Hamilton at B.C. Aug. 24, 2019 - Post Game Thread

[JohnnyMusso]

any one know the attendance? Looked pretty empty in there. Not that it would make any difference to the way the Lions are playing but officiating with Proulx was pretty crappy, missed offside, missed fumble, missed facemask on Reilly, hey its the only way we can move the ball is with penalties!

It was a little over 16,000. Pretty small and it will get worse for next 5 games especially against Ottawa and Toronto.

[Hambone]

Ed Hervey has had many chances to make changes this season but has sat on his hands. Let alone the choice he made for head coach. I mean, I think Hervey is problem number 1 because of his ego. And the longer he does nothing the more incredible the situation seems to me. A good CFL GM doesn’t pray for NFL rejects. He has his squad set, and then looks to fill holes with NFL cuts. Preferably only due to injury.

When it comes to players I don't know if Hervey can fairly be accused of sitting on his hands but certainly can be questioned on who has been changed or not changed. 13 players on yesterday's 46 were not with the team during training camp. Toomer plus 3 more on the PR are new since camp.

[JohnnyMusso]

They should not have a coaching cap. It makes the league look bush league. No other league has one and all can fire coaches mid season.

[B.C.FAN]

They should not have a coaching cap. It makes the league look bush league. No other league has one and all can fire coaches mid season.

The cap may be too restrictive but it was brought in for a good reason. Some teams wildly expanded their coaching and football ops staffs. The coaching cap is $2.588 million for 11 coaches and 14 other football ops staffers, excluding doctors and trainers. That’s almost half as much as the $5.7-million salary cap for roughly 60 players on the active and practice rosters and the one-game injured list. If player costs are controlled for the financial health of the league, other football ops costs must be controlled as well.

[maxlion]

There are a few differences between the admin cap and player cap. Players in the CFL can be cut without financial penalty. Even in leagues with guaranteed contracts, players can be traded in order to gain cap relief. Also, there are more players than coaches, so mistakes can be mitigated. A backup can take the place of a starter. Not so with coaches. Having some limits is reasonable, but the system is too rigid. Teams need to have some way to fix mistakes.

[Hambone]

They should not have a coaching cap. It makes the league look bush league. No other league has one and all can fire coaches mid season.

The cap may be too restrictive but it was brought in for a good reason. Some teams wildly expanded their coaching and football ops staffs. The coaching cap is $2.588 million for 11 coaches and 14 other football ops staffers, excluding doctors and trainers. That’s almost half as much as the $5.7-million salary cap for roughly 60 players on the active and practice rosters and the one-game injured list. If player costs are controlled for the financial health of the league, other football ops costs must be controlled as well.

I still think this ops cap was imposed to help in the sales pitch for a Maritimes expansion franchise. The SMS system allows prospective buyers to build a business plan that can count on some cost certainty when it comes to player costs. The operations side however has been allowed to expand with no checks and balances. The average coaching staff in 1998 was 6. In 5 year increments it jumped to 6.67 in 2003, 8.25 in 2008, 10.25 in 2013 and 11.22 last year. The Riders who had 7 on staff in 1998 led the pack in increases with 14 last year. This has left the CFL presenting business model that says player costs are capped in terms of numbers and dollars but if you want in and want to compete you will have to keep up with the Joneses. If established teams want to keep expanding their staffs and increasing their costs then you'll have to do the same.

I think the CFL looked at that scenario and determined that spend as much as you want whether you can afford it or not was not sustainable and they needed to come up with a way to impose some cost certainty.

[Toppy Vann]

Instability is a risk with lots of firings and two cases come to mind:

Montreal - now looking stable after all these years of insanity post Cavillo and Trestman.

Winnipeg - never lost stability during Mike O'Shea's reign despite the time it took to where they're winning and looking decent.

Bottom line: it's better to make strategic changes versus mass firings.

Now can Claybrooks turn it around? He can be the DC in effect and call those shots but unless he comes to grips with what's happening on the offence and gets new voices on the play structure/ play calls things won't change.

As noted the winning QB tossed for 89 yards versus the loser at 286 yards, a touchdown and two interceptions, and reached the 30,000-passing-yards milestone of his career in the fourth quarter.

[cms22]

i think the mike o'shea situation in winnipeg has been constantly misconstrued on this forum.

winnipeg was a really terrible situation. much worse than current lions on-field situation. think years of this season's performance (and bear in mind that BC should probably have a win or two more than they have right now).

the bombers didn't fire o'shea to a large degree because they couldn't pay another large severance package. i think they might have been paying 2 or 3 coaches NOT TO COACH if they paid o-shea.

some of it was thinking constant turmoil/change leads to instability. but i don't think that was a big factor.

differences between bc and winnipeg (and i've lived in both places recently),

1) most people in winnipeg are interested in the bombers. and a nice core go to the games no matter what.

2) new stadium in winnipeg

3) lions have had great success in fairlyh recent memory.

a few things turned bombers around: 1) matt nichols at QB; 2) went to 3 import OL when things go really tough (and this was the absolute bottom; 3) canadians developed nicely.

[cms22]

just to add to last point,

winnipeg was already like a mouse on a spinning wheel when oshea was hired. not true of hervey and esp. claybrooks.

one impressive thing about winnipeg is they lost three canadian all-cfl players this off-season and are still the best team in the league.... not they are a very solid franchise. they win games they shouldn't vs. the opposite for winnipeg for years (and bc right now)

[JohnnyMusso]

Farhan mentioned yesterday it may come to a point where you cannot bring Claybrooks back, meaning more loses and a very bad final record. He feels they are not there yet, but getting close to it. Ed Willis today too mentioned there has to be a hard look at the Hervey/Claybrooks team.

If Claybrooks is to succeed, he has to stop coaching desperate. Twice in the first half BC gambled on 3rd down in their own end and one was 3 and 2. They made both, but if he failed on one and Hamilton went down and scored a touchdown, he would have been heavily criticized for being too much of a gambler. The third gamble (the fake punt) which was called, but then called off, but the players ran anyway cost them the game. If Claybrooks continues to be a Riverboat Gambler like this in future games, Lions will lose every time.

Stability is one thing, but if you have the wrong people in place, you have to make changes to get it right and I agree with Evil Empire, Ed Hervey is the problem and needs to be fired at year end. I have no more faith in this guy and his choice of coach has turned out to be the wrong one. Claybrooks needs to go too, but his 2 years remaining is a problem and may buy him another year unless the Lions finish 1 and 17 or 2 and 16.

[VictoriaFan]

I didn't see Stubler on the sidelines and it looked almost like Claybrooke was calling D plays, or was I just fast forwarding too fast on the DVR?

[JohnnyMusso]

No TSN said Claybrooks is more involved now with the defensive play calls. But Stubler has been up on the booth all season I think calling plays not on the sidelines.