that's a natural mistake that points to neither audacity nor the making of any accusation, false or otherwise. I read your presentation of the conversation, but didn't read the original article since I had assumed that the important part was what you had reprinted. When you produce quoted material, misunderstandings like this can be avoided by using single quotes inside double quotes. Had you done that I would have known that the statement that was not in quotes (as I would have expected it to be) was not yours but that of the author of the article. So, let's not get your knickers into too much of a twist over this, OK? There was no attempt to make any kind of accusation, but merely wondering why anyone (thinking it was you) would assume that the term "people around him [DeMarco]" would necessarily have to refer to the coaching staff and not, just as reasonably, to his teammates. Oh, by the way, there was absolutely nothing personal in asking that question.

Let me get this right.

It's my fault you accused me of fudging this as I failed to add a quotation mark at the end????!!!

Nice try but check again as the ONLY quotation mark not there was at the end of the quote. The whole thing was in a quote box to show you it was a quote.

Man up next time and take some personal responsibility as you made a very serious accusation yet had the link right there to show you the facts, yet you chose to disregard the link and just assume I must I have tried to pass my views off as part of the Willes' column.



I can't do that so must work...lol

But if I were home in Canada here's my take:

[TheLionKing]

I am more than fine with some fresh blood and new ideas on the offensive side of the ball for 2014. The Lions can blame execution 'til the cows come home - and to a certain extent they're right. But the perception among the ticket buying public is that our playbook is stale and predictable. It is therefore reality.

The $64,000 question for me is: why did it take until Week 16 to dumb down the blocking schemes, so we could get some semblance of a ground attack and better protection for our quarterbacks??


DH

Damn good question. As I have said befor, it seems like the only time this coaching staff makes any meaningful changes is when their jobs are on the line or when called out by Buono. Til then, it's the same old, same old

[Toppy Vann]

I am more than fine with some fresh blood and new ideas on the offensive side of the ball for 2014. The Lions can blame execution 'til the cows come home - and to a certain extent they're right. But the perception among the ticket buying public is that our playbook is stale and predictable. It is therefore reality.

The $64,000 question for me is: why did it take until Week 16 to dumb down the blocking schemes, so we could get some semblance of a ground attack and better protection for our quarterbacks??


DH

Damn good question. As I have said befor, it seems like the only time this coaching staff makes any meaningful changes is when their jobs are on the line or when called out by Buono. Til then, it's the same old, same old

What's wrong with Mike Benevides over the off season coming out and articulating a clearer, more balanced offensive philosophy and commit JC et al to this view of more balance - more protection for QBs. Not complex blocking up front etc.

And bring in a true RB coach but fire nobody?

I want to see stability and of course we are poised now to run for a GC in 2013.

[B.C.FAN]

As to Lulay - honestly - that bad hit he took should and could have been avoided. Step out and then let Harris carry it in would have been my idea of success on that run of his that put him out.

The hit took place at the three-yard line and Lulay bowled the DB over to score. If he had stepped out beforehand, say at the four or five yard line, it would have been third and goal and the Lions would have had to settle for a field goal. That TD was a pivotal play in the game, no pun intended, and Lulay made the same decision that most QBs would make in that situation.

As for second guessing coaches and players after a bad game, it's always the offensive coordinator who takes most of the blame, for any team in any league. In 2011, the Lions started 0-5 because their defence under Benevides was giving up a league-worst 400 yards a game. They won the Grey Cup because they made some personnel adjustmenst in the secondary and their defence went from worst to first in the league. Yet most of the blame for the 0-5 start and the credit for the turnaround went to the offensive coordinator, who did nothing of significance other than benefit from the acquisition of veteran receiver Arland Bruce through trade.

B.C.'s offence is considered to be the most complex in the league. It can also be the most difficult to execute. That's why the offensive coaching staff's reaction to adversity is usually to shrink the playbook and simplify the reads for a young quarerback like DeMarco and the blocking assignments for a young centre like Norman, who both struggled in the latter half of the season. Judging by the team's play in recent games, the biggest failing of the offensive coaches was in not simplifying things sooner.

