Blue Bombers Forum

The frustrations with Youngers defense has been very apparent in various posts. Even when we hold a statistical advantage.
The bend dent break style to me isn't working, even if the other teams doesn't get a major it leaves our defense on the field too long, and doesn't give enough reps to the offense.

I'm not even sure what the problem is at this point. Saw a bunch of 4 man fronts last night and we still couldn't bring any pressure on Bo.

No one has got more miles out of some early good press three years ago than JY. His system has gotten less effective in each of the seasons afterwards. He gives up way too many yards. He generates far too few turnovers. Quarterbacks get a country club experience.

The unit takes on the mentality of the coordinator and that's soft zone coverage everywhere which puts defensive backs in a position where they have an incredibly long cover clock in their head.

No one can be aggressive on our defense. It's all react, react, react.

It has been flawed from the moment he took over and it has only gotten worse since. And even more alarmingly, in the third quarter you've got Deatrick and Rheda yelling at each other trying to explain who is supposed to be covering what, so amgonst our veteran secondary (which should be JYs mains strength) we've got major problems/ confusion. That's 110% on Younger.

Quote from: Jesse on June 12, 2026, 02:19:02 PMI'm not even sure what the problem is at this point. Saw a bunch of 4 man fronts last night and we still couldn't bring any pressure on Bo.

The problem is the system, philosophy and the mentality. What I have been saying for the better part of two seasons. The Bombers don't play defense the way championship football teams play defense. The whole unit plays like it's third and 20 with five seconds left in the game and a big lead. Attack. Get to the ball. Play downhill. Hit people. Create some chaos up front. Dictate. None of those are valued in JYs system.

That's not to say you can't mix in layered coverages and safe zone looks but JY is not the man for the job and he never was. The system is trash.

Bo had all the time in the world to pick us apart. No pressure at all, so he just stood there and waited for an open receiver. I don't get it.

I believe he has been figured out. Look every team has incredibly knowledgeable coordinators including ours. Younger was unique and different in how he does some things, it caught other teams off guard, but I believe that his system has been "cracked" and figured out. A guy like BLM who has been around for so long and seen so much, is not tricked by what he saw and it was apparent, he knew where to go, when to go there.....look he is a very good QB but it was far to easy for him.....

Quote from: 3rdand1.5 on June 12, 2026, 02:26:43 PMI believe he has been figured out. Look every team has incredibly knowledgeable coordinators including ours. Younger was unique and different in how he does some things, it caught other teams off guard, but I believe that his system has been "cracked" and figured out. A guy like BLM who has been around for so long and seen so much, is not tricked by what he saw and it was apparent, he knew where to go, when to go there.....look he is a very good QB but it was far to easy for him.....

It has for sure been schemed. It had been last year and we had this same conversation. The question for Younger at the time, which I had, is what is he going to do now?

Turns out the answer is he has no idea and it's not even so much the X's and O's although they didn't look good either. It's the entire back-footed persona of the defense.

What bothers me as well, is the lack of aggressiveness, we dont create turnovers, interceptions are few , and hard hits even fewer. We have guys trying to arm tackle and running backs are too good for that.
  First thing we need is a hard hitting safety, that can cover
 The only physical lb is Jones
..Wilson only had 2 tackles against a team that ran the ball 25 times+?

Quote from: Pete on June 12, 2026, 02:44:06 PMWhat bothers me as well, is the lack of aggressiveness, we dont create turnovers, interceptions are few , and hard hits even fewer. We have guys trying to arm tackle and running backs are too good for that.
  First thing we need is a hard hitting safety, that can cover
 The only physical lb is Jones
..Wilson only had 2 tackles against a team that ran the ball 25 times+?

We have the talent. We don't have the vision or philosophy or system. Everyone is always trying to contain. To be incredibly disciplined. It's a cerebral, systems-heavy, thinking style defense. Everyone is playing slow. Everyone is trying so hard to cover every inch of turf that no one is playing the play, beating the guy in front of them or disrupting anything. It's always been a problem with JY's system and the bottom fell out last night. It's just gotten so sooo soooo bad.

We're out muscled too often. As mentioned we're seeing too many shoulder hits instead of wrapping up to tackle. JY is mostly to blame but O'Shea is also to blame.

Anyway, this is all just a continuation of what we saw last year. Who in the heck voted " it's fine and just needs time". Like I don't know . lol

I'm not going to re-watch the game. I'm trying to remember if Moxey got beat for a 50 yard pass or did he commit PI resulting in the yardage given up. Same thing last game. Close doesn't count. Williams had the same problem on Lawler.

Strange that we hardly gave up anything to Lawler but Wheatfall burns us all night.

Our DB's seem to be having an issue communicating, and making adjustments to coverage.  While I think JY's DB heavy defence can be effective, a pro like Mitchell seems to be able to pick out the weak points and take advantage of that.  I don't think VA3 has the same reading ability, which is why we feasted on him.

Likewise, the savvy vet Mitchell was able to use our aggressive pass rush against up, stepping up in the pocket or rolling away from it.

JY needs to step it up against savvy vets, and make the subtle changes that are needed to stop them from picking his D apart, but stay aggressive on the younger QB's that don't read as well.

Quote from: theaardvark on June 12, 2026, 04:17:46 PMOur DB's seem to be having an issue communicating, and making adjustments to coverage.  While I think JY's DB heavy defence can be effective, a pro like Mitchell seems to be able to pick out the weak points and take advantage of that.  I don't think VA3 has the same reading ability, which is why we feasted on him.

Likewise, the savvy vet Mitchell was able to use our aggressive pass rush against up, stepping up in the pocket or rolling away from it.

JY needs to step it up against savvy vets, and make the subtle changes that are needed to stop them from picking his D apart, but stay aggressive on the younger QB's that don't read as well.

The defense has always been pretty bad against good zone reading QBs and the list of QBs who have been really effective against it are seemingly growing: Bo Levi, Arbuckle, Alexander and Harris have all shredded our zones more often than not. I'd say we've had some average (or maybe expected success) against Adams (although it looked worse than it ever has in week 1) and Fajardo and we've looked fairly dominant against Rourke/Maier/Brown. It's not looking good.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 12, 2026, 04:56:08 PMThe defense has always been pretty bad against good zone reading QBs and the list of QBs who have been really effective against it are seemingly growing: Bo Levi, Arbuckle, Alexander and Harris have all shredded our zones more often than not. I'd say we've had some average (or maybe expected success) against Adams (although it looked worse than it ever has in week 1) and Fajardo and we've looked fairly dominant against Rourke/Maier/Brown. It's not looking good.

So, we need more man coverage to break up the tendencies we fall into in zone, I guess... not sure how great are DB's are in man.

Quote from: theaardvark on June 12, 2026, 05:52:16 PMSo, we need more man coverage to break up the tendencies we fall into in zone, I guess... not sure how great are DB's are in man.

Whether it's man, match, or zone what we need is a commitment to being more aggressive. We haven't been a good tackling team since JY took over but part of it is the mentality and part is system execution: one feeds the other. When you're consistently being conservative you get a very reactionary, passive defense. Could you imagine a Corey Mace defense not breathing on Bo-Levi for 4 quarters? Or even a Richie Hall defense? Mace would have cut everyone after the game last night. His defense dictates terms even if it gets burned sometimes. The entire philosophy is reversed. When the Bombers had a good defense they did the same. JY has had two years to grow as a coordinator and he gotten worse. Not better.

If we're going to give up 500 yards of offense and 35 points anyway we might as well hit the quarterback.

Quote from: theaardvark on June 12, 2026, 05:52:16 PMSo, we need more man coverage to break up the tendencies we fall into in zone, I guess... not sure how great are DB's are in man.

Problem is the top teams have the top QB's and Bombers haven't done well against these teams in the past 2 years.

Please add the option "it's overly confusing" to the list.

Like him or not, The recovery of Bo Levi from his years of playing poorly and being injured, is a great sports story in the CFL

Quote from: markf on June 12, 2026, 07:38:17 PMLike him or not, The recovery of Bo Levi from his years of playing poorly and being injured, is a great sports story in the CFL

Part of it was Bo's ability to develop the short game which Zac has yet to do. Zac's mid game is elite but the offence for consistancy on quick slants and wideouts

Hard to defend this. Up until last year I thought his weird D was the result of management not getting the right bodies on the roster to host a more traditional defense: hiding an aging Willie. No true tackles. Departure of Jeffcoat. Loss of Bighill. Always hurt Kyrie. Then-newbie LBs like Jones, Griffin and Ayers. And on the opposite end, a stack of talented secondary guys like Nichols, Holm, Kramdi, and the ability "hybrid-ness" of our O'Shea LBs to play in pass coverage (Griffin, etc.). I thought it was by necessity. Now we have Ceresna, a healthy Lawson, and overall a pretty capable (on paper) front 7 that should allow us to be able to play D in all the ways needed to adapt to the situation. Now it appears the JY defense was really a feature, not a bug in his mind.

I won't overreact but it's very clear something needs to change. It was disheartening last night to watch our O march the ball and have an enjoyable series and then for our defense to come on the field and be pushed from their end all the way into our endzone most times.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 12, 2026, 03:14:26 PMWho in the heck voted " it's fine and just needs time". Like I don't know . lol

I think we all know exactly who

We play too passive of a D and rely on the Qb of making a mistake, which in our soft coverage , we take advantage of. Trouble is with good Qb's like BLM, Rourke and Kelly, they're rip you apart in their sleep. We'll do fine against the Edmonton's and Ottawa's of the league, but will struggle with Sask, BC, Toronto and Montreal.

To those that voted its always been bad.

Facts are its been a top performing D going back to the Hall years for a very long time.

Tough game, 100% but let's not get carried away here wow.  That said some good discussions on what is wrong.  More wrong than right currently.   My biggest worry is our run D.

What will this year bring, who knows.  Way too early to know.  Know what we got by labour day.
 
No hiding the fact we have done similar things for a long time, gotta be a factor but don't count out adapting.  Hall did it at a time when many turned on him.  He brought us championships and much success.  Worked out pretty darn good.

I have complete trust in our defensive coaching and schemes but we need to improve and adapt to adjust to some high powered offenses and very good QBs.  50/50 on the mix of players.  Not enough sample size to know yet.  Plus need to see the unit function when healthier.

I believe the Hall / Younger era of D will go down as one of the most successful runs in Bomber history.  I loved me a Ritchie D but these guys are better.  The players play.

Just keep in mind what you're defending. A system that has won nothing and has a 100% fail rate in the playoffs. Gave up 43 points in the playoffs game and two 30+ points in the first two of 2026. One that essentially flies in the face of traditional defensive theory and one that has steadily gotten worse in each of the years so far. 

We've played one good quarter of defensive football in eight tries this year. It's a unit that used to power us to Grey Cup championships and made a winner out of game manager style QB in Matt Nichols. After three years of Younger we need our offense to score 34+ in every big game. Average to below average QB play and we'll go 3-15 with how bad Younger has been to start the season.

I agree with most of the criticism of Younger's scheme. But I think part of the issue this year is talent. Ceresna was a great addition, but the rest of the defence is mostly mediocre. Holm, Ceresna and Lawson are very good. Willy is getting older and was back to alot of one weak push to the outside of the tackle and then backing off and waving his arms. Nichols has lost a step, as has Wilson. Kramdi is not a great safety and Jones is an average linebacker at best. Corners got beaten badly although I think Williams has promise. At best I think our talent on defense is middle of the pack. Have not been impressed with our scouting of new American talent over the past few years, and our drafting of Canadians has been poor. Shay taken fourth overall, into his second year, and still not taking defensive reps? Seems like a wasted pick.

