Lionbackers.com

B.C.FAN wrote: Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:08 pm I listened to 3 Down Radio tonight on TSN 1040 and was disappointed that the hosts focused almost entirely on ownership uncertainty as the biggest problem facing the franchise, and not coaching. They questioned Wally extensively on the ownership issue and didn’t raise the issue of coaching as being the reason the team has been losing games this year. In his recap of the loss, Wally said that at the end of the game the Lions couldn’t prevent a first down and couldn't make one. No one challenged him to explain why that was the case. The coaches were too scared to challenge the Eskimos secondary at the end of the game when they needed first downs, and they were too scared of getting beaten deep to continue to play the aggressive defence that had worked well for 55 minutes so they went into a shell and played soft zone coverage that allowed the Eskimos to complate 9 straight passes, including the tying and winning touchdowns.

It is like a play by Shakespeare, King Lear. Not a comedy; it is a tragedy.

Very sad time for the franchise.

It is also a case study in sports management, coaching and leadership.

"All a prevent defense does is prevent you from winning" John Madden

With the exception of Lowell Ulrich and a couple of others, the media in this town is scared/intimidated to really question Buono.

TheLionKing wrote: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:59 pm With the exception of Lowell Ulrich and a couple of others, the media in this town is scared/intimidated to really question Buono.

Part of the reason for not asking the tough questions is that if the reporter is not viewed by the team as a supporter, then the team can deny access to players and team info. AFAIK the guys at the Lionsden Vlog got the cold shoulder from the Lions last season from the Lions marketing department for being critical of Lions marketing.

In short, the beat reporter has to walk a fine line and be careful not to piss off the team.

Guys, if you've been listening to the pre and post game shows these past few weeks, and even 3 Down Radio two and three weeks ago, they have not been holding back on the need to blow this operation up, top to bottom.

Farhan Lalji is the best thing to happen to this club in terms of coverage. He is brutally honest but his opinions are also always well reasoned and well supported. Chris Burns is a critical announcer and has also gone on record as saying what's needed, and that includes a coaching change, and of course Lowell Ullrich has been pretty unequivocal as to what is needed too.

I didn't catch last night's show, but I don't see what the big 'missed opportunity' is here.


DH

David wrote: Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:01 am Guys, if you've been listening to the pre and post game shows these past few weeks, and even 3 Down Radio two and three weeks ago, they have not been holding back on the need to blow this operation up, top to bottom.

Farhan Lalji is the best thing to happen to this club in terms of coverage. He is brutally honest but his opinions are also always well reasoned and well supported. Chris Burns is a critical announcer and has also gone on record as saying what's needed, and that includes a coaching change, and of course Lowell Ullrich has been pretty unequivocal as to what is needed too.

I didn't catch last night's show, but I don't see what the big 'missed opportunity' is here.


DH

This game was a microcosm of the Lions' lost season. The Lions lost because the coaches were scared of taking any risks when their lead was on the line. The B.C. defence tied a season high with 10 QB pressures in the game but they had none on Edmonton's last 11 passes, including the 2-point convert to tie the game and the OT touchdown drive. All those Edmonton passes were completed easily.

On offence, Jonathon Jennings was so afraid of making a mistake that he didn't attempt a deep pass. He held the ball for 5 seconds in the end zone for a first-quarter sack and he didn't try and stretch the defence in the fourth quarter when Edmonton choked down on B.C.'s short-passing game that had been efficient up to that point.

The successful coaches in the league, including Dickenson in Calgary, Maas in Edmonton, Jones in Saskatchewan, O'Shea in Winnipeg, Trestman in Toronto and Campbell in Ottawa, are risk-takers who gamble on third down (the Lions' 10 third-down gambles on the season are by far the lowest total in the league), attack defences downfield and blitz the opposing quarterback. When the game is on the line, the Lions do the opposite. It's a coaching position of fear, and the fear is passed down to the players. The coaches set the team up to fail.

