What to do about our defensive backfield

I think we should next game as a tryout type game for some of the db's around practice

I think you consider inserting Hebert and Shannon James at safety and /or halfback and then Langster at Bo Smith's corner position . Also give Pierre Singfield and Trae Williams a look .

Anyone get much of a read on Langster last night ? I take it he played the whole 4th quarter ?

The rest of the DB'S can prepare and focus on the ARGOS and then we can see who we lineup against teh ARGOS based on performance

i'd have Langster , Williams or Singfield compete for the 2 CB's jobs with Hinds
and likely keep Dennis at half with Shivers
and possibly Hebert over BARKER at safety

i think Hebert would make the other db's more confident and more aggressive

This would cause some ratio concerns and i'd then put KIRK in over Bolden

As an aside we need to get Thipgpen more touches on offence

Starting those guys in the secondary creates ALL KINDS of ratio problems...

Indeed. Barker wasn't the issue last night. If we had other DBs doing their jobs with an adequate pass rush, Dylan wouldn't have been in chase mode ALL night long. NO safety looks good in that environment -- especially a young one -- period.

Hinds? Not the worst member of our secondary. As a NI player, he has the potential to be a ratio-buster at CB for the future. I did not like the soft-zone approach we were using most of the night. There was simply not enough jam in the approach to allow guys to make plays. It was a recipe for miscues and breakdowns causing huge gains against that receiving corps.

Oski Wee Wee,


Burris nullified the pass rush with quick read and release passes - effectively takes Baggs et al out of the picture and exposes the defensive backfield. The DBs just can’t cover the array of receivers that Calgary can deploy. Play up on the receivers and risk getting burned deep, otherwise it will be a rather surgical dismemberment as it was last night.

Granted. That is what I would have done. Better to force the issue then to allow surgery to commence. :wink:

Oski Wee Wee,


Not that I'm blaming the refs for our loss. Quite frankly the Cats were given a huge dose of humble pie. But for the life of me I can't figure out alot of the calls. When Hinds was burned by Bryant on that long TD, he had also been flagged for PI. Yet when I watch the replay....he didn't even touch Bryant. Bryant blew by him???? And then how do pick plays committed by their receivers end up as illegal contact by our DB's?? The one call against Bo the receiver ran right into Bo and yet Bo gets called??

Brutal calls. And while Browner did get alot of calls against him...an awful lot of flagrant ones were missed...like pushing Mann with two hands out of bounds after hanging onto his jersey for 10 yards.

I believe on that play the ref ruled that the pass was not catch-able - so no pass interference was called. He still should have called illegal contact on a receiver, imho though. This would have been a ten yarder which would have given us a 1st down and extended the drive, iirc.

Yes, the pass rush on many times was right in his face.

Burris was amazing last night, for sure.

I agree 100%. Again not blaming the refs, but things seemed to be inconsistent to me. I also agree that on the Mann play, the call should have been illegal contact even if the ball was not catchable. The call on Bo Smith was brutal, and probably should have gone against Calgary, but how often do they call pick plays ... never. Heck they called illedgal contact on Jamal Johnson when Matt Kirk sacked Burris on second down when he bumped a Calgary player within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, and it had nothing to do with whether the ball was catchable. That drive ended up being a touchdown instead of most likely a field goal. Some of these calls and non-calls may have kept things a little coser, and the game probably wouldn't have gotten out of hand so early.

Anyone else notice that the Calgary dbs never turn to look at the ball. They just run straight at the receiver and hope the ball hits them, or it's thrown short and they run into the receiver. Say what you want, but that should often be called pass interference.

The dbs got burnt on a couple on deep plays that really hurt us. I'm not a big fan of the way they drop back and give all the short passes, particularly if they get beat on the deep ones. If you're going to do that, you can't get beat on man coverage deep. Bo Smith is probably done for the year if he tore anything, and contrary to some people's opinions, I think he was starting to play a little better. If he is out, they will have no choice but to make some changes. They are going to have to get Shivers or Bradley back, or use James or Hebert.

Pass rush wasn't as effective last night. Hate to go back to the refs on this, but did anyone notice the huge hold on Baggs when Burris may the "no look" pass to Rambo. They kept showing that replay, and all I could see is Baggs getting bear hugged by the O-Lineman. I know there is holding on most plays, but that one was pretty blatant, and it allowed Burris to get outside and make that play.

Hopefully they can clean things up a bit next week. This one will suck a little momentum from the TiCats defense, but they now how some films on some areas where they can improve.

Tough one to watch. I had to turn it off around 12:30 (son had an 08:00 hockey practice). With the game being a blow out, I had no problem falling asleep.


I remember one play in particular where the Calgary defender never turned his head, and at the last minute stuck his hand up, blocking the pass coming in. According to the TSN announcers, that was great coverage. They showed it a could of times, and even mentioned that he never looked around. To me, that's screening.

The Calgary DBs, and receivers, definitely seemed to be getting away with more than our guys. Are they just better at hiding it from the refs? Or did someone have a bit of money on the game? [Objection.] Withdrawn. I'm thinking the game might have been a bit closer had the reffing been a little more, uh, consistent. We probably still wouldn't have won, but it would have been closer for sure.

I agree wholeheartedly that the absolute definition of screening was shown on that play. This is pass interference that wasn't called. While I don't like to think that the ref's may have been paid off, I do wonder if they sometimes have some deep rooted (sub-conscious?) bias against some teams that make them look the other way at certain plays during a game. While certainly not the highest paid officials out there I truly believe that they try and do a good job as they are professionals. To think any less you would, imho, would force one to give up your fan status as you would believe all the games are rigged. This is the reason, although extremely entertaining, professional wrestling has never really appealed to me.

That was totally tongue-in-cheek. I have a lot of respect for referees in general. It is a tough, thankless job, and they try to be as objective as they can. I do not believe that any of the CFL refs would be on the take, mostly because I don't think there's enough money involved in the betting side to make it worthwhile (unlike the NBA).

There may be another reason for a possible bias in penalty calling: the colours of the teams' jerseys. A study was done last year at UBC that indicated that teams that wear jerseys with a lot of black on them get penalized more than other teams. The researchers concluded that it was primarily due to a psychological effect on the referees.
Maybe it's time to change our uniform.

You will of course wash your mouth out with soap for speaking such sacrilege. (See I too can say things with tongue-in-cheek.) :slight_smile:

I wonder if there is any way, other than through use of computers, that you can take the human psychology element out of the reffing of games. On second thought, the human element does add a certain flavour that would be sorely missed if removed.

They could always go back to the gold pants instead of the black. At least that might put them on an even footing for away games. :expressionless:

Plus, this doesn't explain the Als' penalty record. Then again, imagine the number they'd get if they wore black.... :smiley:

I'd rather see a page taken from the movie The Longest Yard. Perhaps some of these refs need a wake up call during the game. An errant pass to the mid section or to be inadvertently tackled on a play.

In the words of the famous Knute Rockne........“The only qualifications for a defensive lineman are to be big and dumb. To be a defensive back, you only have to be dumb.?
That being said I guess we should only be playing dumb guys in the backfield!!!!