Quote from: bunker on June 13, 2026, 12:58:00 PMI agree with most of the criticism of Younger's scheme. But I think part of the issue this year is talent. Ceresna was a great addition, but the rest of the defence is mostly mediocre. Holm, Ceresna and Lawson are very good. Willy is getting older and was back to alot of one weak push to the outside of the tackle and then backing off and waving his arms. Nichols has lost a step, as has Wilson. Kramdi is not a great safety and Jones is an average linebacker at best. Corners got beaten badly although I think Williams has promise. At best I think our talent on defense is middle of the pack. Have not been impressed with our scouting of new American talent over the past few years, and our drafting of Canadians has been poor. Shay taken fourth overall, into his second year, and still not taking defensive reps? Seems like a wasted pick.

This is it.  usually not one answer to this question, specially in a team sport. It's not Younger or the players, it's Younger and the players.

Watching the game last night, overall, our defensive players simply are not as good as the ALS. There was some legal hitting from their D that we do not see at all.

Our defensive backfield has been average for several years.

I was hopeful for our d line, only two games, one good one, so there's hope there at least.  Linebackers.... Not great.

And maybe it's also that some of the players brought in and released are better than the old hands we stick with, how those decisions are made I don't know,  I've read a lot of comments to that end.

Our o line is better, but still, how many times did Zach have to bail? Too many. Keep that up we'll be seeing Taylor.
Not much space for Brady.

Did the Bombers offered Houston a contact this off season? And if so, did BC and then Ottawa just out bid us for his services.

I don't think our DL was that good in the 1st regular season game either. We still gave up over 100 yards rushing. I've mentioned several times that we gave up a 100+ yard TD drive in each game.

This is a pattern. It's systemic.  Lack of consistent pressure and soft coverage / chase mode in the secondary.

Quote from: bunker on June 13, 2026, 12:58:00 PMI agree with most of the criticism of Younger's scheme. But I think part of the issue this year is talent. Ceresna was a great addition, but the rest of the defence is mostly mediocre. Holm, Ceresna and Lawson are very good. Willy is getting older and was back to alot of one weak push to the outside of the tackle and then backing off and waving his arms. Nichols has lost a step, as has Wilson. Kramdi is not a great safety and Jones is an average linebacker at best. Corners got beaten badly although I think Williams has promise. At best I think our talent on defense is middle of the pack. Have not been impressed with our scouting of new American talent over the past few years, and our drafting of Canadians has been poor. Shay taken fourth overall, into his second year, and still not taking defensive reps? Seems like a wasted pick.

I agree to a point. It was interesting to hear O'Shea say we played 'young' when, in fact, we're fairly veteran heavy. Nichols has lost a step, was apparent last year and looks worse this year. Wilson and Jones haven't looked sensational and I have no idea who's idea it was to flip them, but it seems to be worse, not better. I was on record saying Willie should have been released a year ago. A defensive end who can't get pressure isn't really a defensive end.

All that said, I think this group of players could all be much more effective with a different scheme and mentality. To make all the stupid, safe zone looks work, number one, JY needs hybrid guys who do a little of everything but are usually experts at nothing. He also makes everything complicated. Example: Nichols declining speed would be less of an issue if he didn't have what has to be the longest cover clock in any system in the CFL going off in his head. The DL would probably make more plays if they were given the green light to attack instead of the disciplined rush/pocket collapse style of the last couple years. Since everyone tends to move backyards to safe zones at the snap no one is ever coming downhill. No one ever can come downhill because everyone is a triple move away from giving up a big play and unlike actual football defense long developing routes are always on the menu because no one ever gets near the QB in JYs system. It's impossible to look good in system like that.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 13, 2026, 01:41:24 PMDid the Bombers offered Houston a contact this off season? And if so, did BC and then Ottawa just out bid us for his services.

I'm not sure but the Lions signed and then released him before the Redblacks signed him. That says something. Lions also signed J. Parker and also released him.

When you see how often we are getting beat deep, its very concerning. Our safety is playing shallow to help stop the run, our mlb (Wilson) only made 2 tackles.
 Our coverage ends up being one on one and were losing the battles.
 Kramdl doesn't have the speed to match todays receivers and hes much better at lb.. at least he can tackle.
The whole defensive scheme is broken

what our defense lacks, is a decent safety who can make plays, not look lost out there.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 13, 2026, 01:41:24 PMDid the Bombers offered Houston a contact this off season? And if so, did BC and then Ottawa just out bid us for his services.

I very much doubt they offered him a contract.

Younger wants guys to fit into his system rather than tailor the system to the talent that is here. So far Condell has tailored his system to the talent here. Kudos to him.

MOS, Hall and Younger all played for and were influenced by Rich Stubler. Bend but don't break Stubler. He won some Cups but also got fired lots. To me the system seems ancient, effective against the lesser QB's only.

I haven't seen a good defence anywhere this year. Last night both QB's threw for more than 400 yards. 

Quote from: Jesse on June 13, 2026, 03:05:30 PMI very much doubt they offered him a contract.

Reportedly 3 teams were interested. Maybe we were out bid. He signed a one year deal, probably Ottawa offered the most cash.

Quote from: Waffler on June 13, 2026, 03:32:19 PMReportedly 3 teams were interested. Maybe we were out bid. He signed a one year deal, probably Ottawa offered the most cash.

Reports had him signing with BC. But, BC backed out of the deal so he moved on to Ottawa.

Bonds would be another interesting player when he is 100%.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 13, 2026, 03:40:53 PMReports had him signing with BC. But, BC backed out of the deal so he moved on to Ottawa.

Bonds would be another interesting player when he is 100%.

I wouldn't rule out bringing Bonds back he's healthy. I'm not sure he will be healthy until LD but he could be a good add at that point of the season.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 03:47:45 PMI wouldn't rule out bringing Bonds back he's healthy. I'm not sure he will be healthy until LD but he could be a good add at that point of the season.

I'm sure O'Shea will give Bonds another shot, that seems to be his policy for injured players. Somewhat appalled they gave Nield Schoen's #83 while he's still rehabbing.  Could be the number doesn't mean anything to anyone involved but the Bombers owe him some courtesy for the contribution he made.

As for Houston the Bombers pulled him off the couch mid-season and were probably able to sign him for close to minimum, pay bumps for Kramdi, Nichols and Holms and the signing of Moxie left enough budget for one rookie.  With 4 well paid vets, this is possibly the most expensive secondary in the CFL.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 03:47:45 PMI wouldn't rule out bringing Bonds back he's healthy. I'm not sure he will be healthy until LD but he could be a good add at that point of the season.

Can he cover for 9 seconds any better than anyone else?

If 100% healthy and back close to game speed Bonds is a very good option. 

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 13, 2026, 07:02:14 PMIf 100% healthy and back close to game speed Bonds is a very good option. 

He'd still have to wait his turn for an injury to occur, Moxey signed for 2 years, so they won't be quick to give up on him.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 13, 2026, 07:08:48 PMHe'd still have to wait his turn for an injury to occur, Moxey signed for 2 years, so they won't be quick to give up on him.

Wiiliams isn't exactly a lock and we could change the ratio to add a DB as a DI. Moxey will adjust and just had a slow and bad start.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 07:34:20 PMWiiliams isn't exactly a lock and we could change the ratio to add a DB as a DI. Moxey will adjust and just had a slow and bad start.

I can't see it, Vaval is the backup, how are they going to change the ratio on defence when they only require 2 Natl's?  Secondary depth is thin, if any of the 3 inside guys go down they could be in trouble till Allen gets back, although I guess Griffin could fill in anywhere but corner.  Don't understand why they let Dexter Lawson go, he was capable of playing multiple positions and would probably be content with a PR spot seeing as nobody picked him up yet.

If there was a significant issue with JY and his scheme, I would think we'd have an issue keeping guys like Willie, Holm, Kramdi and signing guys like Ceresna, Moxie, JSK...

Having Hall there to help should make the adjustments for next game easier. 

We need the front office SMS to be raised with the new TV money.  Our D had JY, Hall, Stanley (part time) and rookie coach Thomas.  I guess Osh is lending a hand, but still, I think that we could use at least 2 more dedicated D coaches.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 13, 2026, 07:49:58 PMI can't see it, Vaval is the backup, how are they going to change the ratio on defence when they only require 2 Natl's?  Secondary depth is thin, if any of the 3 inside guys go down they could be in trouble till Allen gets back, although I guess Griffin could fill in anywhere but corner.  Don't understand why they let Dexter Lawson go, he was capable of playing multiple positions and would probably be content with a PR spot seeing as nobody picked him up yet.

In the last game we added an extra DL as a DI. It was Reese. However the premise is whether Williams improves or a healthy Bonds is a better option mid season.

I'm not saying Williams can't develop and become a good CB. It's just an one example how we could change the ratio.

The other as mentioned repeatedly is Ayers. Great on ST's but that's just not enough. Any extra import DB is a better option than putting Kelly in the secondary. We're not getting any extra pressure from Ayers, so I'd be ok with adding Texada after the bye.

ST's are import but we have 12 players that can sub in.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 08:28:18 PMIn the last game we added an extra DL as a DI. It was Reese. However the premise is whether Williams improves or a healthy Bonds is a better option mid season.

I'm not saying Williams can't develop and become a good CB. It's just an one example how we could change the ratio.

The other as mentioned repeatedly is Ayers. Great on ST's but that's just not enough. Any extra import DB is a better option than putting Kelly in the secondary. We're not getting any extra pressure from Ayers, so I'd be ok with adding Texada after the bye.

ST's are import but we have 12 players that can sub in.

Williams will be ok I think, only time will tell.
Ayers>Texada imo but close call there.
Reese make any plays?

Could Texada play halfback because he could potentially go in and replace Nichols.

It makes no sense to compare a corner with a will linebacker.

Nichols>>>Texeda

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 08:28:18 PMIn the last game we added an extra DL as a DI. It was Reese. However the premise is whether Williams improves or a healthy Bonds is a better option mid season.

I'm not saying Williams can't develop and become a good CB. It's just an one example how we could change the ratio.

The other as mentioned repeatedly is Ayers. Great on ST's but that's just not enough. Any extra import DB is a better option than putting Kelly in the secondary. We're not getting any extra pressure from Ayers, so I'd be ok with adding Texada after the bye.

ST's are import but we have 12 players that can sub in.

Saw Ayers take a good amount of reps last game, but he sure didn't make a positive impression
 Once again OShea's favorites hurt us in terms of an effective roster
We can't afford the luxury of having 2 imports only effective on special teams.
 Its also worrisome that our safeties did not seem to make any tackles other than running plays

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 13, 2026, 08:28:18 PMIn the last game we added an extra DL as a DI. It was Reese. However the premise is whether Williams improves or a healthy Bonds is a better option mid season.

I'm not saying Williams can't develop and become a good CB. It's just an one example how we could change the ratio.

The other as mentioned repeatedly is Ayers. Great on ST's but that's just not enough. Any extra import DB is a better option than putting Kelly in the secondary. We're not getting any extra pressure from Ayers, so I'd be ok with adding Texada after the bye.

ST's are import but we have 12 players that can sub in.

They finally have a 7 man D-line rotation and you want to claw it back???  Let it be for a few games to see how it works out.  Hopefully Schmeck comes back soon, I think they'll be in a better ratio position with 2 Natl. DT's in rotation with Ceresna, Gatkuoth continues to take up space.

As for Kelly, I didn't see him get burned or miss any tackles against the Ti-Cats like many others, could be he's getting the hang of it with more playing time.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 13, 2026, 10:12:21 PMNichols>>>Texeda

Probably. But on the other hand, how could you possibly know? Have you seen Texada play half? Speed and youth counts for a lot and his been much too discounted by the current coaching staff over the last few years. I don't care how smart or experienced Nichols is if he physically can't cover the out anymore. Burned over and over by the Cats and the everyone's got the film now.

Too early to write off Nichols
Too early to start Texeda

Interesting points on Kelly didn't notice him, maybe a good thing

I think Willie is no longer that effective......he mostly backs off the line and looks for a pass knockdown.   He lead the league last season in knockdowns....however he isn't great at pressuring the QB or against the run....even when Ceresna is double teamed.    Our DBs seem small and not that fast and our LBs aren't very aggressive.   Wilson had two tackles and the Cats ran for 170 yards?
Zach and 430 yards passing and on most nights that's enough to win games.....a sure dropped TD pass to Nields and a pick in the end zone didn't help either.   We may have to rely on our offence to outscore opponents however we need our running game to be a big part of that.   Brady had 32 yards on 8 rushes....not good enough

I think the defense is over-complicated in a ineffective way.

