Mack must strip LaPo of duties on offence

"There have been too many mistakes this season that can be attributed to a lack of attention to the big picture. Running an offence requires tunnel vision. Overseeing an entire team and game plan takes a different mindset. Few can do both well and few even try in today's game.

Montreal Alouettes head coach Marc Trestman calls the plays for his team but he's got Anthony Calvillo at quarterback and a reliable assistant in Scott Milanovich. It's a three-headed monster with experience and confidence.

Winnipeg just doesn't have that situation with its personnel. LaPolice has taken too much on -- for all the right reasons -- as he attempts to do his part in rebuilding this franchise, but that doesn't change the fact that it's not working.

Yes, the Bombers are 7-3 but anyone with an objective eye on the package can see there are flaws, and game management is near the top of the list. LaPolice is a young coach and needs help.

GM Joe Mack must exert his power. The Bombers have a capable offensive mind in Jamie Barresi and Mack needs to tell LaPolice to turn over some of the offensive duties, including play calling."

[url=] ... 39008.html[/url]

playcalling is fine. no matter what happens, people will complain about the playcalling unless the execution is there. if LaPo is calling plays, he's trying to do too much. if it were someone else, we'd be saying fire them. and if someone else calls the plays, it'll probably change only minimally because there's nothing terribly wrong with the current playcalling.

if we had a better O-line, there would be a lot less complaining about playcalling. funny how that works..

7 - 3 and calling for the OC's head, lol, maybe they're just in a rut? Happens you know, especially with the young receiving corps we have.

When LaPo was hired and he announced Baressi as OC except on gamedays when he would take over playcalling responsibilities I always thought that might be a mistake. My perspective in thinking so was that it might be folly to allow a rookie HC to take on so much responsibility and that it didn't make sense to have and OC that took a day off on gamedays. Now before I get a bunch of replies calling me names I do in fact realize Baressi doesn't actually have a day off on gameday, I mean that he gives up a chunk of what most OC's normally do to LaPo on that day. Wearing both hats is something that's not easy to do, even for a seasoned HC, never mind a rookie one. There's just so much more to do nowadays including having the right amount of time to figure out what the defense is doing and getting plays called in to the headsets quickly, etc. I don't think anyone is calling for the OC's head but rather to reconsider whether things might be better served by redistributing the coaching responsibilities. Look at the arguments against - playcalling is fine but execution is not or playcalling and execution both have issues. Is it not fair to consider whether having 2 coaches trying to lead the offense might be a contributing factor to the execution problems? The team is 7-3 team and this discussion is ridiculous - but consider the main categories this offence leads the rest of the league in is the number of 2 and outs and how it struggles to get anything going early on in games. Its pretty fair to question whether this area could be significantly improved. And how many of those 7 wins has the offence lit up an opponent and how many have relied on the defence to keep them in it? However despite what the article suggests at this point it is what it is and I don't think Mack can really step in and force a change in the structure. It would be up to LaPo now to decide for himself if he needs to redistribute the responsibility he's taken on himself.

I have to agree. To be so imersed, as you have to be in play calling, there will definately be a letdown in other aspects the head coach position requires. I just hate how an O.C. controlls this game rather than the Q.B. I don't want to sound like a homer, but look at Durant since calling his own plays. You will never convince me that Buck isn't as astute that he couldn,t call a better game than what is being offered by Lapo. These guys know the playbook, can feel the heat and the tendancies of the D on a play by play basis, and play it out accordingly. I just wish we could go back to the players being more of a factor in the outcome than the coaches.

Those are a couple great posts guys, thanks.

Agreed in some respects. For an offense to be successful there needs to be good communication between the QB and person calling the plays. Teams can spot their OC in the box so they can get a birds eye view of what's going on on the field and communicate that with the QB and compare notes, allowing both to make proper adjustments. I don't have a problem with an OC controlling a game and Buck not making his own calls in the huddle. But can a guy be the OC and have enough time to properly communicate with his QB when the offense is off the field and still be the HC and manage what's going on the field at the same time? Can he be sufficiently attentive to the offense when his attentions must be elsewhere at the same time. I think its certainly more difficult to do in the CFL I think when the playclock is so short compared to the NFL making the game generally move at a quicker pace.

I would also like to see Lapo concentrating more on HC duties than calling plays all game. Let Baressi do what he was hired to do, be the OC and call the plays.

imo, our offence all starts and ends with pass protection which we are failing to do on a consistent basis. Any offense will perform better when the QB isn't usually running for his life and getting pounded.

K. I'll get to my thoughts here but am gonna throw this out..

a few weeks back, i said it.. and noone really responded back so lets try again...

why when the team is winning.. people praise baressi for his play calling but when the team is losing.. it's lapolices fault?

i figure this is a topic that might actually get a response to that question.

when winning baressi gets all the props.. when losing its on lapolice? WHY is that?

I think some bomber fans are pretty sad... regardless of what happens in montreal... with calgary losing.. we are still gonna be tied for most points in the league.. worst case we are 7-4.. who honestly thought we were gonna be 7-3 after 10 and have a chance to even be 8-3 after first 11 games.. anyone? no so whats the fuss? because we lose 2 games to sask?

first game, well it was labour day.. it happens...every year we lose labour day... not really but close.. is it cuz we got killed in the banjo bowl? 7 turnovers right? 5 interceptions right? how is 7 turnovers on lapolice?

gonna say this and just be done with it.... people are hypocrites... HUGE time, that quote u took sir was from gary lawless right? the same guy who 2 days prior to writing that article wrote about how the jets better win right away or people will stop caring.. lawless is a moron and a self admitted non cfl/blue bomber fan.. dude loves the steelers.. hates the bombers and the cfl. He's what some would call the new scott taylor.

back to the topic at hand tho, IMO, they can call the most innovative unbelievable, omg did u see that "plays" alll they want.. or just your basic football plays.. if the oline dont protect the qb, regardless of its buck,brink,calvillo,buriss, whoever... your gonna lose. If any of the coaches deserve to be relieved of their duties.. its 2 of them and none are named paul or jamie.. kyle and pat tho.. sp teams and oline.. THEY ARE our weakness. and these last 2 games.. its shown. Until we get an oline that allows pierce more than 1 mississi (ppi), the same results will happen.

count it the next time, go and rewatch that game, 1 mississi is how many seconds he has.

play calling is fine.. its the players on the field (offensively, its the oline) that arent getting the job done.


even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.