Burn The Witches thread, Vol. 3

If you could read, you'd see that I never asked for the coach to be fired....I simply said that he seems content to be a sub 500 coach, whereas Trestman and Hufnagel are not.....
Both teams were 3 and 2 going in to last night's game....one was happy about it and one wasn't. Fact.

looks like good old 9-9 AGAIN :lol: ITS ALL GOOD BOYS DON'T WORRY JUST ASK MB :cowboy:

If you could read what you quoted, you'd see that the Onknight said, and I quote:

You quote that and then agree with his assessment of the coach (that he's no better than .500). That strikes me as agreeing that he should be fired, since that is what Onknight said in his post.

Where do you get the idea that Bellefeuille is happy being a sub .500 coach?

Again, I'll ask: do you watch the games?

The Cats were not happy to be 3-2, they were happy that they had won three in a row. That's not the same as being happy they were 3-2. And a team on a three-game winning streak should be what, miserable?

The Stamps were unhappy to be 3-2 because they had not played well. If you watched the games, you'd know that.

You can throw "fact" at the end of your post all you want, but it doesn't make it true. You clearly do not understand context. Both teams felt differently about their 3-2 records because both teams got to 3-2 in two totally different ways. That doesn't mean one was happy to be 3-2 and the other wasn't.

Most here know that I'm not a MB fan, but I don't see any reason to fire the coach after one competitive loss to a good team in their own stadium. That's a game you can hope to win, but maybe not expect to win. This year, there's a heckuva lot of parity.

Exactly, there are NO bad teams this year, any team could win it all, any team can win at any given time against any given opponent.

The panic and knee jerk reactions to loss on the road to a good team because of one bad half of football is very amusing.

We've won 3 out of our last 4.

12 games to go.

Let's feast on the hapless Argos Saturday night, and get things back on track.

I agree there is parity, but I don't think it stretches one through eight. Right now, the top five teams (Winnipeg, Edmonton, Montreal, Calgary and Hamilton) are all very tightly bunched. The bottom three (BC, Saskatchewan and Toronto) don't look so great.

But, I leave room for BC to make the jump. They have been competitive in nearly every game, and the addition of Bruce should help them. The Riders and Argos, however, look completely lost. They are bad football teams right now. I think we're going to look back at the Riders' win against Montreal and wonder how they hell they did it. The Argos and Riders will be lucky to win 10 games between them.

1 and 7 in 2008
9 and 10 in 2009
9 and 10 in 2010
3 and 3 in 2011

MB is a sub 500 coach. FACT.

I don't know that the Argos and Riders are as bad as their records indicate. The Riders beat Montreal, and the Argos lost some close games (the one against Edmonton comes to mind). We've only played a third of the season, and I wouldn't be surprised to see both teams come around in the next six games. I envision Toronto's defense elevating their game, if only because Steinhauer will call a better game than Garber did.

I guess my original point was that this is a tough league. Last night's game wasn't a game the Cats should have won; it was a game they could have won but didn't, because they were facing a very good team at home, and a team desperate for its first home win, at that. My Als piled up 26 points in the first half of their opener against BC, only to be held to 4 points in the second half. We were lucky to win that game. Sometimes, you have to give credit to the other team.

That's your comeback? I give you so much room to play with and all you come at me with is a point that I didn't even debate. I never once said that Bellefeuille didn't have a sub .500 record. That's too bad, I was hoping for a more reasoned debate. Should've known better.

The Jimenez penalty spelt the beginning end for us, we probally would have been up but 11, instead of 7 at half, selfish penalty that i think deflated the offense.

Chamblin didnt make a single adjustment to the swing pass the Stamps threw about 10 times last night

And nobody is giving the Stamps credit for having a great D that just shut us down in the second half. Glenn should have stuck to a short passing game but still, the Stamps have a good defense

I don’t know how we win 3 games, the forums are absolutly dead after a win, we lose one game, and everyone is swamping the forums about how bad our team is. I truly don’t think I will ever understand some Tiger-Cats fans :?

The Riders win in Montreal is looking like the anomaly, IMO. The Riders just look sloppy. I just don't like what I've seen from them this year.

And I don't think Toronto can compete at the level with the top teams until they find a QB. The defense wasn't the issue with the Argos, IMO. They were already pretty good. The problem with the Argos starts with the QB.

I completely agree with everything you said in this entire paragraph.

I have already given you my position. I stated rather clearly what I disagree with in regards to your statements. Please feel free to go back and read my previous response and pick it apart. I asked you questions that you have yet to answer. So if you go back and read the questions, you can answer them. If you'd rather not do that, fine. I guess we can both move on.

Sorry, but I EXPECTED to win that game after the 1st half... If this game continued on the shootout pace and the cats lost a close one at the end...whatever, that happens. But the type of performance they put out in the second half is not something anyone should be fine with. It wasnt a 'competitive' loss. You cant put up a goose egg in a half of football.

Just want to add my two cents to what has been commented.

I figure you win as a team you lose as a team. They played well in the first half, although the team did get a few breaks to help them out (penalties to extend drives, Calgary dropped a few catchable passes). The didn't play so well in the second half. A lot went wrong in the second half, which can be attributed to players and coaches not performing.