It's cool in theory that we have guys like Woodbey, Griffin, Kramdi, Smith, etc who can be anywhere at any time... but it seems like all we're doing is creating open zones by having guys drop out of traditional looks.

If teams were trying to run a tricky offense we'd probably be pretty well set up. But as it stands - simple ground game and pass attack exploits us while players scramble around the field on D.

For the most part I think we have the athletes to get it done. Though I'd rather someone else at safety, Jones at MLB (sorry Kyrie but it's over), and we all love Willie but outside of the knockdowns he's a "meh" player at best.

Simplify the D and let them make plays... if they can't, well then we know what positions we need to upgrade ASAP.

Both Wilson and kelly need to be yanked from our starting D. Neither is the answer at their respective position. Totally agree on Jefferson, he's no where near what he used to be and we should have moved on

I can't quite figure Willy out. Most of the time he does a halfhearted rush outside the tackle, they bump him once, and he backs off to fill a lane looking for the pass knockdown. But in the last game in the second half, they lined him up inside, and he quickly beat a guard with a swim move and was in BLM's face.

I get that he's 35, but I can't believe it's just a motor or effort issue, that he's dogging it on 90% of his reps. Is he doing what JY wants him to do? If so, that's pretty idiotic.

Quote from: bunker on June 14, 2026, 03:28:52 AMI can't quite figure Willy out. Most of the time he does a halfhearted rush outside the tackle, they bump him once, and he backs off to fill a lane looking for the pass knockdown. But in the last game in the second half, they lined him up inside, and he quickly beat a guard with a swim move and was in BLM's face.

I get that he's 35, but I can't believe it's just a motor or effort issue, that he's dogging it on 90% of his reps. Is he doing what JY wants him to do? If so, that's pretty idiotic.

100%. Younger's system almost discourages sacks. It's all about lanes, contain, and a controlled, coordinated rush across three or four lineman. The theory is QBs feeling "pressure" is as good or better.

All defensive lines need some discipline and rush lane control but JY takes things to extremes and in practice then, results in an unconventional, unproven and largely ineffective system which doesn't ever impact the game so long as the QB takes the time we afford him and reads it out.

Quote from: towelie on June 14, 2026, 03:13:31 AMI think the defense is over-complicated in a ineffective way.

It's cool in theory that we have guys like Woodbey, Griffin, Kramdi, Smith, etc who can be anywhere at any time... but it seems like all we're doing is creating open zones by having guys drop out of traditional looks.

If teams were trying to run a tricky offense we'd probably be pretty well set up. But as it stands - simple ground game and pass attack exploits us while players scramble around the field on D.

For the most part I think we have the athletes to get it done. Though I'd rather someone else at safety, Jones at MLB (sorry Kyrie but it's over), and we all love Willie but outside of the knockdowns he's a "meh" player at best.

Simplify the D and let them make plays... if they can't, well then we know what positions we need to upgrade ASAP.

Look how tough the Lions LB's are with Sankey and Hladik, they're old school, they ain't dropping back into pass protection or covering twitchy receivers out in the flats, they're tackling the ball carrier and throwing them to the ground. You could see Thor wasn't too happy with the treatment he received.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 14, 2026, 06:47:27 AMLook how tough the Lions LB's are with Sankey and Hladik, they're old school, they ain't dropping back into pass protection or covering twitchy receivers out in the flats, they're tackling the ball carrier and throwing them to the ground. You could see Thor wasn't too happy with the treatment he received.

That said, their defence sucked too. Harris had over 400 passing yards and scored over 30.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 13, 2026, 10:24:49 PMThey finally have a 7 man D-line rotation and you want to claw it back???  Let it be for a few games to see how it works out.  Hopefully Schmeck comes back soon, I think they'll be in a better ratio position with 2 Natl. DT's in rotation with Ceresna, Gatkuoth continues to take up space.

As for Kelly, I didn't see him get burned or miss any tackles against the Ti-Cats like many others, could be he's getting the hang of it with more playing time.

I'm in favour of the 7 man rotation but it comes down to a ratio issue. Our secondary was left out to dry and I'd prefer Texada over Kelly. Scmekel might be a better option in the short term to change that ratio. He has CFL experience. Having 3 import rookie DL may work as the season progresses but is it now? Even Kornelson might be a better option. If he's not why do we keep him around?

I don't know how many times I need to mention that the simple solution is taking out Ayers and let the Canadian LB's sub in for his role on defence. Yes he's great on ST's but is that a luxury we can't afford elsewhere.

I didn't say that Texada needs to start. He needs to be a DI and if not him find anther import DB, perhaps one we had in TC.  Lamont comes to mind.

Quote from: Jesse on June 14, 2026, 12:39:51 PMThat said, their defence sucked too. Harris had over 400 passing yards and scored over 30.

Sasks O-line and protection was execeptional, Harris reads well and releases quickly, and they have great receivers. IMO, they would be a challenge for any defence right now. Have to see how BC's D does against some other teams before fully evaluating them. BC also had 2 rookie corners who might take time to get up to speed. But yes, their D was not that effective last night.

Quote from: Pete on June 13, 2026, 10:24:46 PMSaw Ayers take a good amount of reps last game, but he sure didn't make a positive impression
 Once again OShea's favorites hurt us in terms of an effective roster
We can't afford the luxury of having 2 imports only effective on special teams.
 Its also worrisome that our safeties did not seem to make any tackles other than running plays

Ayers is the 3rd player on ST's. We have Castillo, Vaval and Ayers. Ayers is seeing some reps on defence but he isn't effective. He's not a 1st year player otherwise might cut him more slack as a defensive player.

I like his work on ST's but you have to ask yourself is he the best option we have to use on defence? In 2 games he's had 1 DT and no ST's.  That's a small sample for 2026 but it's still a question on roster decisions.

We might argue that Elsbury at center is the other choice. Our pass pro has been good but our run game was a flop in this last game. I can't grade his performance so it's a rhetorical question. Other than the fact he's on the field for every offensive play.  Anyone know how many reps Ayers gets on defence?

If JSK didn't get injured would he be on the AR instead of Ayers to beef up the rotation?

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 01:52:01 PMAyers is the 3rd player on ST's. We have Castillo, Vaval and Ayers. Ayers is seeing some reps on defence but he isn't effective. He's not a 1st year player otherwise might cut him more slack as a defensive player.

I like his work on ST's but you have to ask yourself is he the best option we have to use on defence? In 2 games he's had 1 DT and no ST's.  That's a small sample for 2026 but it's still a question on roster decisions.

We might argue that Elsbury at center is the other choice. Our pass pro has been good but our run game was a flop in this last game. I can't grade his performance so it's a rhetorical question.

If Ayers was Canadian we'd all love him as a ST ace but he's not and thus a poor use of a roster spot.

Speaking of LB's: McManis, Sankey, CJ Allen and Awe were all available in free agency. We choose JSK. He may have been a better fit or a better SMS cost or we spoke to the other guys and they choose elsewhere.

Allen is a Canadian starting LB.

I think many of us here were surprised we re-signed K. Wilson. He's steady but he's been getting less effective each season. 

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 02:20:10 PMSpeaking of LB's: McManis, Sankey, CJ Allen and Awe were all available in free agency. We choose JSK. He may have been a better fit or a better SMS cost or we spoke to the other guys and they choose elsewhere.

Allen is a Canadian starting LB.

I think many of us here were surprised we re-signed K. Wilson. He's steady but he's been getting less effective each season. 

JSK would have been very good and the right price.  S#it happens.
Wilson was fantastic last year.  We shall see how he plays this year, least of our problems imo.

Those other names would have been too expensive but yes deadly.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 01:48:01 PMI'm in favour of the 7 man rotation but it comes down to a ratio issue. Our secondary was left out to dry and I'd prefer Texada over Kelly. Scmekel might be a better option in the short term to change that ratio. He has CFL experience. Having 3 import rookie DL may work as the season progresses but is it now? Even Kornelson might be a better option. If he's not why do we keep him around?

I don't know how many times I need to mention that the simple solution is taking out Ayers and let the Canadian LB's sub in for his role on defence. Yes he's great on ST's but is that a luxury we can't afford elsewhere.

I didn't say that Texada needs to start. He needs to be a DI and if not him find anther import DB, perhaps one we had in TC.  Lamont comes to mind.

Texeda likely > Kelly after seasoning

Quote from: Lincoln Locomotive on June 14, 2026, 02:49:42 AMI think Willie is no longer that effective......he mostly backs off the line and looks for a pass knockdown.   He lead the league last season in knockdowns....however he isn't great at pressuring the QB or against the run....even when Ceresna is double teamed.    Our DBs seem small and not that fast and our LBs aren't very aggressive.   Wilson had two tackles and the Cats ran for 170 yards?
Zach and 430 yards passing and on most nights that's enough to win games.....a sure dropped TD pass to Nields and a pick in the end zone didn't help either.   We may have to rely on our offence to outscore opponents however we need our running game to be a big part of that.   Brady had 32 yards on 8 rushes....not good enough

Full stop disagree on Willie, he will have another good season.  It's not all about sacks.  He contributes in so many ways.  Generational talent who can still play.  Least of our worries.  His stats on QB pressures are very good.  I don't have the latest figures but last year he was featured on a graphic (TSN) and was near the top.  Calling all stats nerds to update this take!

Bad pick, agree on run game, bad drop.

Quote from: towelie on June 14, 2026, 03:13:31 AMI think the defense is over-complicated in a ineffective way.

It's cool in theory that we have guys like Woodbey, Griffin, Kramdi, Smith, etc who can be anywhere at any time... but it seems like all we're doing is creating open zones by having guys drop out of traditional looks.

If teams were trying to run a tricky offense we'd probably be pretty well set up. But as it stands - simple ground game and pass attack exploits us while players scramble around the field on D.

For the most part I think we have the athletes to get it done. Though I'd rather someone else at safety, Jones at MLB (sorry Kyrie but it's over), and we all love Willie but outside of the knockdowns he's a "meh" player at best.

Simplify the D and let them make plays... if they can't, well then we know what positions we need to upgrade ASAP.

The defensive scheme is proven, effective and generally highly regarded and being complicated/flexible/heavy rotation is what makes it great.  We rotate everyone, everyone can do multiple jobs, pillar of strength, helps greatly with player development and next man up.  Not a great start.  Run D worries me.  I think we can fix it.

Wilson is full stop done done.  Yes Jones is very good.  LB crew miss Kramdi.  He shouldn't be at S but we have no other better option (yet).

Willie is a top player at the end of a great career that still have a lot to give.  Nobody will ever call him "meh" with any certainty or validity. See above.

Disagree with most of what you said but thanks for your take.  Agree that we have the players, could use a good safety and maybe another corner.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 14, 2026, 04:28:27 PMJSK would have been very good and the right price.  S#it happens.
Wilson was fantastic last year.  We shall see how he plays this year, least of our problems imo.

Those other names would have been too expensive but yes deadly.Texeda likely > Kelly after seasoning
Full stop disagree on Willie, he will have another good season.  It's not all about sacks.  He contributes in so many ways.  Generational talent who can still play.  Least of our worries.  His stats on QB pressures are very good.  I don't have the latest figures but last year he was featured on a graphic (TSN) and was near the top.  Calling all stats nerds to update this take!

Bad pick, agree on run game, bad drop.
The defensive scheme is proven, effective and generally highly regarded and being complicated/flexible/heavy rotation is what makes it great.  We rotate everyone, everyone can do multiple jobs, pillar of strength, helps greatly with player development and next man up.  Not a great start.  Run D worries me.  I think we can fix it.