When Wally mentioned that Lions couldn't make a first down or stop a first down at the end of the game, it was a purrfect opportunity to question him about why that was the case. The hosts were too focused on the big ownership picture to focus on the coaching details that are killing the team on and off the field.

Turnovers, sacks and pressures.

Playing safe gets you nowhere. Turnvovers and sacks need an aggressive approach on defence.

Not protecting the quarterback is a formula for losing.

I understand your frustration B.C.FAN, but to me that's like asking Captain Smith why he didn't properly heed the iceberg warning and maneuver the Titanic around it. All has already been lost, and the soon to be departed coach will never admit blame.

Why we've turned a natural gunslinger into a game manager is my biggest question. But for the panel to grill Wally about his conservatism is mostly pointless.

Just like our offense.


DH

Punt returns and punt coverage.

I suppose Ty Long's strong leg outkicks the coverage at times. But this fan is not going to provide that excuse. Is his leg that much stronger than the other punters in the league?

We can't find ways to give gaps to Chris Rainey? D'oh ...

Points well made, BCFAN.

And, David, it looks like you are moving past the pain, into humour, although it is dark humour. That is a good adjustment. LOL

You mention Captain Smith of the Titanic.

And then there is Captain Queeg of the USS Caine (The Caine Mutiny).

Queeg: "Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them."
.................

During the course of a free-form, steam-of-consciousness exchange with the media, Buono suggested the Lions took winning for granted this season. As proof, he pointed to a fund the team set up for the wives of Lions’ players to travel to the Grey Cup. Yes he did.

“You see the mindset,” Buono said. “Now is that arrogance? Is that stupidity? Or did we just expect (to win)?

“When you expect to win sometimes you don’t earn it. Maybe that’s been our downfall. We expected to win and we forgot how to earn it.”

-- from Ed Willes

Ah ha. The cause of our failures this year.

David wrote: Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:01 am Farhan Lalji is the best thing to happen to this club in terms of coverage. He is brutally honest but his opinions are also always well reasoned and well supported.

B.C.FAN wrote: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:40 pm
This game was a microcosm of the Lions' lost season. The Lions lost because the coaches were scared of taking any risks when their lead was on the line. The B.C. defence tied a season high with 10 QB pressures in the game but they had none on Edmonton's last 11 passes, including the 2-point convert to tie the game and the OT touchdown drive. All those Edmonton passes were completed easily.

While they may not have been credited with QB pressures, they did send a blitz on a number of plays in the final minutes, including on both of Bowman's touchdowns, and Watson's game winning touchdown in overtime, as well as on at least one of the converts. However, in pretty much every instance, Reilly read it perfectly and found the open receiver immediately.

Edmonton actually played a more passive style of defense in the final minutes, but Jennings was unable to capitalize, and our oline seemed less able to withstand the pressure than Edmonton's was.

I did not tape this game. So I do not have answers to many questions that might be available after looking at the tape.

Reilly did very well as the game wound down. He read the D and found open receivers. He was decisive. He knew where to look, he had enough time, and he found his man time and time again.

Was our defence easy to attack, well scouted and predictable in the final moments? Did we get pressure on Reilly in the final 5 minutes plus OT? Did we have close cover or big cushions?

On our O plays at the end of the game ... Did we have open receivers? Or had the D anticipated and given close cover? If we had open receivers, then of course Jennings needs to be able see those.

Was Edmonton able to get pressure on the QB with just the front four? Or did they blitz in the final 5 minutes? If they were able to get pressure primarily with the front four, then they can have as many as 8 men back in cover (plus accounting for JJ24 and the QB on runs).

I would have to look at the tape to make some judgments.

We can look at Jennings and his reading of the play. When watching live, I tend to see our receivers being in close cover at most times during games.

I am willing to blame Jennings if he is not as able as Reilly or Lulay or Mitchell or Ray to read the defence. But did we have open receivers in the final minutes? Even those very short passes were closely covered. Did he have enough time to find any receivers that might have been open deeper? Were there 8 men back covering 5 receivers? Was there a spy on JJ24? Was there a spy on Jennings?

