Lost in the shuffle.

It seems that with everyone celebrating a great win last night an important point has been lost in the shuffle.

Sandy Beveridge was the difference on Defence last night. He played what was in my opinion his best game as a Ti-Cat.

I have been one of the many on this site who have been critical of SB’s play and I am not afraid to admit that he showed me something last night. Taking nothing away from the rest of the D, because they played in their usual stout style, but Sandy came up huge many times. I think that the only weak spot in the D this year has been at safety. If I was an opposing D coordinator I would have attacked that position all game long. Last night that tactic was not available.

Sandy broke up passes on the sideline and made several key sure tackles when they counted. Just look back at the play he made against Reynolds where SB was the last man to save a TD. Sandy had a great 1st half but he was a little less visible in the second half. In my opinion, that is because Calgary played AWAY from him. They actually adjusted for Sandy’s play midfield.

I would be willing to argue that what we saw form the defence last night was how they could play game in and game out with consistency at safety. If you get a chance, go back and watch the game and pay attention to how there was a chance for Calgary to make a big play only to have Sandy take it away

Great play last night Sandy. Play like that every game and there will be no weak spots on the D.

Sandy got beat deep a few times last night as usual. Luckily, the Stamps recievers weren't so sure-handed.

He saved us more times then he didn't. Caused imcomplete's at least 2x on the field and a HUGE incompletion that looked like a sure catch in the end zone. Stamp's would've been back had they gotten that, thank Mr. Beveridge.

I agree that Sandy played very well. He takes a lot of heat on this forum, but plays hard all the time and is a good veteran contributor. Last night he justified Greg Marshall's judgment about him. Of course he didn't make every play, but he made several, and a few beauties.

As a poster who has also been critical of Beveridge, I agree that he had a good game. Credit where it is due. I'm not sold that he starts on an elite defense (which I believe we all want) but he finally made some plays last night which was nice to see.

It helped that the front seven put a lot of pressure on Hank making Sandy's job a bit easier. I give him a B+ but we need INT's from the safety.

Yah! I nodiced he did well to! He also made some INTENCE hits! Good job SB :rockin:

[

Agreed. While he did make a nice play to strip a sure TD, he was beat by the defender and was lucky that the ball was underthrown.

He was lucky again in the west endzone when Brett Ralph burned him badly and dopped a sure TD that went right through his hands.

Yes, a couple of nice tackles. Nothing outstanding tonight, and was as lucky as he was good.

He did a great job tackling Joffrey Reynolds to save touchdowns when noone else seemed able too.

People love to blame the safety anytime someone gets deep. It is often someone else who has been beaten on the play....the guy who makes the tackle isn't the guy who got beat in every case.....I'm pretty sure that on the play where he stripped the receiver of the ball, he did not have the primary coverage responsibility....he saved someone else's hide on that play..and that is often the role of the safety..

:thup:

Exactly. A few times there Beveridge was the only guy between Reynolds and the endzone. Great game for Beveridge, truly the unsung hero in that one.

Nice use of Canadian spelling! 8)

run quik da spellin police is hear :smiley: :smiley:

Now why would you go and try to infuse some logic into a good witch hunt?? :lol:

Everyone gets beat from time to time, but I agree that Sandy played very well and gave 100% as always.

Come on !! don't try to come on here and pretend that you noticed Beveridge and you say he was "lost in the shuffle"
It was Schultz on TSN that said this last night after the game! If Schultz hadn't mentioned this last night I doubt you would have posted this or noticed him at all.

Here in Hamilton, we have eyes and minds of our own and we don't need that dullard Schultz to tell us anything about football. :roll: I think the "lost in the shuffle" part he refers to is that fact that Beveridge actually got blasted on this site for his "poor" play, but nobody thought to mention the fact that he played well amid all of the post-game threads.

Thank you.

Anyone who thinks Schultz doesn't tell it like it is from his heart from his football experience, is stupid. This guy IMHO doesn't brown nose and says what he thinks. Just my opinion. Anyone who says Schultz is a dullard is more than enough of a dullard themselves to know even to say this. More than dullard actually. Sorry borehamgirl, my take on it...

I agree that Chris Schultz is an honest analyst. He's intelligent and knowledgeable. I enjoy his comments. That doesn't mean I agree with all of his assessments. Many I do; some I don't.

I liked how Sandy Beveridge played Friday night and through the last few seasons. He was an excellent special teams guy and it was nice to see him do well as a starter again. Greg Marshall must think he's pretty good or he wouldn't be starting, and everyone here agrees Marshall is a terrific defensive coach. To me, Beveridge gets "lost in the shuffle" in that many people are often down on him, for whatever reasons. I'm not and never have been. Unheralded or under-appreciated might be better terms for how he is perceived. I don't think all of the criticism he receives is fair.

It could be considered that moreso than his coverage, it was #19's open field tackling, and run stopping that saved us.

Had it not been for this, Calgary would have won 28-24, and Reynolds would have had a 150 yard 2 td game.