5,367 passing yards, career high and #1 in CFL for 2012
43 TD passes, career high and TiCat record and #1 in CFL for 2012
104.4 QB rating, career high and #1 in CL for 2012
Unbelievable! 6-12
A Winnipeg win and we finish dead last again.
Unless Calgary scores 34 points, Hamilton will be the first team in CFL history to lead the league in points scored and finish with a losing record. And not just a game or two under 50. 6-12!
So now that the season is over, is there any real doubt where the TRUE problems lie? Did Hank have to put up those kind of numbers in 2008 to win the Grey Cup?
actually, Burris was second best in the TD-INT ratio, beating all other league starters except Lulay.
The fact that Hank was #1 in all major passing categories (TD’s, yds, rating etc) including numerous team/personal records, while the team scored the most points in the league, and yet produced a .333 losing record is very telling.
and a first in the history of the CFL.
a tremendous overhaul and reconstruction is required in nearly all facets of the defensive system and coaching.
It is sorely apparent to those who embrace simple deduction and reasoning skills.
Statistics are for losers. I saw go by the record for Burris. He brought the team no where. He fumbled lots and threw piles of interceptions, many returned for TD's. He is a one dimension QB who telegraphs his passes and completes mostly short passes. How much yardage did he get in garbage time, when the Cats were out of the game.
That being said, I have always believed the Cats Defense has sucked for years and until we get a good defense this team will be mediocre at best.
Personal stats are fine Captain, but it’s the team stats, (wins mainly) that really count. That’s why numbers can be misleading in the big picture. Sure, number-wise Henry had a good season and should get credit where credit is due, but you need to look at the cost of all that. I could be argued that there were several games where is inconsistency led to losses, (read, team losses), and so it’s nice to read the personal numbers you posted, but it’s the numbers in the standings at the end of the season that count.
Sure, he led the league in picks, but only by two (Glenn is next at 16, followed by Calvillo at 14). And he finished with TWELVE more TDs than the next guy (AC at 31). Are the fumbles a problem? Sure, but with Hank he tends to have them in spurts, not continuously over 18 games. As in, he'll have a few games where he fumbles a lot, but then keep the ball clean for a few more. In the end, he gave the Cats a chance to win most games.
The way last night's game ended is eerily similar to how the game in Montreal ended. Cats tied it up and needed a stop, but couldn't stop the opposition from marching down field for the winning field goal.
Personal stats are fine Captain, but it’s the team stats, (wins mainly) that really count. That’s why numbers can be misleading in the big picture. Sure, number-wise Henry had a good season and should get credit where credit is due, but you need to look at the cost of all that. I could be argued that there were several games where is inconsistency led to losses, (read, team losses), and so it’s nice to read the personal numbers you posted, but it’s the numbers in the standings at the end of the season that count.
But why are we drawing a one-to-one connection between Burris and the team's stats? Where's the justification for it? Hamilton has become the first team in CFL history to having a losing record and miss the playoffs in spite of having the league's top offense. That is abnormal. If you guys had a stellar defense that routinely held the opposition to fewer than 20 points and you missed the postseason, I could understand blaming Burris, but for the love of all that's holy, that offense is a juggernaut! Again, 40 points for last night and you still lost. That is on Creehan and the defense, which couldn't stop Toronto when it counted and never came up with the kind of big play (turnover) that might have swung the momentum in your favour.