No need to fire anyone. Go home, review the tape, do things better the next time. Keep working hard. Win the game next week.

Do I think it appeared like we were outcoached in the second half due to adjustments. Possibly. It certainly seemed like there were some bad calls made by the offense and they were predictable to the point the Calgary new what was coming. Calgary's offense continued to beat the defense with the same couple of plays. You have to adjust or they will just keep doing the same thing.

The fact that we didn't get a first down in the third quarter and had poor field position in the entire second half can also be attributed to not executing plays. The defense didn't make many stops, and the offense went 2 and out several times. Before you know it Calgary scored 19 points and the Cats score none.

Just to respond to some of the other comments that were made:

I agree that Jiminez's penalty was a bad one and may have been a bit of a turning point, but ultimately it cost us 4 points, and Calgary beat us by 12. I'm not sold that this play in particular changed the momentum, and while being up by 11 at the half may have put a little more pressure on Calgary, it may not have been enough to change what ended up happening. If anything the Shivers penalty in the endzone may have been a bigger turning point, or the stopped drive when the Ti-Cats were second and 2 with 3 or 4 minutes to go in the fourth quarter while we were still down by 5 points.

I wouldn't blame the coaches for the players we have on the field, that more of the GMs responsibility. Injuries happen, and we had a few green players out there this week. If anything they had a positive impact in the first half, but the same cannot be said in the second half.

As far as league parity goes. The two teams on top (Winnipeg and Edmonton) could quickly falter if a few things go wrong (some may have already in Edmonton). The two or three teams on the bottom (Toronto, Saskatchewan, and BC) are capable of knocking any team off on a given week. Toronto needs to get a QB playing better, and their offense will be better when Boyd returns. Saskatchewan lost a lot of players (Chick, Bagg, Fantuz) in the off-season and could get some of them back after NFL cuts. BC is better than their record and is notorious for starting slowly and finishing strong. With one third of the year down, the next third is shaping up to be really intersting. I really think it could be a tight race at the end of the year, but we'll see.

This game was a tough road game that was winnable but a tough loss to swallow because they didn't play well in the last two quarters. I actually thought that when the TiCats got the wind in the fourth quarter, they had a good chance to come from behind and win. It just didn't turn out that way. It seemed like they never recovered from the momentum swing in the third quarter. Had they marched the ball down the field just once early in the fourth, things could have been different, but it just wasn't to be on this night. You just can't play two bad quarters and expect to win.

Better luck next week.


I don't like what I've seen either, but I don't think they're going to go 1-17 like the '03 Tiger-Cats. At some point, they'll figure out how to win again.

And I don't think Toronto can compete at the level with the top teams until they find a QB. The defense wasn't the issue with the Argos, IMO. They were already pretty good. The problem with the Argos starts with the QB.
Not denying the Argos' problems are on offense, but how do you upgrade a receiving corps in the middle of a season? On defense, I always thought they were overrated, and Garber's idiotic decision to play zone behind a rush-three defense on Calvillo [i]twice[/i], when the first time led to a 40-20 loss and a nearly 2-1 advantage for the Als in time of possession, rightly cost him his job.

Lemon and Bell would look better if they had better receivers to throw to. When a washed-up Copeland is your no. 1 guy, you don't have a CFL-caliber receiving corps.

Anyhoo, I expect the Cats to be steaming mad this week facing Toronto.

I don’t see them going 1-17 either, but if they did finish, say 5-13, I wouldn’t be surprised. Now, if they can get Fantuz back (who is apparently unlikely to make the Bears) that changes things.

Can’t disagree with any of this either.

Part of me, a very small part, wasn’t overly upset with the loss last night. I was a tad worried about Hamilton overlooking Toronto next week if they went into the contest on a four-game winning streak. I know that might sound silly, but the term “trap game” exists for a reason (I felt that Edmonton-Toronto could have been one of those games for the Eskimos, and it nearly was). With the loss, the Cats should be focused all week and ready to crush Toronto.

Yup, I agree that with a win in Calgary, Hamilton might have been unfocused for the Toronto game, but I don’t think that will be an issue now, particularly given the offense’s terrible showing in the second half of last night’s game. We’ll see how rookie DC Steinhauer matches up against Khari Jones & co.

I've noticed the asinine Jimenez penalty as being a possible turning point in the game but I haven't seen mention of the poor play calling late in the 4th quarter (though I haven't read all the game thread posts).

With less than 5 minutes to go, behind by 5 points, TiCats moved the ball from their own 1 yard line to the 35-40 yard line. With a 2nd and five and the need to get 1st downs (keep the drive alive), they go for a 30+ long bomb that missed.

Kick the ball away, Calgary manages to score and that's the ball game (though with the lack of 2nd half adjustments by the TiCats, Stamps may very well have scored anyway).

Bottom line... IMO, the TiCat predictable (and questionable) play calling in the 2nd half left a lot to be desired.

I questioned THAT too. Why not stay with what was working? :roll:

Oh well...hopefully they learn from this. :wink: