Mr. Wally Buono

[Bobbyp]

Actually I have to take the blame for the loss every time I wear some Lions stuff on gameday they lose. I was cocky on Friday knowing it and was thinking theres no way that will happen and it did. So once again Id like to say it was my fault.

[Rammer]

Actually I have to take the blame for the loss every time I wear some Lions stuff on gameday they lose. I was cocky on Friday knowing it and was thinking theres no way that will happen and it did. So once again Id like to say it was my fault.

I was going to ask this question, but didn't think that anyone would do that on a pivotal game such as it was.

[cromartie]

I did not see a "leading edge innovative" offense on the field for the Eskimos last night. I saw a team running simple inside zone runs at us all night, and eating us alive. That is pure personnel, gang - that is not coaching. When you know what is coming, and can't stop it, it is not a scheme issue. Oh, and Steve Buratto and Richard Harris might disagree with the notion that only two assistants have been gassed in the Buono era.

Yes except the problem is, you're typing this in Week 20. If you don't adjust your scheme to the strengths and weaknesses of your personnel by Week 20, or sit and let situations fester over two seasons or more (like JoJuan Armour having to push Javi Glatt out of the way to flow toward the running back as Javi stands in at middle linebacker, again, looking like a defective video game player waiting for a handoff that's already happened) then what you have is an institutionalized management problem. Which is what this team clearly has at this point.

It's one thing to have a plan that has worked in the past. The Head Coach and General Manager are responsible for coordinating a vision that builds a franchise. Good Assistant Coaches have the strength to have a base system in mind, but also are adept at adjusting said plan to meet the strengths and weaknesses of the personnel hand they've been dealt.

This staff either doesn't have that authority, doesn't have that ability, or both, and the rest of the league knows it.

Only Casey Printers, and maybe Geroy on offense can look around and go "*bleep* this isn't going to work because the matchup's bad. Let's adjust my route, you roll out and do this instead."

This isn't even unique to football. Good Upper Level Managers have vision that leads to growth. Good mid and lower level managers start out with maximizing what they've been given, and are promoted up through the ranks as they develop their own vision and ability to adjust.

[Blitz]

I did not see a "leading edge innovative" offense on the field for the Eskimos last night. I saw a team running simple inside zone runs at us all night, and eating us alive. That is pure personnel, gang - that is not coaching. When you know what is coming, and can't stop it, it is not a scheme issue. Oh, and Steve Buratto and Richard Harris might disagree with the notion that only two assistants have been gassed in the Buono era.

Yes except the problem is, you're typing this in Week 20. If you don't adjust your scheme to the strengths and weaknesses of your personnel by Week 20, or sit and let situations fester over two seasons or more (like JoJuan Armour having to push Javi Glatt out of the way to flow toward the running back as Javi stands in at middle linebacker, again, looking like a defective video game player waiting for a handoff that's already happened) then what you have is an institutionalized management problem. Which is what this team clearly has at this point.

It's one thing to have a plan that has worked in the past. The Head Coach and General Manager are responsible for coordinating a vision that builds a franchise. Good Assistant Coaches have the strength to have a base system in mind, but also are adept at adjusting said plan to meet the strengths and weaknesses of the personnel hand they've been dealt.

This staff either doesn't have that authority, doesn't have that ability, or both, and the rest of the league knows it.

Only Casey Printers, and maybe Geroy on offense can look around and go "*bleep* this isn't going to work because the matchup's bad. Let's adjust my route, you roll out and do this instead."

This isn't even unique to football. Good Upper Level Managers have vision that leads to growth. Good mid and lower level managers start out with maximizing what they've been given, and are promoted up through the ranks as they develop their own vision and ability to adjust.

Fantastic post cromartie....and you've hit it so dead on. I remember Jamal Johnson pushing Glatt out of the way on a number of occasions and yet we stuck with Glatt, when even an average fan could see the difference.

There are posters here who want Printers to stand in the pocket and deliver a 5 yard pass against the blitz on second and eight. Printers and Geroy know the limitations of the scheme and play calling. Printers ad libbing on the scramble on occasion and Geroy adjusting his route give us the potential for big plays that our offensive scheme is unable to do. It's what breaks the predictability. It's why opposition defenses are not happy to play against Printers. In fact is was why opposition defenses preferred to play against Buck than Jarious...because Buck stays within the scheme...while Jarious will at least bomb away and scare the daylights out of them.

However, it would be a treat if Chap could give Printers some screen plays and designed rollouts to enhance the offence instead of the usual recipe of restricting it.

[Lionheart]

Fantastic post cromartie....and you've hit it so dead on. I remember Jamal Johnson pushing Glatt out of the way on a number of occasions and yet we stuck with Glatt, when even an average fan could see the difference.

YOu know, I'm probably totally wrong on this but for some reason I can't help wondering (reaching?) if Jamal's first play the one in which he took a dumb ST penalty by nailing a guy trying to catch the ball on a punt return. Did that subconsciously prejudice him with Wally from the beginning? That play I just don't forget.. I don't know why?

