An excerpt from Steve Milton

By Steve Milton

[b]the offence did more than enough to supply the 2012 Cats with a winning season. But a head coach cannot be judged on the performance of one-third of the team. He is responsible for everything, and that includes the spectacularly flawed defence. Somebody has to take the fall for that - besides the mobs of defensive linemen and backs who've been tried and found wanting.

And so, Cortez' first chore will be to dispatch his defensive co-ordinator. Although Cortez's offence contributed to opposition points in both debacles, this team gave up 43 points in its first game of the year and 43 points in its last. If you can make a case from those numbers that the defence appreciably improved in the 18 weeks between them, please send us the name of all your math teachers. They must be immediately decertified.[/b]

I have been saying this all along!

Might want to include the paragraph just previous to put in perspective.

[b]"The offence Cortez directed set all kinds of records, was fun to watch, and gave the team a chance to win its final, desperate, game.

But it also fumbled and was intercepted at the most inopportune moments and yard-lines, couldn't possess the ball long enough to preserve some late leads, and during that season-skewering five-game losing streak, was as bleak as tundra in the pivotal third quarters."[/b]

Steve Milton is a flat out excellent sports writer!

Agreed.

fenderguy, of course the offense was not flawless.

No offense is. None. Including ours, who have made their share of faux pas this term.
But to state this season is the fault of Burris or the offense is disingenuous and misguided.

to quote Milty, “the offence did more than enough to supply the 2012 Cats with a winning season.”

This is the same reporter who stated Hamilton under Burris as QB still had a suspect OLine - DLine and what he refers as the back 5. Great reporter.

By no means am I saying that this season's failure is the lone fault of Burris or the offense. Just saying that they share in the accountability of for the dismal results in 2012. Just seems like many are under the impression that Burris & the offense walked on water & they did all they could be expected to do and it is all the Defense's shortcomings. Just shedding light on the other side of the coin. In this specific thread, all I'm trying to say is you can't point to just one part of Milton's column. The paragraph ahead is as telling as the one quoted.

quick question for you Fenderguy if you don't mind.
Do you believe that the offense and defense are EQUAL in culpability for this season's futility?

I'll also concur. Steve Milton is unquestionably the best football writer in Canada. We're fortunate to have him here.

Overall ... No ... I'd say Defense has to take more than an equal share in culpability. 60/40 for nice round figures.

Think of me as one of those "fact checkers" on CNN. I'm not here to roast or burn any player/coach in particular. I'm here to debunk myths, shed light on reality, point out the other side of the equation, not just let people come on here and make statements that simply are not true.

Main points of contention are;

The imbalance in time of possession has much to do with the offense's inability to extend drives as it is the Defense's ability to make stops and get off the field.

Henry Burris had from a statistical point, a very impressive looking season. But he did not take care of the ball.

In the key aspects that have the most impact on winning, Hamilton does not get passing grades. Yes, they threw the ball around like playground flag football but they played undisciplined football as far as turnovers, penalties, time of possession.

And that fruit does not belong on pizza but here & now is not the time nor place for that discussion.

And finally, the toilet paper roll MUST be installed on the holder in a rolling over the top, away from the wall fashion. This is just common sense.

agreed for the most part. (although I'd place a causal percentile in the 70-30 range, generally speaking)

BTW, great whimsical analogies FG. :lol:

I look at it this way;

You have the Army & Air Force as part of your military. The Air Force got all the budget. The Air Force got all the attention. The Air Force got all the upgrades. The Air Force was supposed to give you complete air superiority & dominance. But it didn't. And your ground forces came under fire. They were left naked on the battlefield. Exposed. Vulnerable.

Did the Air Force not perform as well as expected because the Army wasn't able to protect their air bases close to the front?

But I think you're right that balance is required. Having the best offence without a defence isn't going to win many games, just as having the best defence without an offence won't win many either. We have the offence, now we need to keep that and improve our defence for next year.

Five of our losses were by three or fewer points. In all of those games, we allowed more than 30 points against. The offence and special teams did their jobs those games, scoring 29 or more points in each one. If the defence had been able to stop one more drive per game, we would have had a much better season, and nobody would be criticizing the offence.

You can also look at it that 5 of Hamilton's losses were by three or fewer points and they gave up on average, 6 points a game on turnovers.

Yes. If the Defense stopped one more drive per game. Or if the offense extended one more drive per game. Or the offense had one less turnover that resulted in easy points per game.

All very true. The question is which is the easiest to fix. My guess is that improving the defence would be easier than improving the offence, which has put up way more points than it has cost through turnovers. Fixing the fumble issue would be good, although I have no idea how they would do that.

Agreed. Fixing the Defense is probably easier than fixing the offense. Though the turnover issue and points off turnovers have to be the priority. Those things are killers to teams and speak to fundamentals. Points off turnovers are two things. First, the actual turnover. Second, the Defense bailing out your offense by not conceding points off the turnover. TiCats failed in both areas in 2012. They need to emphasize ball protection. It's as fundamental as blocking and tackling.

Yet another way of looking at it, if you subtract the 113 points off turnovers from Hamilton's total points scored, they go from 1st in the league with 538 to 2nd last with 425. Not a perfect mathematical situation as I realize its not a vacuum & subtracting/adding has effects upon other's numbers ... But it is pretty staggering.