Lamb coacing decisions

Ticats on the verge of being blown out, but still the possibility that they can rally. Lancaster goes for 3rd and and a long yard (more like 1 1/2 yds) and the play is a QB sneak. We turn over the ball and Riders score a major. Things looking bad maybe we should have handed the ball off.

Later, third and less than a foot, in our own end. Lancaster goes for it. Yep, no QB sneak this time when it might work. Nope hand off to twinkle toes Radlin a couple yards deep. Yep the slowest guy on the team and prone to fumble. Result we turn the ball over.

QB change comes late in the game after Lancaster and Eakin share many laughs on the sidelines. Does anyone know what they were discussing? I suspect Eakin is saying, look coach even with my abilities I can not deliver with that Offensive Line, why not put in Williams. Could have been something else I have no idea, but what professional coach stands on the sidelines and laughs with his 2nd string QB when the team is being blown to shreads.

Lancasters days have passed as a football man. When Bob realizes that this team my actually start to improve.

Defense Rules ;

On that QB sneak for one and a half yards,wasn't that when Eakin came in to replace Maas for one play ,that sneak?

Why oh why would we use a smaller player like Eakin to QB sneak ,when Jason Maas is bigger and stronger at it?

That was a dumb a** coaching decision similar to the Bombers coaching on Friday night .

The Radlein handoff must have been Paopao's call, I would assume.

A quarterback sneak on third and a foot is the safe call. That pile should be on cover of the media guide of 2007. It perfectly encapsulates the futility of this franchise, rudderless and clueless and giving the players no discernible program of development week-to-week to believe in themselves.

You can't just get coaches off Balsam Street to run a football operation. We have a downward spiral because there is no context to be accountable or confident.

Am I wrong? Don't think so.

Oski Wee Wee,

Russ you sure have a way with words 8)

That call with the Eakin sneak was the end of the competitive game. I was stunned that Mr. Conservative went for this on 3rd down. When I saw Eakin come in I thought it was a trick play or an attempt to draw the Riders offside. Bonehead for sure!

as per thread title
"Lamb coacing decisions"
I suggest sneaking up on them, grabbing them then gently caressing them, breaking out a nice bottle of red wine and go for some stimulating conversation and see what it leads to. :twisted:

Eakin is not exactly a strong staight ahead runner!
He's weak!

Pure Dumb A** call by coach Lancaster!!!

Why not have Radlien take snaps on short yardage plays?

Ans;Because he doesn't practice them.....Oh OK ,start practicing Radlien as QB on short yardage plays.....

I'm having a meltdown over this season.......can't take much more ...

I'll be joining coaching staff in rates....? :expressionless:

Wait a minute...sheep are running the team?

It makes sense on many levels.

Sorry, cant resist...but down 20-1 with a 3rd and 5 feet on your own 35 yd line midway in the 2nd quarter, bringing in the backup QB for a sneak is a Baaaaaa d call.

Toronto does it and never seems to get nailed? Oh wait.. their OLine is bad and they STILL get 1 yard.

Michael Bishop is the QB who sneaks for Argos.

He's a horse!,no problem.

Our point is Eakin is a smaller more mobile latterally QB ,not powerfull straight ahead like Maas is.

Questionable call by Lancaster ,baaaad call ,

How do you know that Lancaster made that call?

OK, I assume the head coach makes the call on changing QB's ,no?

Dont assume anything with this group.

The head coach is responsible for determining which unit will be on the field at any time. It is conceivable that the OC called this particular play as the best method to obtain the necessary yardage when his unit was called upon. If this is true, then we have 2 boneheads.

My last post went into the here goes try #2:

Two points are clear from this:

  1. There is no clear 3rd-and-2 or less unit re QBs. Most teams use a backup in this role when they have a QB who is less than robust or that they know they are toast if they lose their #1 guy.

This is a pro team that does not make intelligent personnel judgements. Needless to say. However, you would think after the 2003 debacle, losing Danny Mac for a slew of games due to a knee injury from an Argo stand on a sneak in a preseason game, that the culture around the team would have twigged to the idea that a backup QB should be able to follow his line forward for a foot.

Having a backup QB coming in also does not tip your hand if you decide to play action s a trick play. Here again, it's having a clue.

As a coach, in the abstract, you assume that your line can get a foot simply with forward momentum pushing forward against the opponent lining a yard off the ball. But no. There was no context last night for that since there was zero commitment to a running game whatsoever. The Riders' D-line were relatively fresh as daisies since there was no smashmouth happening.

Doomed from the start. The players should have pride in that very simple physical mano-on-mano aspect and get it done. That being said, fullback handoffs are not exactly a primo feature of this offensive approach. I don't think Radlein is the issue here. Ask Barrin Simpson if Julian can bring it, but I digress.

  1. The extent to which Jason Maas is banged up. I prefer a backup QB going in for short sneaks, but regardless, why one wouldn't go for the safe call boggles my mind... Jason Maas pulls a Gerald Ford headplant between the armpits of Marwan Hage and Wayne Smith and we get the first down. 'Nuff said.

Like I said, it's 2007 Media Guide-ready cover material. It captures the season in one still.

Oski Wee Wee,

In the 1st quarter, we were down 10-1 and we are 3rd down on our own 15 yard line. Why did we give up a safety touch when our 1 point had come off a 78 yard punt by Fleming and we were still kicking with the wind? Saskatchewan starts at their 35-yard line up 12-1. A 60 yard kick would have had them in the same position but with 2 less points. Must have been a real confidence booster for our special teams and defence.

Talking about individual plays here and there is pointless. This team suffered a total meltdown on Saturday night. I mean TOTAL!! From the opening kickoff to the final gun, this team had nothing. I mean even the CBC guys didn't know where to start when analyzing the debacle they'sd just seen.

An Argo fan

On the 3rd and 2 there was no misdirection- no backfield in motion, no receivers giving the sense that it was anything but a straight ahead play.

That, combined with the fact that their D-line was getting lower than our O-Line all night made the risk ridiculous.

I admit, I wanted them to go for it- but I also expected something that might have at least made the other team think for a moment.

I recall very well the TV scene of Lancaster and Eakin talking on the sidelines; as it was on, my wife gave me the commentary as follows:

Eakin: "Put me in, coach"

Lancaster: "No, you suck"

Watching Millington and Benefield stunned like that was amusing, they being extremely gregarious most of the time.

Unreal. It really is like dissecting a sandlot team at this point given how out-of-depth the accountability and coaching elements are.

Oski Wee Wee,