Riders 41 - Lions 8, Post-Game Stats and Comments

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

I didn't expect such a poor performance from the Lions but prior to the game I had reservations as to the difficulty of winning both games in a back to back series. Only the very good teams can win both games and I thought going into the game that the Lions were "good" but not "very good." And their play during the game was a lot worse than not very good.

After that effort, I am not so sure about the good part. Mediocre is probably a more accurate description of the Lions.

Earlier this season, after 2 loses to the Esks, I figured the Lions would not be good enough to host a playoff game. So finishing forth and getting a crossover playoff spot is a better bet and a more likely way to the GC, that is if they don't end up finishing 5th and out of the playoffs.
User avatar
SammyGreene
Team Captain
Posts: 8079
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:52 am

Oh boy! Blitz is going to have fun with this one, namely another dreadful performance for the offensive line and why again did Wally feel it was time to move his perennial all-star anchor at tackle.
Lose to Calgary and suddenly the cross-over might just be the Lions best option since they dominate the East anyways. These time is not as talented as advertised back in June.
Their lack of depth is exposed with one or two injuries and the fact they are having to bring guys out of retirement to shore up their roster. When was the last time Wally was doing that? Their often dreadful blocking and coverage on kick and punt returns with mainly back ups on the field exposes that as well.

Jennings had horrible protection without a doubt but I have yet to see the 2016 version of him with such high expectations entering the season. I even miss the 2015 version who stepped into the offence and instantly showed terrific vision and used his arm strength to make throws we hadn't seen in a long time.
After 8 games, I never thought I would see rank in our passing game by yards in this order:

Week 4 Hamilton Lulay 436 yds
Week 5 Winnipeg Lulay 404 yds
Week 7 Saskatchewan Lulay 338 yds
Week 2 Toronto Jennings 301 yds
Week 3 Montreal Jennings 288 yds
Week 1 Edmonton Jennings 264 yds
Week 6 Edmonton Lulay 259 yds
Week 8 Jennings Saskatchewan 195 yds
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

Is it time to hope for some NFL cuts?
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
User avatar
The_Pauser
Legend
Posts: 2494
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:36 pm

WestCoastJoe wrote:
Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:58 pm
We were unprepared. Others will not want to hear it, but IMO that is on the coaches. It was like the players had tuned them out.
I disagree. These are pro athletes. If they need coaches to get up for a game then they should not be pro athletes. If we had the wrong game plan and were being exposed in that way, then you can put it on the coaches. But this team was not motivated, probably felt like they could walk in there and this would be an easy win. That's on the athlete, NOT coaches.
Roar you Lions roar!
User avatar
prj
Starter
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:32 pm

Imagine how effective the Lions will look when they finally decide to hire a Special Teams Coach and stop asking the Rain Man to do it all by himself.

oh, you mean they have one already?

Then why am I reminded -- constantly -- of the days before we had blocking on punts, when we left two scared Canadian kids who often caught the ball back there?
User avatar
BC 1988
Legend
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:58 pm
Location: BC (since 1988)

swervynmerv wrote:
Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:53 pm
Biggest contingent of Lions fans I have seen at a game in Regina in a long time. Lots of orange in the stadium. The fans deserved a better effort!
If it was all in a group--i didn't notice them during the broadcast-- that was probably the Operation Orange contingent (which was sponsors only for that trip).

Hardly the performance you'd want to put on the field for that important audience.
Dusty
Champion
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 8:31 pm

prj wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:24 am

Then why am I reminded -- constantly -- of the days before we had blocking on punts, when we left two scared Canadian kids who often caught the ball back there?
Back in those days, I remember Bob Friend catching the ball and immediately angling towards the sidelines....running for his life.... lol... he usually got some positive yards....
User avatar
The_Pauser
Legend
Posts: 2494
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:36 pm

A couple points:

1) 5 men is more than 3 men. I can understand if an O-line messes up their assignments on a play, and that makes the defense look great when that happens, but to consistently be beat by a 3 man rush is unacceptable. Of course the QB is not going to be able to get the ball off to a receiver, because when the D is rushing only 3 men that means they're dropping everyone else back in coverage and all of our options are likely covered. What's supposed to happen is this should give the QB time to either run the ball himself, or give him time to wait for a receiver to break coverage and get open. Unfortunately our 5 man offensive line wasn't able to fend off the 3 man rush. Unacceptable.

I'm no fan of Dan Dorazio, but this isn't on coaching. It's a simple numbers game. You have 5 men vs. 3. That means at least two of those should be double teamed. Instead, I saw our linemen get walked around far too often. That's not on coaching, that's either a talent issue or a motivation issue. Considering our O-line has had some good games, I don't know that it's a talent issue. Are we the most talented? Not even close, but we aren't this bad either. So I chock it up to a motivation issue. It's simple: they didn't come to play. They weren't hungry. They thought it would be as easy as the previous week. They got their asses handed to them.