[South Pender]

Let me get this right.

It's my fault you accused me of fudging this as I failed to add a quotation mark at the end????!!!

Nice try but check again as the ONLY quotation mark not there was at the end of the quote. The whole thing was in a quote box to show you it was a quote.

Man up next time and take some personal responsibility as you made a very serious accusation yet had the link right there to show you the facts, yet you chose to disregard the link and just assume I must I have tried to pass my views off as part of the Willes' column.

Ok, Toppy, now you are getting personal. I have no idea of what you mean by accusing you of fudging anything. Instead, what I said was that I had misread your quote, thinking that some of it was your own opinion, something I apologized for. But let's take a look at the passage in question:

Toppy Vann writes: "This is not how Wally used to talk when he was HC - so he has altered his message now that he is GM alone:"

Then Toppy Vann quotes a newspaper piece saying:
_____________________________________________

“We’re running out of mulligans,” he said. “We’ve got to accept that we’re going to war with a young quarterback (Thomas DeMarco). We have to help him to be able to deal with the pressures and expectations of winning. I just don’t think we’re doing that.

“Yes, he’s got to step up his game but the people around him have to step up their game, too.”

That comment sounded like it was aimed at the Lions coaching staff, particularly on the offensive side of the ball. Buono was then asked if it’s incumbent on the coaches to come up with a game plan that minimizes the risks with a young quarterback while playing to his strengths and to the strengths of the team.
_____________________________________________

Now, since the part beginning with "That comment and ending with "strengths of the team" had no quotes around it, I naturally thought that it was Toppy Vann's commentary on the comments from the article given in quotes. For this, I apologized to Toppy Vann. However, it is, in my opinion, a natural mistake. Had, instead, the passage been presented as follows, there would have been no mistaking whose opinions were being expressed:
_____________________________________________

This is not how Wally used to talk when he was HC - so he has altered his message now that he is GM alone:

“'We’re running out of mulligans,' he said. 'We’ve got to accept that we’re going to war with a young quarterback (Thomas DeMarco). We have to help him to be able to deal with the pressures and expectations of winning. I just don’t think we’re doing that.'

'Yes, he’s got to step up his game but the people around him have to step up their game, too.'

That comment sounded like it was aimed at the Lions coaching staff, particularly on the offensive side of the ball. Buono was then asked if it’s incumbent on the coaches to come up with a game plan that minimizes the risks with a young quarterback while playing to his strengths and to the strengths of the team."

(With the whole passage now in full quotes, it would be clear that none of the comments were Toppy Vann's.)
______________________________________________

That is what I meant when I referred to single quotes inside double quotes. I hadn't seen the box as standing in for quotes, as I should have.

But now the personal part, Toppy. First, it was an honest mistake, for which I apologized. That's manning up. Second, it's hardly a "serious accusation," since it wasn't an accusation at all. Third, it's not exactly a crime to ignore the full link; I think we all assume that when a poster takes sentences out of a link (but also providing the link) and presents them, that that's the part of the link that he wishes to discuss. Criticizing a forum member for not reading the entire link is just neither fair nor realistic.

[South Pender]

As for second guessing coaches and players after a bad game, it's always the offensive coordinator who takes most of the blame, for any team in any league. In 2011, the Lions started 0-5 because their defence under Benevides was giving up a league-worst 400 yards a game. They won the Grey Cup because they made some personnel adjustmenst in the secondary and their defence went from worst to first in the league. Yet most of the blame for the 0-5 start and the credit for the turnaround went to the offensive coordinator, who did nothing of significance other than benefit from the acquisition of veteran receiver Arland Bruce through trade.

