Would a bad loss this week against the Larks be the last nail in the Bombers season ?
I don't think so.
If you break the season down into thirds, the Bombers played 4 of 6 on the road, so 2 - 4 ain't that bad.
These next 6 games are 3 and 3, including Als x2, Ssk x2, BC & Argos, I think there are 3 wins in there.
The last 6 are 4 - 2, mostly against East opponents, so 4 - 2 is possible.
2 + 3 + 4 = a 9 - 9 season, which would be playoffs.
Yeah that makes sense.
.....Would an Als. loss produce cracks in an over in-flated ego......it's gonna depend on whose lunch gets eaten....bring it..And if we can continue playing like we left off in the stumps game....you'll have your plate more than enough full....or will we??????
Montreal always brings their A-game to town, I wouldn't expect anything less this weekend. Gotta keep AC on the sidelines by putting together a few drives on offense and our defense has to be physical with the Montreal receivers off the line to try to disrupt the timing routes. If they can do that, we should have a game on our hands.
All I know for sure is that Argos and Riders miss the playoffs.
This is going to be a close game IMO. The Bombers D is going to be angry and fired up after the loss to Calgary, and Bishop's ability to stretch the field will give my Als DBs a lot to think about in man coverage. I also don't think the Als' offensive woes are going to fix themselves overnight. I could easily see either team grinding out a 24-21 win with the game coming down to who executes best in the last three minutes of the fourth quarter.
Yeah, I don't think people are giving Winnipeg enough credit. I've been impressed with Winnipeg's defense thus far. I find it the same situation we find ourselves as a couple of weeks ago when we went to Edmonton. We were suppose to win big, and ended up losing. Winnipeg is starting to get desperate, and in Winnipeg, anything can happen.
I just hope the Als approach this game knowing, that the important thing is to beat up on the East.
It is an intriguing matchup for me anyway.
Agreed there. For all their problems (and they have many), the Bombers' defence is clearly one of the league's best, particularly the front seven. So the Als' offence better darn well bring their A game. Were I in Trestman/Milanovich's shoes, I'd sure be game planning a lot to target the weak link in their secondary, which as I see it is Craver on the one corner; and stay away from that Hefney guy, I wouldn't be throwing to his area much at all.
....or Walls.....every team is now, very aware of this guy....not too many completed in his area...
I doubt Trestman and Milanovich are going to think too much about avoiding certain DBs. If you execute your offense properly, it shouldn’t really matter who’s lining up in the secondary. Calgary showed in the first half of last week’s game that they could put up points on Winnipeg. I’m hoping we can do the same this Saturday. :rockin:
I'll agree to a point; but you can't arrogantly just go with a particular game plan and ignore who you're going up against. It is a sign of respect to design a game plan that avoids going directly up the opponent's best players. . . and a sign of wisdom to tailor your game plan to take advantage of the opponent's perceived weaknesses. So I'd be avoiding Hefney and Walls inside, and instead be focusing on my WRs against their corners, Craver whichever of their 2 Johnsons they'll have on the other corner. That to me is their only soft spot on defence.
....The way Anthony is playing.....he can make a lot of defences look....let's say.... wanting in a few areas...
What's with Trestman, MadJack.....seems he's got a little bit of Kelly ire in him.....apparently told someone on the club to ' get him out of here' , referring to Diamond Ferri after an altercation with another player...... Report says he sent him home in a cab... :roll: ...Will Ferri have his locker cleaned out soon...or do you think Marc will draw the line there and won't emulate Kelly to that extent :lol: ...Ferri seems to be a bit of a trouble maker and might suffer the same fate as Armour in cal. if he doesn't watch out....Nice to see though, that Trestman does have 'some' fire in his belly underneath that cool exterior....He did admit later, however, that he 'lost it'...By giving a guy a cab ride home and raising his voice....he better be careful he might get over-wrought :lol:
I wouldn't shed any particular tears if Ferri has played his last game as an Al. . . Guzman looked darn good in replacing him last game. If he's become a trouble maker, then we're better off without him.
I highly doubt Bombers are going to fumble the kick off again! That`s only reason Stamps took the big lead.
No argument here, MJ. There is a world of difference between confidence and arrogance. I am definitely not in favor of us thinking we can do anything we want just because we have a better record in the standings than the Bombers.
It is a sign of respect to design a game plan that avoids going directly up the opponent's best players. . . and a sign of wisdom to tailor your game plan to take advantage of the opponent's perceived weaknesses.But you're talking about two different things here IMO. Naturally, we want to attack Winnipeg's weaknesses with our strengths. But that [i]doesn't [/i]necessarily mean we should substantially alter our game plan because the Bombers happen to be strong at defensive halfback. Are we going to minimize the involvement of Ben Cahoon, an elite possession receiver, and Jamel Richardson, our most explosive offensive weapon, simply because Winnipeg has good DBs? To me, that is hamstringing ourselves for minimal gain, making ourselves one-dimensional in the air by avoiding areas where Hefney and Walls are covering. I'm not advocating that we chuck balls into double coverage when the play isn't there, BTW; however, I do think that we need to come up with creative ways for our slotbacks to remain productive [i]despite[/i] the admittedly strong cover skills of Hefney and Walls.
So I'd be avoiding Hefney and Walls inside, and instead be focusing on my WRs against their corners, Craver whichever of their 2 Johnsons they'll have on the other corner. That to me is their only soft spot on defence.I'm fairly confident that Trestman is aware of potential mismatches on the corner. Hopefully, this translates into Watkins having a big game (provided he hangs onto the damn football; too many drops, not enough intensity from him last week).
all of this discussion may mean little. i think it will really come down to the als establishing cobourne. if the als get the run game going it will really open up the passing game.. regardless of the cover guy simply because there will be more space in the secondary... and with ac's accuracy that is dangerous...
however, if the bombers are able to limit cobourne and shut down the run game early then the matchups may become a problem... i cant see richardson and cahoon being completely shutdown but it will be tough against hefney and walls. if the als are forced to goto the air more often i think the wide recievers will have to step up... because thats where the blue weakness is at the moment..
either way mtl has a great offense and will be tough to stop. and will put up decent yards and points... how close this game is will greatly depend on the bombers O and if they can put up points and keep time of posession close. imo
I heartily agree. If we establish Cobourne -- something we haven't done the past two weeks -- things will open up. I want more than a token run play in the first quarter this week. Against the Argos, I don't think we called a single running play in our first two drives. That's an unacceptable imbalance, particularly given the strength of Winnipeg's front four. We have to make them respect the run or Calvillo is going to find it difficult to operate the passing game effectively.
Reid quoted as saying he thinks Montreal's D-line is "OK" and that the Alouette linebackers aren't very good.
I hope our D makes him eat his words...
I doubt they'll have a problem with that lol.