2) JJ10 wasn't ready. I do think he's healthy-ish, and probably ready for game action from that standpoint, but his timing was off and he couldn't get into a rhythm. That's what happens when you get injured so early in the season and miss a few games, and as JJ10 stated he felt like it was the beginning of the year all over again. He'd be okay if the rest of the team could pick up the slack, but because of our O-line we weren't able to get any push on the run game, and neither QB had any time to establish anything through the air. Probably should have been pulled sooner, but it looks as if Lulay's ribs are really that bad so I can see why Wally didn't want to make that switch.

I actually haven't been all that impressed by JJ10 this year. I felt our offense really took off when Lulay was given the reigns, and would seriously consider a change once he's healthy.

3) Our defense was a mess. Unmotivated, forgot how to tackle, blown assignments galore. A complete breakdown everywhere. Purifoy I felt had a rotten game. Zero pressure from our D-line (which has been a bit of a common theme all year). Solly was a non-factor. Our DB's were picked apart seemingly with ease. It's one of those games that makes you have to consider either running them ragged in practice (if you don't want to work during the game, you'll work during practice), or giving them a day off and chocking it up to fatigue. That'll be on the coaches to decide how best to handle, though given they had an extra day between games, fatigue shouldn't have been an issue. And now that we're up against a quick turnaround I don't know that running them ragged in practice is the best of ideas either.

4) Our special teams continues to be a disaster. Our kicker has a great leg, so that's a bright spot at least. And he can hit those longer field goals. Our special teams coverage though is something else completely. I wouldn't say Rainey has lost it...he just can't break free when the opposition is in his face on literally every kick return. Our special teams blocking is just not there, and I'm wondering if perhaps our blocking schemes are the issue.

5) As I mentioned in a post above, let's stop blaming coaches for literally everything. It's getting beyond silly and lacks any sort of critical thinking. Coaches set the game plan, and it's on the players to execute that game plan. If the came out with the wrong game plan that would be on the coaches. But the players showed up not wanting to play. It's as simple as that, and I do put a lot of stock into what Wally said at the beginning of the game. He saw something with the team's attitude that he was concerned about, and called them out for it. That's when he called upon one of the team captains to get the players going. It's not on the coach to make sure a professional athlete is feeling up to playing that day. These are professionals. They shouldn't need anyone to get them up for a game, and they'll be the first to tell you that. This isn't pee wee football where you need your coaches to be all "rah rah let's go get 'em Billie." These professionals need a game plan to execute, and they are expected to get themselves up to go out and execute that game plan to the best of their ability. If it fails, then you look at why adjustments weren't made. But when it's a motivational issue, it's on the player. Now it's on the coaching staff to make changes. If certain players aren't giving the effort then they should sit. Let's see what happens and how the team responds this week.
Roar you Lions roar!
User avatar
CardiacKid
Legend
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:46 am
Location: Under Christmas Hill, Saanich

The_Pauser wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:20 am
WestCoastJoe wrote:
Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:58 pm
We were unprepared. Others will not want to hear it, but IMO that is on the coaches. It was like the players had tuned them out.
I disagree. These are pro athletes. If they need coaches to get up for a game then they should not be pro athletes. If we had the wrong game plan and were being exposed in that way, then you can put it on the coaches. But this team was not motivated, probably felt like they could walk in there and this would be an easy win. That's on the athlete, NOT coaches.
Players are responsible for their level of intensity. I think the team leadership need to convene a players meeting and rip a new collective a**hole for each and everyone of them. I'm sorry but we were sold a bill of goods in regards to this team and how they obviously were checked out mentally prior to the game is worthy of our criticism.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

The_Pauser wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:20 am
WestCoastJoe wrote:
Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:58 pm
We were unprepared. Others will not want to hear it, but IMO that is on the coaches. It was like the players had tuned them out.
I disagree. These are pro athletes. If they need coaches to get up for a game then they should not be pro athletes. If we had the wrong game plan and were being exposed in that way, then you can put it on the coaches. But this team was not motivated, probably felt like they could walk in there and this would be an easy win. That's on the athlete, NOT coaches.
I will stand by my comment.

Whether a football player is professional or amateur, they respond to coaches for morale and motivation. There are loads of examples throughout history.

As noted, others will see it differently. Blame the players or blame the coaches? I put it on the coaches, who also choose the personnel.

Systems. Game planning. Play calls. Motivation. Personnel selection. All on the coaching staff.

My last word on this disagreement. The Pauser got me to respond once, but that is it for this issue.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
The_Pauser
Legend
Posts: 2494
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:36 pm

WestCoastJoe wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:31 am

I will stand by my comment.

Whether a football player is professional or amateur, they respond to coaches for morale and motivation. There are loads of examples throughout history.

As noted, others will see it differently. Blame the players or blame the coaches? I put it on the coaches, who also choose the personnel.