That does seem to be the case (laying all the blame on the OC). It has struck me as really odd that, despite poor play on many occasions by the Lions' defense, Rich Stubler has pretty much escaped unscathed on this forum. Why is that? As I mentioned above, I believe the maxim that defenses win championships. One only has to look at the top teams in the NFL at the midway point to see that they all have very solid defenses (although Denver's has not been quite up to expectations). And, as noted above, it was one single bad defensive play that cost us a game we would definitely have won absent that play--and a 12-6 record and a home WSF.

[Blitz]

First, good night for the Leos...Calgary, I'm sorry Blitz, had NOTHING to play for and it showed...and as soon as the injuries started, Calgary folded the tent

My comments MLF were based upon Hufnagel's own comments to the media prior to the game..that he wanted to win it and he was going to play his starters in order to do that...while playing all three quarterbacks.

Calgary wanted momentum going into the WDF and the team wanted to tie previous Calgary records of a 15 win season. Our Leos major focus going into this game was also be build momentum and to also to continue to focus on their running game. On the one hand you could say that neither team had anything to play for or that both teams had something to play for.

You've often posted about making adaptations and I'm really pleased to read your recent posts regarding Logan and even a very recent one that you would even protect him for next season.

Some samplings of your previous posts on Logan, quoted below, were not complimentary of Buono bringing in Logan.

But the answer is bringing back Stefan Logan who has success here FIVE YEARS AGO as our kick returner and import RB...except we have a decent to good returner in Brown and an All Star RB who is CANADIAN in Andrew Harris...so yes Wally, let's dump one of our best players in Andrew Harris (a ratio buster) and blow up the non import ratio on an import RB/KR that we don't really need as these spots are already taken and there are few holes to run into anyways…This bizarre season just continues to get more and more bizarre...Stefan Logan...hee haw...Grey Cup here we come...

…. And while bringing back Chris Wilson and Stefan Logan may "sound" nice, they were good players for us half a decade ago...and hardly address the REAL and perceived problems that this team has...the buck stops at the top, and with the Lion's football operations that means Wally Buono...and blame all he wants upon others, it is at himself that the hardest look should be taken for Wally is the direct cause of this mess that we are in...not very kind to a HOF coach, but true nonetheless.

….as I read the article, the thought comes to me like a lightening bolt...the Lions MGT and Coaches have created an unhealthy situation...one that I wouldn't want to be in...we have MAJOR holes elsewhere, but Logan, Wilson and Pierce are the guys Wally brings in...nice job.

….this is a train wreck season and then the only change Wally makes to the offence is demoting Harris for Logan is complete bullsh$t and you know it! ...the Chris Wilson, Buck Pierce and Stefan Logan thing is actually a complete joke...not that Wilson is horrible, but we didn't need him and he's not contributing in any significant way...as for Logan, he's a quality player in the last legs of his career, but you don't supplant your All Star CANADIAN tailback for him and scratch your very good KR.

Mexico Lion Fan

What got you to change your mind MLF about Logan, since you were not very happy at the time about us bringing him in..and now you see him as a potential positive, not only for the remainder of this season but also for next season?

Andrew Harris also seems to be happy with the two back system of Logan and himself. He has peeled off 8 carries of over 10 yards in his last two games and he only had 6 carries of over 10 yards prior to the insertion of Logan into the backfield.

In a recent Vancouver Sun article Andrew Harris said the "one-two punch with Logan was crucial" to our recent running game success and it seems like he has embraced it. Excerpts of the article are quoted below.

Thanks to sparkplug Stefan Logan, a rejuvenated Andrew Harris and an offensive line delivering blows like a hammer, not absorbing them like the proverbial nail, the B.C. Lions have a running game again.“The biggest thing is, we changed our blocking scheme about three or four weeks ago, we’re getting used to it, and we’re gaining confidence with it,” Harris said. “The change-up -- the one-two punch with Logan -- is definitely crucial.

I'm pleased that Harris is happy about the change and that you are now too MLF.

