Offence

There is NO creativity on our offense when EVEN OUR #1 is not getting the the ball ?
..........

"HUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM " the MARSHALL PLAN IS SHAPING UP but our ATTACK is sporadic ....

bye bye Gibson your play calling is Brutal.......

The calls were alright, Cobb made big mistakes, Glenn made big mistakes, our secondary slept in and missed the game.

You can spell.. Sporadic... but you can't spell HOUSTON????

I'm not sure I would do that. We scored 25 points against Sask and would have had two more scores (anywhere from 6 to 14 points) if Cobb hadn't fumbled. And Cobb did get some big yards rushing. I'm more concerned about how soft the secondary is. You can not keep getting into shoot outs with these teams. You need the ability to shut down the opposition more than on occasion.

Not going to hang this one on the OC...

Not going to hang this one on the DC...

The poor,incompetent players on our Defensive Secondary are the reason we lost...

It was a major problem last year and the front office did sweet jack squat in the off season to fix this problem...

For years now Hamilton has not had any decent plays on third and short. We bring everyone in tight and then try to move it through the middle. How bout we actually spread the field some, thereby opening up a raft of options for play calling and also spread the defense; this should make it easier to get the one yard we need for first down.

Yes Cobb gave up two fumbles, the second one was the result of trying to dive into the end zone with the ball out in front. Not a good idea as any defensive player could either knock it out of his hands, or, since the ball is in the lead position be easily fumbled on contact. That being said, the defense allowed the Riders to march the entire length of the field to score the TD and even late in the game, allowed the riders to control most of the clock.

I'd like to have kept Rodney Van personally.If the Bombers can find a Jonathon Heffney out of nowhere, why can't we?

Hmm...Why can't we???

Front Office incompetence as it relates to talent evaluation would be my guess...There's a pretty good track record indicating this....

The two fumbles by COBB cost us two touchdowns and the game as far as l'm concerned. I know COBB is
improving but I still would like to see what the new RB can do. He might be able to hang onto the ball better.
they should try putting both of them in for one game and put thigpin.

You don't usually criticize a running back who get 166 rushing yards on 15 carries. But those two that he fumbled away were very costly. Both were within the Riders 20 yard line. The second was right at the 1 yard line, and I will say that that cost us a TD. Because we would have got the TD eventually.

And then there was the second down play where he ran out of bounds too soon, leading to that 3rd and 2 gamble. Did he not see that big orange stick in front of him, and understand he had to get as close to where it was as possible?

Cobb seemed to be very good and very bad on the same night. But the O line was able to open holes against a D line that was missing two starters.

But I don't know if Cuttino would be better.

The only way to find out is to play him!

And if he's worse?

If he's worse, he's worse.If you don't try you'll never know.This isn't the week to take Cobb out though, other than the fumbles he was good.He just needs to learn to protect the ball and spare the heroics unless they're desperately needed.The first cost us first and 10 in the red zone and the second cost us first and goal.

I hear this all the time, but what is offensive creativity? Do you want to see a plethora of trick plays or something? Offensive football has, since the invention of the forward pass, been about the same basic things: throwing, running and catching. There's not much else you can do on a football field while on offense. So please, clarify what you mean by the word "creativity."

Creativity: "Creativity is a mental process involving the discovery of new ideas or concepts".

Sure, football is all about running and passing, what else can you do? The big thing is how you execute the essentials of the game. You have to have the ability to keep your opposition off guard, never let them get comfortable with your play calling. Our team seems to run the same ol stock in trade plays in certain situations and that is predictable. Let's try and "discover new concepts" and execute the basics in a innovative way. That will keep the opposition thinking because they don't know what's coming next. This is the responsibility of the entire coaching staff because someone, I would think the head coach, has to develope the play book. I think the OC justs selects plays that he thinks are correct under the given circumstances. Just my opinion.

[i]Hamilton tailback DeAndra’ Cobb was both the hero and the goat for the Ticats during the game. He ran for 166 yards on 15 carries, but also fumbled twice inside the Roughriders’ 10-yard line.

“A couple plays out there I think we shot ourselves in the foot and I was the one holding the gun,? said Cobb, who also caught three passes for 29 yards. “The disappointing thing is it wasn’t forced fumbles, it was just me not clutching down, it was just me letting the ball get away from me, so it was just one of those things that happened.? [/i]

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/Tica ... z10diGyka5

blogskee wrote:
" I hear this all the time, but what is offensive creativity? Do you want to see a plethora of trick plays or something? Offensive football has, since the invention of the forward pass, been about the same basic things: throwing, running and catching. There's not much else you can do on a football field while on offense. So please, clarify what you mean by the word "creativity."

blog: For a good answer to your question, read what Weston Dressler says in today's Mark Masters National Post column posted above. Here's part of it:
“That’s part of offence, making big plays,? said Dressler. “You can only script so many shots down the field. Those are the ones that don’t work out when you’re trying to make a big play. It was just a let-it-develop [mentality] and we ended up with some big plays.?
Maybe Mike Gibson should read that too. I cringe when I think back to the first few games of the season when the play-calling was appalling during those early losses. It's improved now but there's still a long way to go. New thinking is needed.

Fumbles, interceptions and drops happen. It's football, and those things happen at every level of the game. If Cobb stretches and gets that TD instead of a fumble,(and the refs don't have a chance to blow that call) the Cats most likely win and there is no discussion about Cobb's other drop or about creativity or whatever. Be angry and upset about the loss. It shows you're a true fan. But direct that emotion in a positive way; not asking for someone to be fired.

What Dressler describes in the above quote is not what I would call "creative." It's execution. There were plenty of times the Riders looked deep and it didn't work out. Case in point, Dylan Barker's INT. They hit a few big plays, but does Bagg score that TD if the DB doesn't break off coverage to get Durant, who he thought was going to run? Probably not.

The Cats also got a few big plays of their own. Cobb broke off a couple of big runs for example. The Cats have taken their shots down field, but would we rather see Glenn force something or take what the defense gives him? I'm happy with 8-yard passes all the way down the field if that's what the defense is giving up.

Having said all that, how can anyone blame last night's loss -- as the OP seems to be doing -- on Mike Gibson's play calling? We can talk about creativity all we want, but the team may have scored close to 40 points without Cobb's fumbles. The loss last night, if it's on anyone's head, is on Cobb's, not Gibson's. I'm not a fan of Mike Gibson either, but he was not to blame for the loss yesterday. If the Cats had won yesterday, would people be criticizing the OC? If Cobb doesn't fumble, and the Cats score 39 points, are we talking about how predictable the offense is?

All I'm trying to say is that to put the blame squarely on the OC like the OP did after last night is illogical based on what I saw from my seat at Ivor Wynne. The loss last night was not, in any way, Gibson's fault. If we're going to throw a guy under the bus, can we at least make sure it's the right guy?