[Blitz]

Fantastic post cromartie....and you've hit it so dead on. I remember Jamal Johnson pushing Glatt out of the way on a number of occasions and yet we stuck with Glatt, when even an average fan could see the difference.

YOu know, I'm probably totally wrong on this but for some reason I can't help wondering (reaching?) if Jamal's first play the one in which he took a dumb ST penalty by nailing a guy trying to catch the ball on a punt return. Did that subconsciously prejudice him with Wally from the beginning? That play I just don't forget.. I don't know why?

I don't think so Lionut. Jamal Johnson was new to the CFL and that play sticks in our minds, due to the explosive hit within the 5 yard restricted area. There are a number of reasons why Wally didn't give Jamal a chance. First of all Jamal and Glatt competed at training camp for the starters position and Wally gave the job to Glatt. At the time, offences were running less and the trend of the time was to go with a Canadian at middle linebacker.

We also had Otis Floyd as a starter. However, Glatt was also a Wally favorite and Wally went out of his way to constantly praise Glatt to the media and stuck with Glatt when it was so obvious that Glatt was struggling and did for two and a half seasons in the middle linebacker position. However, Glatt is a good pass defender and outside linebacker but the middle was not his forte.

In the meantime Jamal Johnson performed impressively most of the time he was given the opportunity. Jamal knows how to scrape, he explodes into the hole, and his lateral pursuit and hitting power is impressive. Turnovers always seemed to happen when Jamal played....he's the kind of player that makes things happen. However, I think Wally saw a lot of himself in Javy Glatt. I also believe Jamal Johnson is an instintive natural linebacker (he was my favorite Leo defensive player even though he didn't get to play much) and Wally preferred someone not to react out there but to stay within the scheme always...and Jamal wasn't that kind of linebacker.

[cromartie]

In fact is was why opposition defenses preferred to play against Buck than Jarious...because Buck stays within the scheme...while Jarious will at least bomb away and scare the daylights out of them.

Trying too hard to conform to the scheme, and sacrificing his body far too often when it broke down, which was far too often, might be the unfortunate epitaphs of both Buck and Lion82, no?

[PigSkin_53]

In fact is was why opposition defenses preferred to play against Buck than Jarious...because Buck stays within the scheme...while Jarious will at least bomb away and scare the daylights out of them.

Trying too hard to conform to the scheme, and sacrificing his body far too often when it broke down, which was far too often, might be the unfortunate epitaphs of both Buck and Lion82, no?

Absolutely correct in both cases cromartie!

Orchestrated by the Chap's Jr. High sandlot offensive scheme "everyone go out for a pass".

[B.C.FAN]

Football is a simple game, played with great intensity. In the playoffs, schemes and game plans are secondary. You're not likely to confuse your opponents or catch them off guard. Successful coaches have always said that the key to winning is to make plays when the game is on the line. Most games come down to four or five key plays.

In two regular season games against Hamilton, the Lions averaged over 300 yards passing but gave up two interceptions in each game. B.C. turnovers led directly to 20 Hamilton points and accounted for the margin of defeat in both games. Last week in Winnipeg, Hamilton's defence stepped up again with the game on the line and returned two interceptions for touchdowns.

The key to the game for the Lions is simply to match Hamilton's intensity, eliminate mistakes and make plays.

[PigSkin_53]

Football is a simple game, played with great intensity. In the playoffs, schemes and game plans are secondary. You're not likely to confuse your opponents or catch them off guard. Successful coaches have always said that the key to winning is to make plays when the game is on the line. Most games come down to four or five key plays.

On the contrary B.C.FAN football is a game of strategy and subterfuge, not unlike a chess game in its aspect of thinking three moves in advance of your opponent, anticipating his counter moves and having a prepared game plan for his every contingency.

The strategy of making the necessary in-game adjustments to nullify what is successful for your opponent is just as important as the original game plan and study of the opposition’s tendencies, and the same philosophy holding true to overcoming the limitation of his defending your attack.

Execution of these pursuits is of the utmost importance just as it is important for each of the chess pieces (football players) on the board (field of play) to execute their different functions in an applicable timely fashion' when called upon by the chess master (coach(es)).


Deception to cover the true design of your intention either offensively or defensively is also an integral part of your success as disguising the counter measures in your offensive attacks or defensive coverage's serve to confuse and disrupt your opponant's chances of dominance and a successful outcome in the game.

The key to the game for the Lions is simply to match Hamilton's intensity, eliminate mistakes and make plays.

I do however ultimately agree with your statement on intensity and mistake free football B.C.FAN, and in this reguard we must control the the lines of scrimage and bring our A game if we hope to survive Sunday.

[Lionheart]

Football is the most un-simple game on the planet. Nothing comes close to it's complexities. Besides the play on the field you've got to learn a large book, homework, a new language etc.

Pros make it look simple when they're on their best... that could be were your confused.