Receivers have to get some separation. O Line has to give some time to the QB.

As BCFAN considers, was Jennings afraid to go deep throughout the game? Was he following the game plan in not going deep? Had the Lions decided that those long passes to receivers having to fight for the ball were no longer high percentage?

The difference between the two teams in the final minutes was huge.

Was the difference primarily Reilly vs Jennings? I don't think so, at least until I could examine the tape. I think it is more complicated than that. And I think it involves O Line, pass routes, predictability on O and D, pressure on the quarterback, defensive pass coverage, and so on.

There are many questions. I kind of wish I had taped this one. But it doesn't matter. In any case, we lost. We lost another game in which we held a lead late in the game. Lots of blame to go around.

There are the cfl.ca highlights. Our very soft zone gets totally exposed on the tying drive. Our Safety is very deep, completely out of the play during the drive. Reilly is continually able to lock onto his first read, who is open, due to the deep drops. I might post some pix of this.

This CFL fan still believes in Jennings. I cannot imagine Wally trading him or releasing him. If that were to happen, I have the idea that he would do very well under some OCs or Head Coaches such as LaPolice, Trestman, Dickenson, J. Jones or possibly even C. Jones or Jason Maas.

Just some ideas, after a painful loss, and a painful season.

WestCoastJoe wrote: Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:31 pm
Reilly did very well as the game wound down. He read the D and found open receivers. He was decisive. He knew where to look, he had enough time, and he found his man time and time again.

Was our defence easy to attack, well scouted and predictable in the final moments? Did we get pressure on Reilly in the final 5 minutes plus OT? Did we have close cover or big cushions?

On our O plays at the end of the game ... Did we have open receivers? Or had the D anticipated and given close cover? If we had open receivers, then of course Jennings needs to be able see those.

Was Edmonton able to get pressure on the QB with just the front four? Or did they blitz in the final 5 minutes? If they were able to get pressure primarily with the front four, then they can have as many as 8 men back in cover (plus accounting for JJ24 and the QB on runs).

I would have to look at the tape to make some judgments.

We can look at Jennings and his reading of the play. When watching live, I tend to see our receivers being in close cover at most times during games.

I am willing to blame Jennings if he is not as able as Reilly or Lulay or Mitchell or Ray to read the defence. But did we have open receivers in the final minutes? Even those very short passes were closely covered. Did he have enough time to find any receivers that might have been open deeper? Were there 8 men back covering 5 receivers? Was there a spy on JJ24? Was there a spy on Jennings?

Receivers have to get some separation. O Line has to give some time to the QB.

As BCFAN considers, was Jennings afraid to go deep throughout the game? Was he following the game plan in not going deep? Had the Lions decided that those long passes to receivers having to fight for the ball were no longer high percentage?

The difference between the two teams in the final minutes was huge.

Was the difference primarily Reilly vs Jennings? I don't think so, at least until I could examine the tape. I think it is more complicated than that. And I think it involves O Line, pass routes, predictability on O and D, pressure on the quarterback, defensive pass coverage, and so on.

There are many questions. I kind of wish I had taped this one. But it doesn't matter. In any case, we lost. We lost another game in which we held a lead late in the game. Lots of blame to go around.

There are the cfl.ca highlights. Our very soft zone gets totally exposed on the tying drive. Our Safety is very deep, completely out of the play during the drive. Reilly is continually able to lock onto his first read, who is open, due to the deep drops. I might post some pix of this.

This CFL fan still believes in Jennings. I cannot imagine Wally trading him or releasing him. If that were to happen, I have the idea that he would do very well under some OCs or Head Coaches such as LaPolice, Trestman, Dickenson, J. Jones or possibly even C. Jones or Jason Maas.

Just some ideas, after a painful loss, and a painful season.

I agree with many of your observations. It can be almost impossible for a casual fan like me to identify from highlights what went wrong on any given play.

It is easy to blame the quarterback but, as you mentioned, if the opposition’s front four was getting pressure and allowing eight to cover, that makes a qb’s job much harder, and I think we saw some of that in this game.

