Depth chart vs BC game #12

Question: Have the Cats DBs used any man-to-man coverages this year? Wouldn't that be a good idea with a guy like Burnham?

Looks like this will not be the week that Posey comes back to haunt us.

On the ex-Ticats Haunt List, I'm only seeing OL Figueroa, and 2017 6th-round draft pick (and almost-hero against TOR last week) WR Jacob Scarfone.

Can any of you more knowledgeable folks answer my questions?

Right. Posey is back where he’s spent so many of his CFL days, on an injured list. In his 5-season CFL career his annual total of game played ranges from 1 to 12, with less than a half season’s number (9) in each of 3 of those years… Interesting that Posey’s name and type of injury have not appeared on the team’s injury reports during this bouble game trip East.

I see the fines of the week list is out, with Kelly and Simoni among 7 CFLers whose pockets have been picked by the league disciplinarians:

The obvious (simple) answer is: “The Hamilton Tiger-Cat DBs have most certainly used some man to man coverage this year.”
Any sort of all out blitz up front, usually requires man to man coverage in the defensive backfield. And certainly when an offence has possession deep in the Red Zone, a defence cannot afford to play Zone because a pro QB does not require much separation to complete a short pass (for a TD in that case).
But having said all of that, I suspect with the sophisticated pass coverage schemes that are employed in professional football, more often than not, the defensive backfield plus any LBs dropping into coverage, are playing some sort of combination coverage where some of them are covering a Zone and some are playing Man, depending upon the offensive alignment.
I believe your question is very perfectly valid, because I have no idea what coverages Mark Washington was calling when the Argos last visited THF on Thanksgiving Day. They were either playing some form of very loose man to man coverage, or a poorly conceived zone coverage (or some combination of both) because the Argos were able to exploit voids in the coverage about 10yds downfield along both sidelines all day long. I am sure that this was a deliberate strategic choice by the 'Cats, but I have no idea why. And as a Tiger-Cats fan it was very disturbing to watch MacBeth exploit that void in the pass coverage for the entire 2nd half, with no adjustments from Mess’rs Washington & Steinauer.

It will certainly be worth watching how Hamilton attempts to minimize Burnham’s impact on tomorrow’s game.

3 Likes

Sorry, I just thought of something else . . . the Ticats Audio Network has a postgame feature called "Ask Andy Anything" or something like that.
I don't do Twitter . . . someone should ask Andy Fantuz to explain how/why Toronto was allowed to exploit that void in Hamilton's pass coverage on Thanksgiving Day. The followup question would be: What was Hamilton's D scared of?? What were they protecting against, to willingly give up those yards??
It will certainly be a valid question, with Toronto next up on the schedule.

1 Like

Looks like there’s no knowledgeable folks around here. :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

Thank You, JustDewey. I very much appreciate that you took the time to educate me. I was watching a CFL game recently where Tre Roberson was providing very tight man-on-man coverage (on R.J. Harris I think). :ok_hand:

If you have a sizeable lead late in the game the defence gives up all the stuff underneath to chew up more of the clock. The problem is if your offence goes 2 & out everytime they get the ball back then a 14 point lead could disappear very quickly.

2 Likes

That makes sense too. I’ve seen that with our team a few times!

1 Like

Well, so much for Camacho’s Revenge. He was due to redeem himself after last week.

1 Like

He was playing the Defence where you only rush 3 D-linemen in 3rd-and-long and still give up the first down. It worked perfectly -for Montreal- the next week too for a TD.

1 Like

Good God, I’ll never understand why defensive coordinators are so in love with that rush-three prevent crap. It so rarely works the way it’s intended. Usually, the QB has all day to find an open receiver or some poor DB is forced into PI just to stay with his receiver for like a billion seconds.

3 Likes

I suspect it only works when the 3 rushing linemen are built like tanks on roller skates!

1 Like

Exactly. Every once in a while, you get a sack with a rush-3 D, either because the O-line is porous or because the rushing linemen turn into the Hulk on that play. But for the most part, it doesn’t seem to achieve its objective. The other team picks up the first down and continues the drive. Yet DCs are in love with it.

To me, the only time it really makes sense is if you’re leading by a touchdown, the other team is deep in their own zone with one play left on the clock, and the ONLY thing you have to do is prevent them from finding the end zone.

1 Like

I don't know what being put on the 6-game injured list, with less than 6 games remaining, accomplishes, and / or if there are different rules, regarding the 6-gma list, in this shortened season, but I note that, after 3 games on the 1-game list, Frankie Williams has, this week, been shifted to the 6.

I believe it’s the difference between salary counting towards the cap.

I could be wrong.

1 Like

Where's Addison ?

I believe it’s because initially they thought he’d be back after a game or two. IIIC one game IL still counts against salary cap. 6 game does not so if it looks like there’s no hope of return before the 6 game is up, they save cap space with the 3 separate 1game IL now included within the 6 game IL. Or my memory is more screwed up than I thought🥴

1 Like

6 game