It's only 10 yards for a first down, not 40

:roll: how come when it's 1st and 10 or even 2nd and 5 we try to go for a 40 yard bomb for a touchdown when we could easily pitch a ball 7 yards to get the first? I actually like how Calgary runs their offense. they chip away 5 yards at a time and only on occasion did I see Burris throw one up their, but for the Riders it seems almost every 2nd or 3rd play were going for a 30 yard bomb? and it makes no sense, maybe it worked last year because we had Fantuz, Bagg and Koch but Doug Berry can't expect new guys to be able just to do it like such? and what's with running the same play 2 times in a row? wtf!!! yeah that 21 yard run by charles was sweet but we can't try to do it twice in a row!! :x :x :x

usually the reason is to try and stretch out the defense, to make them back off, stop crowding the neutral zone area.

but it doesn't work if your QB doesn't throw the ball on time or ahead so the receiver can run under it.

throwing it too short, forcing the receiver to have to battle for the ball with the DB does nothing but create problems and frustration.

they need to learn how to create opportunities by setting up the long ball by making them respect the short ball. you just can't go with deep balls just because you can.

it's like running a play action when you haven't handed the ball off 2 or 3 times first! you can't fake a run without making the run.

I played football and I was the QB, I remember when we were running plays that we ourselves had a Play action, it was simpler of course due to the age and talent levels.

we would hand the ball off on the right up the gap, then off the left up the gap. do another run either left or right. perhaps a pitch out. then we'd run a play action. We'd fake the hand off to the right and I would do a nice little fake hand off, which would (you hope) draw in the defenders to the running back enough so that you can reverse pivot to the opposite side of the field, meanwhile your receiver is running to the outside all alone and you just dump it off to him and tada!

in Minor football, 9 times out of 10 that would lead to a TD because there was so much gap in between the receiver and the first tackler that he was gone.

Now in Pro, it's not that simple of course, but it doesn't matter which level you're at you cannot run a play action or fake a run when you haven't set it up first!

it's common coaching 101

Welcome back cflisthebest :cry:

9 out of 10 times hey

I have no issues with taking a shot deep now and then in these situations...catching the D cheating forward, but yeah, the thing is the D does not respect the Rider short game. They cover deep and are willing to give up something underneath on the off chance that the Riders might actually execute said play. This was REALLY personified in the 2nd half of the Grey Cup game last year, and it is scary to see that there is a lack of recognition in that.

One must make the D respect and cover the short ball before you can go deep. it really is amazingly pathetic.

aw Billy, why are ya so sad a? come ere, cfl willa make ya feel betta ey?

:P

ya it's amazing how easy it is to deceive little kids on a football field.

Chris Jones had Calgary cheating into the box a lot with their safety, so they have no over the top safety help for much of the game which is probably why the Riders kept electing to try the deep ball. We burned them on this exact same thing last year when Fantuz had his monster game against Calgary. Unfortunately none of our receivers were really able to get much separation, and when they did the ball was slightly overthrown or dropped.

The guy who started this thread makes a good point
the Riders have been living off that BIG play the last couple years
And it's worked...for the most part

But like the hitter with a great home run swing
Strike outs are the down side
And slumps can be long and painful

One could argue that such a team is lacking in offensive fundamentals
The ability to move the ball down the field
With patience and 5-10 yard completions and runs
Ala Anthony Calvillo

It may not be exciting
But when your back's to the wall
It's efficient
And bloody hard to defend

Losing Fantuz and Bagg may have seriously crippled that BIG Play offence
But without a solid "fall-back" ball control strategy
It was only a matter of time

I agree with Senior and depop. The Riders have to go back to ball control. With a questionable defense, you simply can't afford to have your offense sputtering and going two-and-out all the time. I know the CFL is known as a big-play league, but defenses have really evolved over the years. Today, most defenses will give you the underneath stuff and see if you are disciplined and consistent enough to put together a lengthy, multi-play drive to score. The Riders were able to live on the edge when Fantuz was going deep and drawing coverage from Dressler; they can't do it now (and Getzlaf is not the answer).

this is bang on. Like i and others have posted several times...the 2010 Grey Cup was the perfect example...the Als gave NO respect to the short game...2nd and 2...cover deep...the Riders are only going to go short in that situation maybe 10% of the time...don't get burned deep, give up the first down on the off chance a short play is run...maybe you stop the, maybe not, but it is not a homerun. You make a team execute underneath on 2nd and short all day and eventually there will be a bad pass, drop, run stop or a route jumped (that is the strategy anyways), but if you cover short on the Riders you will give up big plays. Teams catch on.