And so it goes...

Following another offseason in which all the pundits said that we were too old, that we were washed up, that we'd be in third place or maybe even out of the playoffs ... well, who's laughing now? :smiley:

I realize that we're not even at the halfway mark, so I'm not proclaiming or guaranteeing anything, but lookie here -- the Montreal Alouettes are in first place in the east! I guess this beaten-down, washed-up team full of has-beens still has some gas left in the tank, eh? :cowboy:

What I like is the trend. Of the four teams in the East. Alouettes are the only team that has been consistently getting better and that is a tribute to the coaching staff and players. A lot of hard work, trust and generosity is required to accomplish that.

Awesome bunch.

Agreed. And it's great to be able to say that I was wrong about Reinebold. :slight_smile: Yes, our defense is still a work in progress, and has to learn to play complete games, and yes, the decision to keep using Osaisai is beyond baffling, but the D has looked better and better over the past four games and is starting to become a force to be reckoned with.

Right now, my only significant issue with Trestman is special teams.

Someone on the ourbombers site did a CFL age study. It seems to have been done pretty scientifically.

2012 Avg. Age

Wpg. 26.16
Ham. 26.72
Edm. 26.91
Sask. 26.95
Calg. 27.02
Mtl. 27.22
B.C. 27.84
Tor. 28.14

What first hits me is how fairly closely the teams are bunched age wise, and the fact Tor. is that old a team.

Teams with players 30+ :

Wpg. 4
Calg. 5
Sask. 6
Ham. 7
Edm. 7
Mtl. 10
Tor. 12
B.C. 14

He goes a little deeper into things also. Hope this link works;

[url=https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArunAX6p6j-WdFFId3BiZmp6YkhPdmN0WHRGUnNYN1E#gid=0]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... YN1E#gid=0[/url]

That analysis is useless without an examination of 1. how many older players are starters on their respective teams and 2. are particular positions (e.g. linebackers, receivers, d-line) old overall? Big difference between a receiving corps with three greybeards and those same three greybeards playing at different positions. To me, you never want to have an entire position aging at the same rate.

Exactly , means very little. You don't think Winnipeg would take a 40 year old Calvillo right now...

Like Jim Popp says : You can play ball or you can't.

Yeah, and guys like Calvillo, McCallum, etc. are going to skew a team's average age. Sure, we've got old man AC, but we also have young running backs, guys like London and Green in the receiving corps in their physical prime, lots of youth on the D-line (Cash is only 25, I believe), and the perfect mix of age and youth on the offensive line (Flory is the greybeard, Bourke and Perrett are barely 30, and Woodruff and LBJ are the kids).

The position where we're consistently older is the secondary, with Parker, Anderson, Brown, and Hebert all in their '30s. But if they can play at a high level, I don't see what's wrong with them continuing. Hebert is showing that he has plenty of gas left in the tank, and nobody really goes after Parker on the corner. He just quietly shuts down whoever he's matched up against.

Interesting; when you compare the 30+ players, you realize that the Argos are in trouble; hence, amongst players 30+, 8 of the Argos are Non-imports; the Als have only 3.

Another aspect,is the quality of the 30+ players; most of the Als are stars and only 1 OL is 30+,i.e. Scott Flory. The future is bright.

Richard

Absolutely. Always makes me smile when I read someone call this team old. If you look at the external chart. Of all the teams, the Als are the ones who got the youngest from last year, even more of a gap than Winnipeg.

By the time Scott is ready to retire, we'll be able to slot in a youngster at his spot without having to do the same across the whole line. We'll be fine. Obviously, losing a perennial all-star at guard will hurt, but we have an abundance of O-line talent that can't even get on the field at the moment.

I'm just glad I can root for the hometown tabbies next monday when I travel to hamilton, just to keep the argos behind us.

Labour day weekend is my favorite of the year I am at the game Friday, Lobster and cornboil for friends saturday (100 pound of creepy crawly hauled in fresh from Halifax). Sunday is shopping downtown,Monday is party at the Beach Club and flying out to Cuba with the gang monday night for 15 days night to Cycle,Kite surf and some smoking hot reggaeton.

JeJe!

You going to be at Ivor Wynne for the game on Monday, 234? Mrs MadJack and I will be there as well (ex-Al Jermaine McElveen has arranged tickets for us!)

I don't think the issue for me was age, but rather the new systems under two new coaches, the OC and the DC, with a whole raft of new players replacing some whose departure from the team frankly came as a surprise to many of us. One of our posters quite correctly opined that it would be about mid-season before this system would start producing dividends. In fact, it started doing that before we reached that milestone.

That said, a few of our Ws were squeakers. I know - a W is a W is a W, but we certainly aren't the dominating team we used to be. That is, I believe, because there is greater (and I will avoid the word parity for now) competition in the East. While Hamilton, Toronto, and Winnipeg have struggled in some games, we sure struggled at the beginning of the season ourselves.

However, Trestman made some good remarks in today's Gazette column about the upcoming games against BC as being a test of the true grit of the 2012 Alouettes; I fully concur with his comments.

So, not too shabby so far, but there is a lot of football left to play. The one positive note I see is that from week to week the Als are finding ways to win. That, to me, is really the bottom line!

Go Als go!

The defending champs have been winning squeakers too. Check their forum; their fans know BC's record could very well be 5-3 or even 4-4.

Section 22 row W seats 1-2 with my dad.

Very true. And that means that they are not dominating teams either. Translation? They are beatable! But to do so, the Als have to treat them as the potential opponents in the GC and have to treat all practises this week - and the game - as such. This game is a meeting of both first-place teams and will go a long way to build momentum and confidence. so, I hope our guys go into this one fired up like never before and get the job done. A W in this game will be crucial for the next one. First things first - a W on Friday!

Go Als go!

Indeed, jkm. But I have too much respect for Trestman to think that he's doing anything BUT exactly what you're describing. This game is a great opportunity for us. What I want is a competitive game, win or lose. A win would be excellent, but as long as we don't get blown out and embarrassed at home, I'll take some positive from it. BC is where we want to be, they're the defending champs. We're still getting this new engine going.

Early in the season there was concern mentioned on this Forum concerning out new defensive coach as his defense was certainly struggling at that time. These thoughts have gone as our defense has looked different and, effective. This I was pondering during the recent Ti Cat game. On the second play of the second half, Burris threw a short pass to Giguere behind the LOS. Kyries Hebert,our safety, quickly appeared to tackle Giguere still behind the LOS. Kyries was around when the Ottawa Renegades were playing and, it was a surprise to have him as our safety this year. This particular play seemed to me to be typical of the current squad- there is great aggressiveness found here and, opposing QBS are most often on the run.