[South Pender]

i

Thanks to sparkplug Stefan Logan, a rejuvenated Andrew Harris and an offensive line delivering blows like a hammer, not absorbing them like the proverbial nail, the B.C. Lions have a running game again.“The biggest thing is, we changed our blocking scheme about three or four weeks ago, we’re getting used to it, and we’re gaining confidence with it,” Harris said. “The change-up -- the one-two punch with Logan -- is definitely crucial.

In response to why the run-game-improving blocking-scheme changes didn't come earlier, I wonder whether it's because they would not have been as effective without a scatback like Logan on the field and occurred only upon his arrival. Logan's arrival and the blocking changes occurred at about the same time. Just a thought.

[Blitz]

i

Thanks to sparkplug Stefan Logan, a rejuvenated Andrew Harris and an offensive line delivering blows like a hammer, not absorbing them like the proverbial nail, the B.C. Lions have a running game again.“The biggest thing is, we changed our blocking scheme about three or four weeks ago, we’re getting used to it, and we’re gaining confidence with it,” Harris said. “The change-up -- the one-two punch with Logan -- is definitely crucial.

In response to why the run-game-improving blocking-scheme changes didn't come earlier, I wonder whether it's because they would not have been as effective without a scatback like Logan on the field and occurred only upon his arrival. Logan's arrival and the blocking changes occurred at about the same time. Just a thought.

I'm guessing that might have been part of the motivation South Pender...along with our run game going south for quite a while.

Still, I don't think I would have had the guts to do it. I might have introduced some new plays for Logan but changing the entire blocking scheme at that point in the season is major. Changing a blocking scheme within a season is very unusual for any pro football team but changing it late in a season is a rarity.

Our Lions had previously changed our blocking scheme at around the 1/3 mark of the 2011 season. From that point on our offence was the best in the CFL. In 2012 we led the CFL in rushing and offensive yards per game so it was logical that we keep the same scheme in 2013.

When Angus Reid got hurt we did not know for sure that he would not be back and anticipated that he would be at some point. That's why he avoided surgery. We seemed to do ok without him for the first 5 games and then Fabian got hurt. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing but it was logical that we continue with a successful blocking scheme that had worked so well in 2011 and 2012. However, as the season progressed it was obvious that our run game was not working as it had in the past two seasons. However, we were still 3rd in the CFL in rushing. Wally went to Logan to add something different. At the same time we changed our blocking scheme. Both changes have resulted in Logan adding a lot to our offence, Harris playing his best football of the season by far, and our running game looking very dangerous.

However, changing the blocking scheme with 4 games to go was a bold move. It takes a lot of cohesion to play well as an offensive line and the various fronts are difficult to learn. Offensive line is the most difficult and completx position to learn, outside of quarterback.

Other CFL teams who had a less effective rushing game than we did, such as Hamilton, Edmonton, Montreal, Winnipeg, and Toronto (Toronto finished last in the CFL in rushing) did not change their blocking schemes during this season and they had more reason to do so than our Leos.

However, the Riders will be an even tougher test for two reasons. The first is that they know we are going to want to run the football on Sunday and will be focused on stopping it as their first priority. Secondly, Saskatchewan's defense is an elite defense in playing against the run. We have our work cut out for us but even with those two factors I think we will be able to get some decent runs against the Riders and I also anticipate that we will give the Riders some new looks, including having both Logan and Harris in the backfield together on occasion.

[South Pender]

I'm guessing that might have been part of the motivation South Pender...along with our run game going south for quite a while.

Still, I don't think I would have had the guts to do it. I might have introduced some new plays for Logan but changing the entire blocking scheme at that point in the season is major. Changing a blocking scheme within a season is very unusual for any pro football team but changing it late in a season is a rarity.

Our Lions had previously changed our blocking scheme at around the 1/3 mark of the 2011 season. From that point on our offence was the best in the CFL. In 2012 we led the CFL in rushing and offensive yards per game so it was logical that we keep the same scheme in 2013.

When Angus Reid got hurt we did not know for sure that he would not be back and anticipated that he would be at some point. That's why he avoided surgery. We seemed to do ok without him for the first 5 games and then Fabian got hurt. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing but it was logical that we continue with a successful blocking scheme that had worked so well in 2011 and 2012. However, as the season progressed it was obvious that our run game was not working as it had in the past two seasons. However, we were still 3rd in the CFL in rushing. Wally went to Logan to add something different. At the same time we changed our blocking scheme. Both changes have resulted in Logan adding a lot to our offence, Harris playing his best football of the season by far, and our running game looking very dangerous.

However, changing the blocking scheme with 4 games to go was a bold move. It takes a lot of cohesion to play well as an offensive line and the various fronts are difficult to learn. Offensive line is the most difficult and completx position to learn, outside of quarterback.

Other CFL teams who had a less effective rushing game than we did, such as Hamilton, Edmonton, Montreal, Winnipeg, and Toronto (Toronto finished last in the CFL in rushing) did not change their blocking schemes during this season and they had more reason to do so than our Leos.

However, the Riders will be an even tougher test for two reasons. The first is that they know we are going to want to run the football on Sunday and will be focused on stopping it as their first priority. Secondly, Saskatchewan's defense is an elite defense in playing against the run. We have our work cut out for us but even with those two factors I think we will be able to get some decent runs against the Riders and I also anticipate that we will give the Riders some new looks, including having both Logan and Harris in the backfield together on occasion.

Interesting analysis, Blitz. Given the boldness of this move re the O-line, would it be out-of-place to praise Chapdelaine for having the guts to take the bold and innovative course of action here? Heretical? Offensive (no pun intended)?

[TheLionKing]

Perhaps Chapdelaine had no choice but to try something different after being called out by Buono

[notahomer]

Perhaps Chapdelaine had no choice but to try something different after being called out by Buono

ahh yes, I can imagine it now as a fly on the ceiling....

JC sitting at his desk, reviewing digital data from the last five games and there's a knock at the door. Its Buono, and he says "Look, you straighten this up and get it done NOW because if you don't, you are the guy sitting down with that TheLionKing guy for a meeting"......

[TheLionKing]

Perhaps Chapdelaine had no choice but to try something different after being called out by Buono

ahh yes, I can imagine it now as a fly on the ceiling....

JC sitting at his desk, reviewing digital data from the last five games and there's a knock at the door. Its Buono, and he says "Look, you straighten this up and get it done NOW because if you don't, you are the guy sitting down with that TheLionKing guy for a meeting"......

[Toppy Vann]

Perhaps Chapdelaine had no choice but to try something different after being called out by Buono

No kidding.

You think that maybe Wally calling out the coaches when they blew the home playoff date actually led the OL coach to change the blocking scheme! I would say that there is just one poster who wouldn't agree with you there and like a dog on a bone he ain't letting go of the Chappy worship. This guy accused me of inserting my own views into an Ed Willes column where he inferred Wally was sending a message to the coaches.

[JohnHenry]

Perhaps Chapdelaine had no choice but to try something different after being called out by Buono

No kidding.

You think that maybe Wally calling out the coaches when they blew the home playoff date actually led the OL coach to change the blocking scheme! I would say that there is just one poster who wouldn't agree with you there and like a dog on a bone he ain't letting go of the Chappy worship. This guy accused me of inserting my own views into an Ed Willes column where he inferred Wally was sending a message to the coaches.

It's curious how a "change in blocking schemes" like after Game 7 in 2011, can result in such an improvement in the OL? The OL has been solid the past 4 or 5 games in opening holes for the running game and especially pass blocking. The question is why didn't the coaches think of these blocking alterations before the wheels came off? Will they only make changes if their jobs are in jeopardy? Why is it necessary for the GM to come down on the team (players sauntering off the field rather than running, slow starts, lack of urgency in road games, lack of aggression from the OL, etc.), isn't that what the head coach is for?