It also seemed that there was a deliberate strategy to control the ball and avoid turnovers by keeping passes short. This is not a terrible strategy in itself, but the extent to which we stuck with it suggests that confidence in Jennings ability to make smart decisions and avoid turnovers is waning. Given his performance this year, the lack of confidence would be justified.

I did not see a major change in strategy on defence at the end. We were still blitzing and mixing things up, but it wasn’t working. Part of this is due to The Eskimos making plays. On the long ball, coverage was purrfect, but when the pass is purrfect, there is not much a defender can do to prevent a catch. And it seemed we couldn’t get to Reilly no matter how many we rushed. He is the best in the league at recognizing the blitz and finding the open man, and at coming through when the pressure is on. We’ve also seen our secondary get picked apart all year, so no surprise it happened again.

Jennings has shown that he has a good arm, but his judgement, especially under pressure, is still in question. Personally, I am on the fence about next year. If Collaros could be signed to a reduced contract, I would be tempted to choose him over Jennings.

maxlion wrote: Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:24 pm I agree with many of your observations. It can be almost impossible for a casual fan like me to identify from highlights what went wrong on any given play.

It is easy to blame the quarterback but, as you mentioned, if the opposition’s front four was getting pressure and allowing eight to cover, that makes a qb’s job much harder, and I think we saw some of that in this game.

Agreed.

It also seemed that there was a deliberate strategy to control the ball and avoid turnovers by keeping passes short. This is not a terrible strategy in itself, but the extent to which we stuck with it suggests that confidence in Jennings ability to make smart decisions and avoid turnovers is waning. Given his performance this year, the lack of confidence would be justified.

What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

The coaches lose confidence in Jennings.

Jennings works in a vulnerable offensive scheme with poor pass protection and telegraphed routes.

He takes a beating. Receivers are covered. He forces throws. Interceptions happen, as he tries to get the ball to receivers who are closely covered. He is in a trap, not of his making. IMO he can read the D well enough. Our receivers do not get separation, in the schemes we run. The D sits on our routes.

I did not see a major change in strategy on defence at the end. We were still blitzing and mixing things up, but it wasn’t working. Part of this is due to The Eskimos making plays. On the long ball, coverage was purrfect, but when the pass is purrfect, there is not much a defender can do to prevent a catch. And it seemed we couldn’t get to Reilly no matter how many we rushed. He is the best in the league at recognizing the blitz and finding the open man, and at coming through when the pressure is on. We’ve also seen our secondary get picked apart all year, so no surprise it happened again.

Soft zone. Slow or even fast death, as we saw on the long pass.

You must pressure the QB. IMO our pass rush scheme is flawed starting with the DL personnel, and going on through poor blitzing, and having a contain type philosophy, with soft zone and deep drops, in a league that lives by the pass.

If you cannot pressure the QB, as we saw pretty much all year, your chances of winning are limited.

On the tying drive, the EE receivers stopped in front of our DBs, who were in deep drops, making for easy reads, first reads for Reilly, and receptions. No close cover. Easy picking without close cover. These are on the highlights film. I might post them.

Jennings has shown that he has a good arm, but his judgement, especially under pressure, is still in question. Personally, I am on the fence about next year. If Collaros could be signed to a reduced contract, I would be tempted to choose him over Jennings.

This CFL fan, as noted, does not doubt Jennings. Our team damaged his confidence. He is the same young QB, chosen by some to be MOP this year.

Also, IMO, Jennings is resilient, courageous and he does not complain nor make excuses. IMO we need better game preparation and planning for him. And of course, better pass protection.

IMO in the CFL, Job 1 for the defence is pressuring the QB. Job 1 for the offence is protecting the QB. We are very poor at those two necessities.

Collaros also had his confidence damaged. IMO we would damage many a young QB in our offence. And, as I have noted, IMO, Bo Levi Mitchell would not look so good in our offensive system.

It is all good. We are all CFL fans here.