Systems. Game planning. Play calls. Motivation. Personnel selection. All on the coaching staff.

My last word on this disagreement. The Pauser got me to respond once, but that is it for this issue.
And there are plenty of examples throughout history where athletes state that motivation is on them, not on the coaches. Again, if you can't get motivated to go out and do your job then that's on you. It's not on the coaches to be all "rah rah let's go play boys."

Then again, some people want to put literally everything on the coaches so I'm shouldn't be surprised at some of these comments.

And for the record, I really don't care if you respond to me or not. But I don't appreciate your condescending tone, so you can take that and keep it to yourself.
Roar you Lions roar!
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

It's actually a bit of column a and b. I am going to point the finger a little more at the game plan than all of the other things that were wrong with this team last night. If nothing else, you have QB who is coming off an injury and is going to be rusty. Is that the time you create a game plan that requires long stays in the pocket, long routes and hoping that a suspect Oline is going to provide the kind of protection that a QB needs under those circumstances? In short, I think not. What was critical in this game right from the start was some ball control. The Riders coming full pull, fine, do some roll outs, throw some screens, short passes to the flat or short outs. Give Jenning's some plays that don't require him to think too much or try to go for that long pass. The game plan seemed way out of step for a QB that has been off for awhile. His timing was off, his touch was off and he wasn't getting time to go through second and third reads. He looked like a deer in the headlights and our coaching did nothing to help him with the game plan. That I put on Jones. So we have an injured QB coming back, we have a backup that is now nicked and we are at game 8. And the trend continues. Our Oline was ridiculously bad last night. As has been mentioned, they often outnumbered the rushers and still continually got beat like rented mules.
Again, adjustments to the game plan that may have helped them didn't seem to be forthcoming either. Players looked like they were confused and in times like that it is the coaching that is supposed to help sort those things out. Unfortunately, the coaching looked bewildered as well and when you are a player, if you lose faith in your leaders, well....the fish rots from the head down. Last night looked like everybody gave up early and went home mentally. And that is probably the worst indictment of all.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
maxlion
Legend
Posts: 1097
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:49 am

Sir Purrcival wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 12:09 pm
It's actually a bit of column a and b. I am going to point the finger a little more at the game plan than all of the other things that were wrong with this team last night. If nothing else, you have QB who is coming off an injury and is going to be rusty. Is that the time you create a game plan that requires long stays in the pocket, long routes and hoping that a suspect Oline is going to provide the kind of protection that a QB needs under those circumstances? In short, I think not. What was critical in this game right from the start was some ball control. The Riders coming full pull, fine, do some roll outs, throw some screens, short passes to the flat or short outs. Give Jenning's some plays that don't require him to think too much or try to go for that long pass. The game plan seemed way out of step for a QB that has been off for awhile. His timing was off, his touch was off and he wasn't getting time to go through second and third reads. He looked like a deer in the headlights and our coaching did nothing to help him with the game plan. That I put on Jones. So we have an injured QB coming back, we have a backup that is now nicked and we are at game 8. And the trend continues. Our Oline was ridiculously bad last night. As has been mentioned, they often outnumbered the rushers and still continually got beat like rented mules.
Again, adjustments to the game plan that may have helped them didn't seem to be forthcoming either. Players looked like they were confused and in times like that it is the coaching that is supposed to help sort those things out.
I agree with most of this. The only thing I would question--and I honestly don't know the answer--is how many of the bad plays were a result of Jennings making a poor decision and how many were a result of the play design. Jennings' accuracy was terrible. If you combine this with poor decision making, that would be a combination that no amount of coaching or oline play could overcome. Also, I seem to be in the minority here, but I felt the oline was okay. The qb consistently had time to throw but hesitated for whatever reason.
maxlion
Legend
Posts: 1097
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:49 am

On the question of motivation, there is no question that this is one of the coaches' primary roles, and that it appeared that motivation was lacking last night. However, a coach's skill in motivating players is best evaluated over a longer period of time than one game. There are too many factors that come into play in single instance to make useful generalizations. Sometimes failure can be a catalyst for motivation.
User avatar
The_Pauser
Legend
Posts: 2494
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:36 pm

maxlion wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 12:59 pm
On the question of motivation, there is no question that this is one of the coaches' primary roles, and that it appeared that motivation was lacking last night. However, a coach's skill in motivating players is best evaluated over a longer period of time than one game. There are too many factors that come into play in single instance to make useful generalizations. Sometimes failure can be a catalyst for motivation.
Are you suggesting that if there were no coaches the players wouldn't bother to show up for the game? I wholeheartedly disagree with this.

Ask any professional athlete and they'll tell you that it's on them to get motivated for a game. They'll all tell you that if someone needs to rely on a coach to get them motivated for a game that they should not be playing pro sports.
Roar you Lions roar!
Post Reply