Wilson is full stop done done.  Yes Jones is very good.  LB crew miss Kramdi.  He shouldn't be at S but we have no other better option (yet).

Willie is a top player at the end of a great career that still have a lot to give.  Nobody will ever call him "meh" with any certainty or validity. See above.

Disagree with most of what you said but thanks for your take.  Agree that we have the players, could use a good safety and maybe another corner.

Import LB's don't tend to be among the highest paid players on defence. The Lions have some big $$$ players on their roster and still managed to sign Sankey. JSK might have been a good addition but Sankey would have been a better addition.

Lions released Awe when they signed Sankey so I don't think he's more expensive than JSK.

Whether these LB's were considered a good team fit is another issue. I don't know if we even considered any of the alternates I suggested or how much difference in SMS hit.

I think I did suggest signing Sankey over K. Wilson might not have been as much as we think. We'll see if they list salaries across the league at that position at some point.

EDIT: Based on 2025 salaries Sankey was earning about $50K more than JSK. Both were allowed to go to free agency so both might have seen a drop from 2025.

My proposal would have been release K.Wilson, not sign JSK. Sign Sankey and use either a rookie import or our Canadian LB's as depth. Or whatever else fit into the budget.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 04:50:30 PMImport LB's don't tend to be among the highest paid players on defence. The Lions have some big $$$ players on their roster and still managed to sign Sankey. JSK might have been a good addition but Sankey would have been a better addition.

Lions released Awe when they signed Sankey so I don't think he's more expensive than JSK.

Whether these LB's were considered a good team fit is another issue. I don't know if we even considered any of the alternates I suggested or how much difference in SMS hit.

I think I did suggest signing Sankey over K. Wilson might not have been as much as we think. We'll see if they list salaries across the league at that position at some point.

Sankey would have been very expensive imo.  Went to highest bidder no doubt.

Agree we need the salaries!

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 14, 2026, 04:55:37 PMSankey would have been very expensive imo.  Went to highest bidder no doubt.

Agree we need the salaries!

Tony Jones is our only LB whose salary is listed at $117.5K in the unofficial roster file. That would have made him # 13 of 15 in 2025. John Jones was shown to be at about $3K more landing at # 12. So there is a bit of cumulative cost involved.

AJ Allen is reported to be earning $490K over 2 years, up from $111K last year. His advantage is he's a Canadian but that's big money.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 05:04:36 PMTony Jones is our only LB whose salary is listed at $117.5K in the unofficial roster file. That would have made him # 13 of 15 in 2025. John Jones was shown to be at about $3K more landing at # 12. So there is a bit of cumulative cost involved.

AJ Allen is reported to be earning $490K over 2 years, up from $111K last year. His advantage is he's a Canadian but that's big money.

I would bet our LBs are a good deal and those stars as suggest before were too expensive.   That's a good deal for TJ. 

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 04:50:30 PMImport LB's don't tend to be among the highest paid players on defence. The Lions have some big $$$ players on their roster and still managed to sign Sankey. JSK might have been a good addition but Sankey would have been a better addition.

Lions released Awe when they signed Sankey so I don't think he's more expensive than JSK.

Whether these LB's were considered a good team fit is another issue. I don't know if we even considered any of the alternates I suggested or how much difference in SMS hit.

I think I did suggest signing Sankey over K. Wilson might not have been as much as we think. We'll see if they list salaries across the league at that position at some point.

EDIT: Based on 2025 salaries Sankey was earning about $50K more than JSK. Both were allowed to go to free agency so both might have seen a drop from 2025.

My proposal would have been release K.Wilson, not sign JSK. Sign Sankey and use either a rookie import or our Canadian LB's as depth. Or whatever else fit into the budget.

I don't think Younger would be interested in old school linebackers like Sankey or Moncrief, he's looking for players with speed and mobility over brute force, even on the D-line.  Not enough beef on the defence IMO.

As for A.J. Allen he is now the highest-paid linebacker in the CFL due to his Natl. status, earning $240,000 in hard money with a maximum value of $246,000.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 14, 2026, 05:29:06 PMI don't think Younger would be interested in old school linebackers LB like Sankey or Moncrief, he's looking for players with speed and mobility over brute force, even on the D-line.  Not enough beef on the defence IMO.

As for A.J. Allen he is now the highest-paid linebacker in the CFL due to his Natl. status, earning $240,000 in hard money with a maximum value of $246,000.

That would be fine if the front 7 could get pressure on the QB and the secondary could cover until they did. How did that work out for us in 2025 and so far in 2026? We can't stop a team when we need to and the game is on the line.

That was true often last year when we needed to force a 2 and out. Even worse as we've already seen this year, stopping a team with 2nd and 20 yards is almost always a fail. Longer the yardage needed the worse we seem to be.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 06:40:11 PMThat would be fine if the front 7 could get pressure on the QB and the secondary could cover until they did. How did that work out for us in 2025 and so far in 2026? We can't stop a team when we need to and the game is on the line.

That was true often last year when we needed to force a 2 and out. Even worse as we've already seen this year, stopping a team with 2nd and 20 yards is almost always a fail. Longer the yardage needed the worse we seem to be.

The D-line played very well against VA and the Stamps, not sure what the Ti-Cats were doing but even when the Bombers brought the house they managed to pickup every loose pass rusher. Credit has to go to BLM for getting rid of the ball so quickly with accuracy, he knew his target before the snap and was right almost every time.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 14, 2026, 07:35:50 PMThe D-line played very well against VA and the Stamps, not sure what the Ti-Cats were doing but even when the Bombers brought the house they managed to pickup every loose pass rusher. Credit has to go to BLM for getting rid of the ball so quickly with accuracy, he knew his target before the snap and was right almost every time.

Rountree had 124 yards on 23 carries. There were more run plays than pass completions. Total was 171 yards. Against the Stamps we gave up 150 yards rushing. In neither case can you make an argument that the DL played well. 

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 06:40:11 PMThat would be fine if the front 7 could get pressure on the QB and the secondary could cover until they did. How did that work out for us in 2025 and so far in 2026? We can't stop a team when we need to and the game is on the line.

That was true often last year when we needed to force a 2 and out. Even worse as we've already seen this year, stopping a team with 2nd and 20 yards is almost always a fail. Longer the yardage needed the worse we seem to be.

Way to early to know how our defense will perform this year.  Last year near the top in pts allowed.

We didn't have defensive problem last year, our O sucked.

Got pressure game one, laid a egg game 2.  Bo is looking like he is 30 again.

Run D worries me so far but so much time to adjust.

Lets give it a 1/4 to 1/2 season before we claim to know what this team will be like for 2026.

We are deep at LB, we had a stud go down, that sucked but over paying would have too.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 14, 2026, 08:17:36 PMWay to early to know how our defense will perform this year.  Last year near the top in pts allowed.

We didn't have defensive problem last year, our O sucked.

Got pressure game one, laid a egg game 2.  Bo is looking like he is 30 again.

Run D worries me so far but so much time to adjust.

Lets give it a 1/4 to 1/2 season before we claim to know what this team will be like for 2026.

We are deep at LB, we had a stud go down, that sucked but over paying would have too.

You're failing to understand or see what is a systemic problem. Points are not the only measurement. Yards given up, field position gained and TOP allowed.

It has little to do with what we've seen so far this season. It's the same problems we've had last year.

Yes our offence was a problem. OTOH, we couldn't push the opponent off the field often enough. I used the example of allowing a 100+ yard drive in both games so far.

This is not new. Often in games where the score was close, we COULD NOT push the opponent off the field. A good defence does that. 2 and out.

We've overpaid a multitude of players. Without knowing what the budget looks like we can't really say we couldn't have afforded Sankey for example. We made choices and we'll see how it works out.

Here are my 2 cents worth after 2 games.

I think our O will be ok BUT we will need to be a lot better running the ball.

Our D in my opinion are not physical enough. And our pass coverage is way too passive. We have way too many uncontested catches. Now I know that every D gives up those type of catches but to me we do that more than any other team. I also think that Wilson is not the middle linebacker we need. I rarely notice him in the game- don't recall him making any hit on a RB in the backfield or at the line. Kramdi at Safety is also a failure- need him at SAM OR WIL. There has to be an intelligent, fast, hard hitting Safety out there. Cam Allen before he got hurt I thought was a step behind the play most of the time this year. I know not a large sample size but...

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 10:08:00 PMYou're failing to understand or see what is a systemic problem. Points are not the only measurement. Yards given up, field position gained and TOP allowed.

It has little to do with what we've seen so far this season. It's the same problems we've had last year.

Yes our offence was a problem. OTOH, we couldn't push the opponent off the field often enough. I used the example of allowing a 100+ yard drive in both games so far.

This is not new. Often in games where the score was close, we COULD NOT push the opponent off the field. A good defence does that. 2 and out.

We've overpaid a multitude of players. Without knowing what the budget looks like we can't really say we couldn't have afforded Sankey for example. We made choices and we'll see how it works out.

You're failing to understand what has been the pilar of success for this club.  Hall's and Younger's D has been very good for almost a decade.  You are failing to understand that we are two game in.  The players you suggested we should have signed were more expensive.

We have a different set of players this year and a different set of problems. 

We have some injuries, a better DL which will take a little time to settle in.  Our LBs are very good but having Kramdi change positions has brought challenges.  Losing Knox really hurt.  Our backend on D is new and will take time to sort out.

I firmly believe that many have been too hard on our defense, they were decent last year and were on the field way too much with an offense that sucked and was hurt.

Last time I checked the goal of the game is to score more points than the other team. Points allowed can't be so quickly written off.  Yes the other metrics are important.

I have seen this type of reaction before.  Have a couple challenging games and the negativity just gets poured on. Patience.  Game 2.

You nailed it, we spend money elsewhere and couldn't afford to sign a top LB, which imo wouldn't have solved our problems, it actually could have created them (stretching our SMS).

If I was running the club, I would spend money on a safety for sure, maybe a corner (wait a few games 1st), maybe a reciever but overall I would stay the course and see if we have the answers in house.

We have a much different take on the club and that's ok.  I wouldn't have even considered breaking the bank at LB, money better spend elsewhere considering we have some of the best depth at LB is the league.  We don't have the star power but we have a good mix of vets and prospects and value guys.

Last year is done.  We have had a lot of turnover on D.  Yes a lot faces back and same schemes but we lost some talent.  Have you forgotten how successful Hall's and Younger's D has been?

Does our D look good, nope.  Run D is swiss cheese, will we improve, maybe.  Cautiously optimistic.  Way too early to know much about the club.  My money is on Hall and Younger figuring it out.  Have done that before.

Quote from: TrueBlue4 on June 14, 2026, 11:26:18 PMHere are my 2 cents worth after 2 games.

I think our O will be ok BUT we will need to be a lot better running the ball.

Our D in my opinion are not physical enough. And our pass coverage is way too passive. We have way too many uncontested catches. Now I know that every D gives up those type of catches but to me we do that more than any other team. I also think that Wilson is not the middle linebacker we need. I rarely notice him in the game- don't recall him making any hit on a RB in the backfield or at the line. Kramdi at Safety is also a failure- need him at SAM OR WIL. There has to be an intelligent, fast, hard hitting Safety out there. Cam Allen before he got hurt I thought was a step behind the play most of the time this year. I know not a large sample size but...

Very good points
Agree all but think Wilson is ok
Physicality an issue
Kramdi at S a big mistake, I never thought he would even be considered there, said early in camp he wouldn't and ate crow.  Time for the team to eat bird and make that change.  He is a very good Cdn LB.  He isn't the answer a safety.
I think our pass coverage will come around.

Agree about the run game, with it we are sunk.  We live and die with Brady.  Need the OL to improve on how they open holes for him.  Will take time, I called it early the line would need time to gel, which I thought has looked better than expected.  Game is won on the LOS, if our OL and DL can start to cook, everything else falls in place.

Questions for me are:
Has Nichols and Moxey lost a step? I have no idea.  I believe more in Nichols as I know him more. Moxey might need more time to learn our systems (guessing).

Can Williams learn the craft quick enough?

Can our extra DB that rotates in play good enough on max pass pro?

Can our defensive coaches quickly adapt in game, adjust to our current talent and find creative ways to keep teams guessing?

Can we get healthy on D by mid season? Will Woodbey come back?

Can some of our younger players get enough reps on teams and rotation to start to make an impact?

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 14, 2026, 08:12:29 PMRountree had 124 yards on 23 carries. There were more run plays than pass completions. Total was 171 yards. Against the Stamps we gave up 150 yards rushing. In neither case can you make an argument that the DL played well. 

that was the same problem last year. Yes, our offense sucked mightily, but dang, our defense couldn't stop the run last year and we opted to go with Wilson as our MLB??, while Sankey and Awe were free agents, man that was just plain dumb.

Quote from: dd on June 15, 2026, 02:00:37 AMthat was the same problem last year. Yes, our offense sucked mightily, but dang, our defense couldn't stop the run last year and we opted to go with Wilson as our MLB??, while Sankey and Awe were free agents, man that was just plain dumb.

Sorry no, we were #3 against the run in 2025 as per below

Fact is we stopped the run at the 3rd best clip in the league, hopefully we can improve after a couple bad games

Wilson is a good LB, those other names are good but too expensive

We also signed Knox who is a top player but got hurt, it happens

Quote from: dd on June 15, 2026, 02:00:37 AMthat was the same problem last year. Yes, our offense sucked mightily, but dang, our defense couldn't stop the run last year and we opted to go with Wilson as our MLB??, while Sankey and Awe were free agents, man that was just plain dumb.

Not sure about Sankey or Awe but it's bizarre to the degree we don't value pressure or aggression under Younger.

If we're going to give up 450 yards of offense and 35 points we might as well give it up in burst plays while hitting the QB and forcing some off balance throws. We'll at least also generate some turnovers and be harder to play against. All of these 10-15 play drives in three down football is insane and basically unheard of. If you know the game at all you know that to be true.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 03:05:39 AMNot sure about Sankey or Awe but it's bizarre to the degree we don't value pressure or aggression under Younger.

If we're going to give up 450 yards of offense and 35 points we might as well give it up in burst plays while hitting the QB and forcing some off balance throws. We'll at least also generate some turnovers and be harder to play against. All of these 10-15 play drives in three down football is insane and basically unheard of. If you know the game at all you know that to be true.

Hall and Younger's defensive scheme is well respected, proven and has brought incredible success to this ball club.  Brought us two cups, cup appearances and much success after a dark period for the Bombers.  If you know the game at all you will remember this incredible success we have had with these coaches.  New year, new players but rooted in previous success.

I believe that Hall and Younger will be remembered as some of the best defensive minds of this era and our incredible performances over the last number of years as some of the best the club has seen for decades.

Long way to go this year but also lots of time to correct a couple regrettable performances on D.

Top 3 in points allowed last year.  A good run defense.  Something to build on.

Younger values pressure, its a balance.  3 man rush means a lot of max pass pro.  League been that way for years.  Got pressure the 1st game, 2nd not so much.  Way too early to know how this will pan out throughout the season.  Not worried about our DL at all if healthy.

In terms of awe and Sankey, we had already signed Santos Knox, to me this shows that we recognized that Jones at MLB wasn't great, unfortunately he got injured. With Awe no team has resigned him even when he had 100 tackles plus so no way he fits in.
 Obvious to most of us Wilson isn't the answer, personally I'm hoping that we do move Jones back to mlb, it isn't optimal but still better than Wilson. As soon as we get Smith back he should be taking more of Wilson's reps. This will allow us to move an import to safety, whether its Allen when he's healthy or bring back Lamont. Also its time to sit Ayers and bring in another db or even a receiver hes not an effective lb in the regular rotation.
  In looking at the defense as a whole its now at 85% of the voters stating that Younger defense just isnt good enough anymore

Quote from: Pete on June 15, 2026, 05:15:19 AMIn terms of awe and Sankey, we had already signed Santos Knox, to me this shows that we recognized that Jones at MLB wasn't great, unfortunately he got injured. With Awe no team has resigned him even when he had 100 tackles plus so no way he fits in.
 Obvious to most of us Wilson isn't the answer, personally I'm hoping that we do move Jones back to mlb, it isn't optimal but still better than Wilson. As soon as we get Smith back he should be taking more of Wilson's reps. This will allow us to move an import to safety, whether its Allen when he's healthy or bring back Lamont. Also its time to sit Ayers and bring in another db or even a receiver hes not an effective lb in the regular rotation.
  In looking at the defense as a whole its now at 85% of the voters stating that Younger defense just isnt good enough anymore

We signed JSK on 02/10 but could have been reaching out to the other LB's in the tampering window Earlier in the case of Awe. I don't know that we did or didn't but we did have an opportunity to do that.

Awe was signed by the Als on 02/11. Sankey was released long before free agency and signed by the Lions on 12/11. So you are in error on that comment.

It's not clear when or if Allen will return. It seemed clear we made a decision before TC to move Kramdi to safety. There didn't seem to be any real competition behind Kramdi to win that spot. A cumulative decision based on moving all our LB's into different roles.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 03:35:11 AMHall and Younger's defensive scheme is well respected, proven and has brought incredible success to this ball club.  Brought us two cups, cup appearances and much success after a dark period for the Bombers.  If you know the game at all you will remember this incredible success we have had with these coaches.  New year, new players but rooted in previous success.

I believe that Hall and Younger will be remembered as some of the best defensive minds of this era and our incredible performances over the last number of years as some of the best the club has seen for decades.

Long way to go this year but also lots of time to correct a couple regrettable performances on D.

Top 3 in points allowed last year.  A good run defense.  Something to build on.

Younger values pressure, its a balance.  3 man rush means a lot of max pass pro.  League been that way for years.  Got pressure the 1st game, 2nd not so much.  Way too early to know how this will pan out throughout the season.  Not worried about our DL at all if healthy.

You mean the defence that gave up 384 yards on 24/34 pass attempts and 166 yards in the Eastern Semi? That's 550 yards we gave up in that game.

I think you need to clean your glasses because you are just not seeing the reality. Our defence does well against bad teams or good teams with significant injury issues.

Against top teams that are healthy not so much. There is a reason we finished 4th in the West and it wasn't just because of our offence.

I mentioned it about the last game. When a defence can't get the opponent off the field, they lose TOP and field position which keeps your own offence off the field.

Offences and defences have best before dates. Change is fluid and adaptive over time.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 01:44:29 PMWe signed JSK on 02/10 but could have been reaching out to the other LB's in the tampering window Earlier in the case of Awe. I don't know that we did or didn't but we did have an opportunity to do that.

Awe was signed by the Als on 02/11. Sankey was released long before free agency and signed by the Lions on 12/11. So you are in error on that comment.

It's not clear when or if Allen will return. It seemed clear we made a decision before TC to move Kramdi to safety. There didn't seem to be any real competition behind Kramdi to win that spot. A cumulative decision based on moving all our LB's into different roles.

we dont know of we reached out for Sankey, he may have selected BC for a number of reasons, Like I said Awe likely not a fit. They did get Santos what is disturbing is we seem. To have given Wilson the sppt by default rather than bringing in better competition

Quote from: Pete on June 15, 2026, 02:04:19 PMwe dont know of we reached out for Sankey, he may have selected BC for a number of reasons, Like I said Awe likely not a fit. They did get Santos what is disturbing is we seem. To have given Wilson the sppt by default rather than bringing in better competition

All probably true, although Awe would have been a Bomber in 2020 but was released due to the shutdown. Montreal ha been a top defensive unit so it says something that they signed him. It's an unfortunate pattern with the team that some roster spots are won by default. I suppose that's true with every team to some degree but it seems we have a harder time moving on from vets. J. Thomas comes to mind. We don't sign replacements in free agency and we don't draft them either.

Ayers would be another example. Good ST players are easy to find. If a DI isn't moving up and becoming more versatile, he should be replaced. Small rosters and ratio dictate that. Was there really any doubt he's make the roster even though we brought in a bunch of new LB's. Not one even was kept on the PR.

I think many of us felt that Jones was not that great a MLB, but Wilson is worse. I'd switch them back now and start rotating in the Canadians.

Considering our defense uses almost all of our DI spots, there is no excuse for how bad the defense has been. There seems to always be someone open on 2nd down.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 01:54:18 PMYou mean the defence that gave up 384 yards on 24/34 pass attempts and 166 yards in the Eastern Semi? That's 550 yards we gave up in that game.

I think you need to clean your glasses because you are just not seeing the reality. Our defence does well against bad teams or good teams with significant injury issues.

Against top teams that are healthy not so much. There is a reason we finished 4th in the West and it wasn't just because of our offence.

I mentioned it about the last game. When a defence can't get the opponent off the field, they lose TOP and field position which keeps your own offence off the field.

Offences and defences have best before dates. Change is fluid and adaptive over time.

You mean the D that brought us cups and cup appearances?  The Bomber defense has been incredible for a long period of time.  Past success often can ground future success.  That's reality.  You are hyper focused on the last 3 games, I look at things with a wider lens.  Our defense has beat all teams for almost a decade consistently under this scheme.  That's the facts, that's reality.  Last year our D was fine (near top in pts allowed, rush yards, a likely a few other areas).  Previously lights out good.  Last year our O sucked which stressed out the D.  With balance on O this year, D should be better.  Patience pays off, always has, always will with this version of the Bombers.  Deep breath.  Game 2.  Is our D good right now, nope.  Can it be, hell yes.  Does our schemes work, 100%.  Can and will they be better, absolutely.

Our D and O are not expired (yet).  Yes we can adapt and change.  I see an average club that likely can improve by 1/4 or mid season.  We need to digest the changes to the our roster imo.

Just b/c you see it one way doesn't mean that's reality.  I respect your opinion but it's far from mine and that's ok.  Let's leave it there.  I don't appreciate the glasses shot but do enjoy the back and forth otherwise.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 03:22:29 PMYou mean the D that brought us cups and cup appearances?  The Bomber defense has been incredible for a long period of time.  Past success often can ground future success.  That's reality.  You are hyped focused on the last 3 games, I look at things with a wider lens.  Our defense has beat all teams for almost a decade consistently under this scheme.  That's the facts, that's reality.  Last year our D was fine.  Previously lights out good.  Last year our O sucked which stressed out D.  With balance on O this year, D should be better.

Just b/c you see it one way doesn't mean that's reality.  I respect your opinion but it's far from mine and that's ok.  Let's leave it there.

This defense also is not the same defense of years past. As for the scheme, that's just not true. The scheme changed when Hall was swapped for Younger. Sure, some aspects did not but more or less it's a different defense.

Now whether it's players or scheme, the run-game has been lacking and teams are converting 2nd and medium/long all day long on us. The "heavy in the secondary" was great because teams couldn't move the ball in the air with the extra DBs. That is simply no longer the case. We all saw it.

Quote from: kkc60 on June 15, 2026, 03:27:12 PMThis defense also is not the same defense of years past. As for the scheme, that's just not true. The scheme changed when Hall was swapped for Younger. Sure, some aspects did not but more or less it's a different defense.

Now whether it's players or scheme, the run-game has been lacking and teams are converting 2nd and medium/long all day long on us. The "heavy in the secondary" was great because teams couldn't move the ball in the air with the extra DBs. That is simply no longer the case. We all saw it.

The schemes are similar.  Hall is still here.  The past success of the D is routed with Hall's schemes which have been modified / improved / tweaked by Younger.  It's not the same yes, but similar.  Splitting hairs imo.  Our run D this year has been poor.  Last year top 3.  The DB coverage has been weak this year but it's two games and it's early with some new faces.  To early to call our D anything until a larger sample size of games.  I have supported and believed in Hall from the beginning.  Maybe wanted him gone and called for his head.  He brought us much success and Younger the same.  2 games in.  Let's set it bread rise before we eat it LOL.  I believe having Kramdi at S was a big mistake but we go nobody else.  I would air lift in somebody but doubt that happens.

I see more similarities than differences from Hall to Younger.  I slightly prefer Younger.  Both very good imo.  Both over criticized imo.

The mood on here by some feels like our pre-mini dynasty run with Hall on D.  Ok ok maybe not that bad.  The forum was pretty manic back then LOL (dry spells will do that LOL).  I have some hope, we shall see.  Not there yet!

I believe in the schemes, mix of current players, 50/50 LOL

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 04:01:04 PMThe schemes are similar.  Hall is still here.  The past success of the D is routed with Hall's schemes which have been modified / improved / tweaked by Younger.  It's not the same yes, but similar.  Splitting hairs imo.  Our run D this year has been poor.  Last year top 3.  The DB coverage has been weak this year but it's two games and it's early.  To early to call our D anything until a larger sample size.  I have supported and believed in Hall from the beginning.  Maybe wanted him gone and called for his head.  He brought us much success and Younger the same.  2 games in.  Let's set it bread rise before we eat it LOL.  I believe having Kramdi at S was a big mistake but we go nobody else.  I would air lift in somebody but doubt that happens.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Hall ran MOD - it's a cover 4 that turns to man when receivers run routes that past the linebackers (who stayed down and in), so like 10 yard routes plus. If they got short short routes they'd stay. The MLB was more of a QB reader. This obviously works less good if more routes are short because you have the cover 4 drop not doing much. He'd then weave in soft technique that looked like MOD but was actually the opposite and allowed corners to jump stuff.  He'd essentially get you used to taking the flats and hooks/outs and then he'd take it away and suddenly a corner and a half are flying down in. A lot of defensive coordinators called that trap although I don't think the Bombers did at the time.

Younger runs much more pure zone. It starts as zone. It stays zone. There's a lot more moving pieces, linebackers covering routes, others filling run lanes. More emphasis on the defensive line to be consistently in a position because of it. He has a bunch of pressure looks that don't work well behind the zone coverage because of course QBs 101 is to throw where the pressure comes from. He doesn't seem to run trap much (although it's obviously hard to tell a lot of time) and he is very uncomfortable when he's not running deep thirds/double high or over the top coverage of some kind which is why almost always plays are made in front of our defensive backs.

The systems are not the same at all and the unit has gone further and further away from what Hall used to run over time.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 04:14:55 PMYou don't know what you're talking about.

Hall ran MOD - it's a cover 4 that turns to man when receivers run routes that past the linebackers (who stayed down and in), so like 10 yard routes plus. If they got short short routes they'd stay. The MLB was more of a QB reader. This obviously works less good if more routes are short because you have the cover 4 drop not doing much. He'd then weave in soft technique that looked like MOD but was actually the opposite and allowed corners to jump stuff.  He'd essentially get you used to taking the flats and hooks/outs and then he'd take it away and suddenly a corner and a half are flying down in. A lot of defensive coordinators called that trap although I don't think the Bombers did at the time.

Younger runs much more pure zone. It starts as zone. It stays zone. He has a bunch of pressure looks that don't work well behind the zone coverage because of course QBs 101 is to throw where the pressure comes from. He doesn't seem to run trap much (although it's obviously hard to tell a lot of time) and he is very uncomfortable when he's not running deep thirds or over the top coverage of some kind which is why almost always plays are made in front of our defensive backs.

The systems are not the same at all and the unit has gone further and further away from what Hall used to run over time.

I see similarities in the systems, yes agree, over time they have slowly drifted apart.  I never said they were the same, said they were similar.  Both are bend don't break at times.   Both get exposed by explosion plays at times.  Both like to rotate.  Younger has more complexity imo.  Some very good info here and thanks for your post.  That said no need to say I don't know what I'm talking about.  My football knowledge isn't as strong as some on here 100%, I believe there is place for everyone on here to voice their opinions and knowledge.  Not about right or wrong but a collective discussion on opinions.  I believe Hall and Younger have evolved together.  Hall evolved a lot near the end as he was having some issues but corrected it, can't remember the year but he was under a lot of pressure at the time.

My knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the two schemes isn't as strong as yours and others 100% true.  But watching Bomber ball over the last decade, I see consistency and similarities between these two very good DCs.

Need to change things up and get back to basics ...basics being tackling 101...The last game was particularly bad

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 03:22:29 PMYou mean the D that brought us cups and cup appearances?  The Bomber defense has been incredible for a long period of time.  Past success often can ground future success.  That's reality.  You are hyper focused on the last 3 games, I look at things with a wider lens.  Our defense has beat all teams for almost a decade consistently under this scheme.  That's the facts, that's reality.  Last year our D was fine (near top in pts allowed, rush yards, a likely a few other areas).  Previously lights out good.  Last year our O sucked which stressed out the D.  With balance on O this year, D should be better.  Patience pays off, always has, always will with this version of the Bombers.  Deep breath.  Game 2.  Is our D good right now, nope.  Can it be, hell yes.  Does our schemes work, 100%.  Can and will they be better, absolutely.

Our D and O are not expired (yet).  Yes we can adapt and change.  I see an average club that likely can improve by 1/4 or mid season.  We need to digest the changes to the our roster imo.

Just b/c you see it one way doesn't mean that's reality.  I respect your opinion but it's far from mine and that's ok.  Let's leave it there.  I don't appreciate the glasses shot but do enjoy the back and forth otherwise.

No I mean the defence that lost the Grey Cup in 2022, 2023 and 2024. The defence that caused us to slip to the crossover team in 2025 and being eliminated in the 1st round.

It has nothing to do with the last 3 games. Look up systemic in the dictionary. How many games did we win against the Riders and Stamps in 2025. Being eastern teams was easier last year. You have to be able to beat teams in the west.

I'll tell you. We lost 7 of 9 games to the west division and only won 2 games against the Lions. In one of those games Masoli was the starting QB.

Quote from: blueraid on June 15, 2026, 04:40:48 PMNeed to change things up and get back to basics ...basics being tackling 101...The last game was particularly bad

hard to argue with that, physicality an issue to be sure, others have pointed that out

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 05:47:32 PMNo I mean the defence that lost the Grey Cup in 2022, 2023 and 2024. The defence that caused us to slip to crossover team in 2025 and being eliminated in the 1st round.

can't win em all, D got us to the big show, you mean the D that allowed some of the least points ever that one year,  you mean the D where we were not scored on for a long period of time, easy to point out the few bad games in a sea of success, not trending in the right direction but our defensive coaches and schemes are proven, reliable and very good.  Their record speaks for themselves.  Our peak on D has passed yes but lets not discount the past success nor write off the chance for it to return.  The foundation is there, time to rebuild a few rooms.

The narrative is the same as it was pre- mini dynasty for some, hyper focused on the cup drought.  Forest through the trees.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 05:51:01 PMhard to argue with that, physicality an issue to be sure, others have pointed that outcan't win em all, D got us to the big show, you mean the D that allowed some of the least points ever that one year,  you mean the D where we were not scored on for a long period of time, easy to point out the few bad games in a sea of success, not trending in the right direction but our defensive coaches and schemes are proven, reliable and very good.  Their record speaks for themselves.  Our peak on D has passed yes but lets not discount the past success nor write off the chance for it to return.  The foundation is there, time to rebuild a few rooms.

I agree with Sir Blue and Gold and others. You don't know what you are talking about. You always in defend and wait mode. Are you not seeing what other posters are telling you?

Look at the poll. You're going to feel you're being picked on and that is just not true.  Our defence got worse when we didn't re-sign Alexander or Bighill. While that was necessary due to age, injury history and SMS, we have not replaced those spots very well.

That should have been done in TC. It wasn't.

During 2025 ( and earlier ) the conversations were about lack of pressure and soft coverage in the secondary.  Sure the defence will improve during the course of this season but to what level is unknown.  You might be the only one feeling a need to justify our defensive performances.

I don't know what else we can tell you.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 05:58:05 PMI agree with Sir Blue and Gold and others. You don't know what you are talking about. You always in defend and wait mode. Are you not seeing what other posters are telling you?

Look at the poll. You're going to feel you're being picked on and that is just not true.  Our defence got worse when we didn't re-sign Alexander or Bighill. While that was necessary due to age, injury history and SMS, we have not replaced those spots very well.

That should have been done in TC. It wasn't.

I don't know what else we can tell you.

That is not a fair take on what or how I post here.  I provide my opinion on the team, league, players, management in a variety of ways, good bad and ugly and often will not follow the herd.  Yes I'm patient, that's allowed.  Who supported Hall, MOS and management before our epic cup run, right I did and many others and I tip my hat to them.  We were patient when many wanted to blow up the team.  Patience paid off.  I think it will again.  I'm allowed to be positive.  The poll is a take on some opinions, it's not facts or right just a summary of opinions.  I don't agree with those that have said that Younger's D has always been bad.  That is simply not supported with the success the team has had on D.  I believe it's an emotional based response to a D that struggled two game in row after laying an egg in the playoffs.  Eggs happen.

Yes I'll defend my position and the club as needed when I want to make a point.  That's what we all do.  There are some on here that remain positive when things go bad.  Some panic when we have a bad game, others get too high when we on a streak, that's just how it is.  There is room for all of us on here.  I have stated my opinion on the state of the club, my opinion on Hall, Younger, etc and it's just take.  Not right or wrong.  Nobody can claim were certainty they know more than someone else and I don't see any value or reason joining in and saying one doesn't know what they are taking about.  I value both of your opinions and knowledge you share.  Just become someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are wrong.  The truth is likely and often in the middle of two polarized view points.

It's not about being picked on, it's about sharing one point and contributing to the forum.  It's about allowing space for that to happen.  It's about allowing a good debate to occur.  These latest exchanges have been mostly very positive with a health of information being share.  That's what I'm here for.  The personal stuff is just noise and best to be avoided.

Full stop don't agree about Alexander and Bighill.  We have been fine at LB for a long time.  Alexander was done full stop and I did like him but not signing him was 100% the right decision.  Those two decisions have little to do with our past issues or current team dynamic.  Now this season, we should have had a better plan at safety.  Injuries forced our hand a bit but signing a safety would be something I support as I mentioned before.  I was surprised at your take here.  Perhaps I'm missing your point.  Clarify it please.

No need to paint with with the same brush every time (posting style).  You have done that numerous times in the past and it's not true.  The variety of posting styles, knowledge, view points on here is something that makes this place special.  We all have a voice and if we didn't debate, argue and differ in how we post, this place wouldn't be very informative and lot less fun.

I haven't just posted that we wait.  I see an opportunity to bring in a S, corner and maybe receiver.  But I would wait a little on the last two.  I would be shopping hard for a FS that has experience and is cheap.  I have said how the D have to evolve and learn how to deploy our new faces.  I am cautiously optimistic about this season.  I am not also very worried after 2 games and don't think that means very much for what we might see.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 06:18:49 PMThat is not a fair take on what or how I post here.  I provide my opinion on the team, league, players, management in a variety of ways, good bad and ugly and often will not follow the herd.  Yes I'm patient, that's allowed.  Who supported Hall, MOS and management before our epic cup run, right I did and many others and I tip my hat to them.  We were patient when many wanted to blow up the team.  Patience paid off.  I think it will again.  I'm allowed to be positive.  The poll is a take on some opinions, it's not facts or right just a summary of opinions.  I don't agree with those that have said that Younger's D has always been bad.  That is simply not supported with the success the team has had on D.  I believe it's an emotional based response to a D that struggled two game in row after laying an egg in the playoffs.  Eggs happen.

Yes I'll defend my position and the club as needed when I want to make a point.  That's what we all do.  There are some on here that remain positive when things go bad.  Some panic when we have a bad game, others get too high when we on a streak, that's just how it is.  There is room for all of us on here.  I have stated my opinion on the state of the club, my opinion on Hall, Younger, etc and it's just take.  Not right or wrong.  Nobody can claim were certainty they know more than someone else and I don't see any value or reason joining in and saying one doesn't know what they are taking about.  I value both of your opinions and knowledge you share.  Just become someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are wrong.  The truth is likely and often in the middle of two polarized view points.

It's not about being picked on, it's about sharing one point and contributing to the forum.

Full stop don't agree about Alexander and Bighill.  We have been fine at LB for a long time.  Alexander was done full stop and I did like him but no signing him was 100% the right decision.  Those two decisions have little to do with our past issues or current team dynamic.  Now this season, we should have had a better plan at safety.  Injuries forced our hand a bit but signing a safety would be something I support as I mentioned before.

No need to paint with with the same brush every time (posting style).  You have done that numerous times in the past and it's not true.  The variety of posting styles, knowledge, view point on here is something that makes this place special.  We all have a voice and if we didn't debate, argue and differ in how we post, this place wouldn't be very informative and lot less fun.

Opinions need to be based on fact even when trying to be positive. Yes, Alexander and Bighill needed to be replaced an once again we have not solidified either position.

In 2025 we started with Parker at safety and then Allen and then a rotation of several players including Kelly. This year we've moved every LB to a new role. So far that's a fail. I don't remember anyone in favour of Kramdi at safety.

We don't seem to have an alternative at the moment but that's still a reality. You suggested bringing in a safety and a CB. I reminded you the time to do that if before TC. I don't know how many DB's we looked at in tryout camps or during TC.  It's not even clear whether Allen would have made the roster if he didn't get injured. Regardless bringing in new players during the season means time on the PR and not usually very successful making the AR unless of injury.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 06:25:38 PMOpinions need to be based on fact even when trying to be positive. Yes, Alexander and Bighill needed to be replaced an once again we have not solidified either position.

In 2025 we started with Parker at safety and then Allen and then a rotation of several players including Kelly. This year we've moved every LB to a new role. So far that's a fail. I don't remember anyone in favour of Kramdi at safety.

We don't seem to have an alternative at the moment but that's still a reality.

Opinion are based on ones take.  We all try to be factual.  None of us ever achieve that all the time.  There are strong facts that backup Hall's/Younger's/Bombers success on D for a very long time.  There are also facts that point to some bumps along the road in that success.

Agree those names needed to be gone.  Yes Parker at safety didn't work, Allen was ok but wasn't ready.  Kelly isn't the answer.  We can agree that we haven't found a safety.  I have said before the season started that Kramdi wouldn't be at safety.  I thought we could figure that out with someone else.  That didn't happen and I called for a new safety to be brought in.  I believe our issues at safety have one of the biggest thorns in our side for a bit.  Hopefully we can figure that out.  We are in complete agreement on that one. 

Will we will bring a S in? Can Kramdi learn the craft? Can Allen get healthy and be an option? Is there another player on the roster we can try?  Will be try two safeties again? Can we rotate at S?

What has Jordan Younger won as a coach?

What's his record over three years? What about his playoff record? A fraction above average?

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 06:32:47 PMOpinion are based on ones take.  We all try to be factual.  None of us ever achieve that all the time.  There are strong facts that backup Hall's/Younger's/Bombers success on D for a very long time.  There are also facts that point to some bumps along the road in that success.

Agree those names needed to be gone.  Yes Parker at safety didn't work, Allen was ok but wasn't ready.  Kelly isn't the answer.  We can agree that we haven't found a safety.  I have said before the season started that Kramdi wouldn't be at safety.  I thought we could figure that out with someone else.  That didn't happen and I called for a new safety to be brought in.  I believe our issues at safety have one of the biggest thorns in our side for a bit.  Hopefully we can figure that out.  We are in complete agreement on that one. 

Will we will bring a S in? Can Kramdi learn the craft? Can Allen get healthy and be an option? Is there another player on the roster we can try?  Will be try two safeties again? Can we rotate at S?

I'm not sure what we'll do at safety. Even if we replace Kramdi then Kramdi replaces Griffin and so on down the line. It's a domino effect.

I think Ball was getting a lot of reps in TC but is injured now. When or if he can return is unknown. Stuart did in pre season as well. Allen might be the future but he only had a small sample size last year. The team seemed to decide moving him out from that spot before TC. Can't really know whether he was being considered at safety, CB or as a DI.

Each of those potentially impacted the ratio and other moves. Again, no idea whether he'll be able to return or when or what they decide at that point.

I think the 1st option is to bring back someone that was here in TC. If they rejected a PR spot that creates a complication. Like I said, adding a rookie that wasn't here in TC is a different kind of issue.

The Bombers didn't address the safety position in the off season. Kramdi can play safety but is more effective as a SLB. Wilson and Jones need to which positions. Wilson is not a MLB.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 15, 2026, 06:54:15 PMThe Bombers didn't address the safety position in the off season. Kramdi can play safety but is more effective as a SLB. Wilson and Jones need to which positions. Wilson is not a MLB.

I suppose that if they find a solution at safety, they move Kramdi back to SAM. In theory that would mean Griffin takes over the role of Woodbey in rotation but we lose him as a full time player on defence.

Finding a Canadian at safety is less likely so the ripple effect with Griffin might mean dropping the extra DL to do that.

Yes, switch K. Wilson and Jones back to roles in 2025. Still lacking but still a preferable choice at the moment.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 15, 2026, 06:54:15 PMThe Bombers didn't address the safety position in the off season. Kramdi can play safety but is more effective as a SLB. Wilson and Jones need to which positions. Wilson is not a MLB.

Agreed and also, no one, other than Brandon Alexander, who himself was more of a Richie Hall guy than a Jordan Younger guy, has been successful at safety. No one.

Saw some griping about Winnipeg's defence online after the loss to Hamilton and it is true that the Bombers gave up a bunch of chunk plays to Hamilton through the air, and 124 rushing yards to Ticats' running back Larry Rountree III. Heck, even Bo Levi Mitchell ripped off a 15-yard run at one point.

"That's not a championship defence."

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 06:49:57 PMI'm not sure what we'll do at safety. Even if we replace Kramdi then Kramdi replaces Griffin and so on down the line. It's a domino effect.

I think Ball was getting a lot of reps in TC but is injured now. When or if he can return is unknown. Stuart did in pre season as well. Allen might be the future but he only had a small sample size last year. The team seemed to decide moving him out from that spot before TC. Can't really know whether he was being considered at safety, CB or as a DI.

Each of those potentially impacted the ratio and other moves. Again, no idea whether he'll be able to return or when or what they decide at that point.

I think the 1st option is to bring back someone that was here in TC. If they rejected a PR spot that creates a complication. Like I said, adding a rookie that wasn't here in TC is a different kind of issue.

I like Ball but has he played safety? Stuart will need much seasoning imo? Any update on Allen's injury?

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 07:00:04 PMI suppose that if they find a solution at safety, they move Kramdi back to SAM. In theory that would mean Griffin takes over the role of Woodbey in rotation but we lose him as a full time player on defence.

Finding a Canadian at safety is less likely so the ripple effect with Griffin might mean dropping the extra DL to do that.

Yes, switch K. Wilson and Jones back to roles in 2025. Still lacking but still a preferable choice at the moment.

I think this trio of LBs would be fine with rotation of Woodbey.  And I would sprinkle in the prospects.

I'm not sure Younger doesn't value sacks. Not based on the last game.

How many times did they blitz against Hamilton? I didn't count but watching, it seemed fairly frequent, and it didn't work. Same as when Bighill blitzed.

And how many plays were there three D linemen ? Again I didn't count, but not many.

Their offensive line, and whatever system they were using, worked and made our effort fail and in every way. Coaching and players.

But not because they didn't try to get pressure.

The actual reason is worse.

Quote from: markf on June 15, 2026, 07:28:51 PMI'm not sure Younger doesn't value sacks. Not based on the last game.

How many times did they blitz against Hamilton? I didn't count but watching, it seemed fairly frequent, and it didn't work. Same as when Bighill blitzed.

And how many plays were there three D linemen ? Again I didn't count, but not many.

Their offensive line, and whatever system they were using, worked and made our effort fail and in every way. Coaching and players.

But not because they didn't try to get pressure.

The actual reason is worse.

I think someone brought up the fact that he doesn't value sacks, completely false.  I didn't notice anything you have asked about enough to comment on but I would like to know as well.  Yes we didn't get home.  Bo was slinging nasty.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 07:21:21 PMI like Ball but has he played safety? Stuart will need much seasoning imo? Any update on Allen's injury?I think this trio of LBs would be fine with rotation of Woodbey.  And I would sprinkle in the prospects.

I'm not sure Ball saw looks at safety. I think it was more at DHB. However that suggests the ability to cover and some speed.

No idea what the injury status for Ball or Allen. Woodbey would help but it's not the trio but whether each is in the best role possible.

Just a thought, especially if the injured are not returning soon: Griffin is the same height and weight as K. Wilson or Jones. Same applies to Woodbey. It's been hard to tell exactly what his role has been when on the field. He seems faster than K. Wilson or Jones. The wouldn't have brought back JSK if that was a consideration earlier. Players are often listed as DB or LB and seem almost interchangable.


I wonder if they ever had any thought of him at either MLB or WIL and making one of the other 2 a DI if roster allows. Griffin is a good tackler, can cover and hits hard.

That would solve the problem of Kramdi moving back to safety if there is another option at safety.

The 1st practice next week might at least give updates on injury situation.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 08:06:20 PMI'm not sure Ball saw looks at safety. I think it was more at DHB. However that suggests the ability to cover and some speed.

No idea what the injury status for Ball or Allen. Woodbey would help but it's not the trio but whether each is in the best role possible.

Just a thought, especially if the injured are not returning soon: Griffin is the same height and weight as K. Wilson or Jones.

I wonder if they ever had any thought of him at either MLB or WIL and making one of the other 2 a DI if roster allows. Griffin is a good tackler, can cover and hits hard.

That would solve the problem of Kramdi moving back to safety if there is another option at safety.

The 1st practice next week might at least give updates on injury situation.

agree on Ball and Griffin, don't know enough about Griffin's skill set to know where he best fits other than I like what I see!  Do you remember if Ball could tackle well?

Many problems would be solved if Kramdi wasn't at safety, assuming his replacement is better.  I would allow a few games for our new safety to settle in even if it meant some pain in doing so.  Sometimes the best way to learn.  I would be very interested if Kramdi is ok at safety or if was pissed at the assignment.  He would likely never say.  Going point about the trio, which alignment is best, good point.  Would be interesting to know who on our team as played safety at any level at somepoint.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 08:06:20 PMI'm not sure Ball saw looks at safety. I think it was more at DHB. However that suggests the ability to cover and some speed.

No idea what the injury status for Ball or Allen. Woodbey would help but it's not the trio but whether each is in the best role possible.

Just a thought, especially if the injured are not returning soon: Griffin is the same height and weight as K. Wilson or Jones. Same applies to Woodbey. It's been hard to tell exactly what his role has been when on the field. He seems faster than K. Wilson or Jones. The wouldn't have brought back JSK if that was a consideration earlier. Players are often listed as DB or LB and seem almost interchangable.


I wonder if they ever had any thought of him at either MLB or WIL and making one of the other 2 a DI if roster allows. Griffin is a good tackler, can cover and hits hard.

That would solve the problem of Kramdi moving back to safety if there is another option at safety.

The 1st practice next week might at least give updates on injury situation.

I would have liked to see Cam Allen come back on when Woodsbey was injured. Go back to what was working last year.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 08:11:39 PMagree on Ball and Griffin, don't know enough about Griffin's skill set to know where he best fits other than I like what I see!  Do you remember if Ball could tackle well?

Many problems would be solved if Kramdi wasn't at safety, assuming his replacement is better.  I would allow a few games for our new safety to settle in even if it meant some pain in doing so.  Sometimes the best way to learn.  I would be very interested if Kramdi is ok at safety or if was pissed at the assignment.  He would likely never say.  Going point about the trio, which alignment is best, good point.  Would be interesting to know who on our team as played safety at any level at somepoint.

I think Ball could tackle but the ability to read the offence and to communicate to the rest of the secondary is almost more important. Ball was originally a receiver in college. That suggests an ability to read defences in order to get open. It also suggests he has good hands.

Stuart was playing CB in pre-season and was just a little late in his coverage. reports are that he has versatility to play most positions including SAM. he is inexperienced and we don't usually see a pure Canadian rookie starting.

Kramdi is a team player so I think he'll adjust to the role without complaint.

Imports don't play in college in a 5 man secondary generally, so none would have that specific experience in college. A safety needs decent speed and high football IQ. Knowing where to go within an assignment is important. It doesn't matter how fast you are if you make the wrong decisions. Day late and dollar short so to speak.

Quote from: Jesse on June 15, 2026, 08:22:28 PMI would have liked to see Cam Allen come back on when Woodsbey was injured. Go back to what was working last year.

Maybe. Like I said he had a small sample size of about 8 games and at times looked lost. I also mentioned a new safety means several other changes.

I thought adding 2 veteran players on defence was great. It still meant moving all 3 LB's and starting a rookie at CB and 2 rookies in the DL rotation. It will take time at best.

Here is another thought:

I don't think Nichols has lost his ability. He may have lost a bit of a step. We moved Alexander from DHB to safety. Same skill sets, High football IQ, communication skills and good tackler.

What I can't remember is who replaced him at DHB when we moved Alexander to safety. More than that we don't seem to have another DB to change to DHB.

We cut Lamont who played there in pre season so he's a possible choice. How he performed int TC I don't know. His release may have been due to lack of skill set, or just numbers.

Some of the rookies in TC would have been tested at DHB.  Did they all fail or was it a numbers game and deciding not accept a PR spot. Or is Texada also considered as the emergency replacement at both DHB and CB?

If the Bombers had of drafted Findlay at #15 last season, we would have  our Starting Safety.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 15, 2026, 09:14:05 PMIf the Bombers had of drafted Findlay at #15 last season, we would have our Starting Safety.

Yeah, we took Smith 1 pick before Findlay. Findlay is starting and Smith when healthy hasn't had a chance to start.

The career path for either is not clear or which will end up as the better player.

Findlay was getting a lot of reps last year and some as a starter. Both players also played well on ST's. On the surface at the time I was hoping for Findlay to be picked.

Our need last year was more at safety than LB and we'd already drafted Shay. Why we did that IDK. I can't even say we didn't make the right decision in the long run.

We would have has another starting Canadian though and that can never be a bad problem.

Quote from: Pigskin on June 15, 2026, 09:14:05 PMIf the Bombers had of drafted Findlay at #15 last season, we would have been our Starting Safety.

Easy to say that now.  The draft is a cr@p shoot.  Would he have developed here the same, likely not.  All that said, he looked ok last year.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 15, 2026, 09:36:18 PMEasy to say that now.  The draft is a cr@p shoot.  Would he have developed here the same, likely not.  All that said, he looked ok last year.

While that's true, we did have a need at safety and not at LB. He would have been a ratio breaker if he played well even if as a 6th DB or eventual starter.

How he did in any interviews, there may have been an issue. Findlay is from North Vancouver and his father or was it his grandfather that played for the Lions? He may not have been willing to go to Winnipeg as his 1st choice and that could have flipped the Bombers to Smith.

Who's to say Findlay would be any better in Younger's system than anyone else? And it's hard for draft picks to get on the field and play with the way our coaching staff approaches things. Even Oliveira had to wait a full season. Jake Kelly was drafted in 2023 and is only now getting reps.

Why haven't we developed the guy we drafted ahead of Findlay, Jaylen Smith as a safety. very good speed, physical and can tackle. He has all the tools to be an impact national

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 11:30:35 PMWho's to say Findlay would be any better in Younger's system than anyone else? And it's hard for draft picks to get on the field and play with the way our coaching staff approaches things. Even Oliveira had to wait a full season. Jake Kelly was drafted in 2023 and is only now getting reps.

I get what you're saying and agree for the most part, but Brady missed his rookie season due to injury. He was on the field as soon as he was healthy.

Quote from: Jesse on June 15, 2026, 11:55:38 PMI get what you're saying and agree for the most part, but Brady missed his rookie season due to injury. He was on the field as soon as he was healthy.

True. Probably an unfair example but he got hurt playing special teams and if you follow our track record he likely would have stayed in that role for the year. It's not necessary the wrong move but it does take O'Shea, generally speaking, a long time to play draft picks on offense or defense in general.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 07:01:11 PMAgreed and also, no one, other than Brandon Alexander, who himself was more of a Richie Hall guy than a Jordan Younger guy, has been successful at safety. No one.

That's true. BA was the only safety we've had since Loffler that was an impact player back there, all others have been a step behind/trying to figure it out/invisible.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 11:30:35 PMWho's to say Findlay would be any better in Younger's system than anyone else? And it's hard for draft picks to get on the field and play with the way our coaching staff approaches things. Even Oliveira had to wait a full season. Jake Kelly was drafted in 2023 and is only now getting reps.

There's truth to what you are saying, but the other part of the equation is that our drafting has often not been very good in terms of player quality.

When players showed they could play, they were given an opportunity. Guy like Wallace was starting into his second year. Liam Dobson also started very quickly.

Going through our recent draft picks,  I don't think Jake Kelly is good enough to play, and Anthony Bennet definitely wasn't. Clercius  played as a rookie, and is a borderline talent in terms of being a starter. Chris-Ike I think is played to a level commensurate with his talent, ie part time as an extra blocker and on STs. Shay and Smith have done little so far to show they deserve more playing time, although that could change as the season progresses.
I'm struggling to think of any draft picks Osh held back from playing on their ELC, who went on to have a major impact elsewhere.
Don't have the energy to go through the Americans, but I know Pokie Wilson and Vaval both started for us as raw rookies, with essentially no pro experience. As did Scheon.
No question Osh likes his vets, most coaches do. But IMO his major problem is hanging on to them a little after their best before date, out of loyalty.
I think he's willing to give young players a chance to play if they show him they are ready.

Our D is/was great against a pass-only QB in a pass-mostly O.  It is/was great against a run-only QB (Ford/Crum-style).  But our D stinks against the young pass/run QBs, and even worse when they have a decent OL & RB.  And now our D stinks even against the oldster pass-mostly QBs because we're letting even the oldest escape & run into a wide open flat -- or do delayed RB draws on 2nd down.

Both '25 and now I watch other O's scheme all RECs to clear our flat and leave a wide open outlet for their QB to gut run or edge run.  It's a free bingo spot.  Our DL is too slow to give chase and they seem incapable of effecting both edge contain and A/B gap escape routes similtaneously.  And every "LBer" has dropped way back to keep the zone intact.

It's so bad that even BLM was able to run unmolested for a 1st down against us.  Almost unheard of for BLM.  1 run for 15!!  Holy cow how is that possible!!

When I watch other D's, they never fully vacate the flat.  Usually at least MLB & WILL are still there until it's 100% clear it's a pass.  If a QB runs they are at least close by to give chase.

As long as we leave this open, every QB will be able to convert almost every 2nd down.  Our blanket coverage might work perfectly, and sometimes does, but then they just take the free outlet.  When I'm in the stands watching this, it's extremely frustrating.  And when it's BC or MTL it'll get downright embarrassing.

Now... compare to when Zach runs, there's 3 guys all around him, usually tackling him at the LoS, and everyone holds their breath as we contemplate how long the "neck" will be this time.  The problem isn't Zach, as he's just as fast as BLM, the problem is other D's don't leave this freebie open like we do.  They all get on top of a QB swinging out right basically immediately.  Why can't we?

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 04:14:55 PMYounger runs much more pure zone. It starts as zone. It stays zone. There's a lot more moving pieces, linebackers covering routes, others filling run lanes.

Except our D has been broken down by guys like the TSN talking heads, especially Lapo.  It's been stated many times we are running match coverage, or some hybrid.

And it's clear we're not always just in zone because you can see how many times Moxey or Nichols was isolated on one guy and getting torched.  In zone there should be at least one other guy there unless it's a very very deep go route, which most of these weren't.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 15, 2026, 04:14:55 PMThe systems are not the same at all and the unit has gone further and further away from what Hall used to run over time.

My theory is Hall is still almost as much the DC as Younger, in terms of X/O's, scheme, etc.  Maybe Younger calls the plays at the moment.  And Younger certainly is the main interaction with the players, practice, etc.  But the brain stuff is still a ton of Hall.  He's sitting right there in the D booth every single game with the headset on!!  Heck, I see him more often than Younger in TSN game coverage -- I couldn't even tell you if Younger is on-field or in-booth!  That's how little I see him.

Your theory has one major hole: our run D.  If what you said was true, our run D should have been stout under later-year Hall (pre-Younger).  But it wasn't.  Our run D has been going to heck since Stove left.  So you can't say it's just Younger having every LBer go deep to cover the zone.  Hall was also allowing that flat to vacate on the regular, and when our DL wasn't good enough to stop runs at LoS anymore, it was already falling apart.

What we have now is just Hall++.  And maybe it would still work fine -- IF we had a Stove.  Which we don't (do we? -- Ceresna later season?).  If we can stop the run, and stop the QB escape freebies, with just 4, then I think we can get back to winning real quick.  But in the last 1.5 years I've seen no indication we have any hope of doing that.

My philosophy has always been '18-'21 Bombers: stop the run & make them beat you with the pass -- because the pass has way more that can go wrong for the O.  Now O's run against us at will, and smart ones even get their (possibly geriatric) QB involved.

Back to basics.  Stop the run.

You actually think its not JY running the D? Its his show.

If Richie Hall was still running the defense the defense would make sense. Because regardless of how much success he had in any given year, you could see what we were trying to do.

The 1st practice should give us an idea of whether we get any players back from the IR. There will be strategic adjustments but those may be more difficult to understand from practice reports.

The day before the game before we'll see if they change the make up of the game day roster via players becoming healthy, or tactical changes. IE: an extra DB instead of an extra DL as a DI.

Our choices are limited based on our IR problems. But there are a few things that might change.

While I'm not specifically suggesting it, Kornelson coming on could mean an import coming off and a DB added. I do see that in the realm of a choice we might make.

Quote from: bunker on June 16, 2026, 03:04:18 AMThere's truth to what you are saying, but the other part of the equation is that our drafting has often not been very good in terms of player quality.

When players showed they could play, they were given an opportunity. Guy like Wallace was starting into his second year. Liam Dobson also started very quickly.

Going through our recent draft picks,  I don't think Jake Kelly is good enough to play, and Anthony Bennet definitely wasn't. Clercius  played as a rookie, and is a borderline talent in terms of being a starter. Chris-Ike I think is played to a level commensurate with his talent, ie part time as an extra blocker and on STs. Shay and Smith have done little so far to show they deserve more playing time, although that could change as the season progresses.
I'm struggling to think of any draft picks Osh held back from playing on their ELC, who went on to have a major impact elsewhere.
Don't have the energy to go through the Americans, but I know Pokie Wilson and Vaval both started for us as raw rookies, with essentially no pro experience. As did Scheon.
No question Osh likes his vets, most coaches do. But IMO his major problem is hanging on to them a little after their best before date, out of loyalty.
I think he's willing to give young players a chance to play if they show him they are ready.

Nothing wrong with their drafting, they've brought in a few good players every year whether they needed them or not. Problem is coming off a 5 year GC run not every draft pick gets a fair crack at a starting job, O'Shea likes his vets and they've established a pecking order that favours experience over youth, that attitude is supported by the vets leading the locker room.  On less established teams there would be more opportunity for rookies to gain playing experience, but that also comes at a cost of multiple rookie mistakes and those teams rarely go far in the playoffs.  Nobody ever said football was easy.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 16, 2026, 05:26:35 PMNothing wrong with their drafting, they've brought in a few good players every year whether they needed them or not. Problem is coming off a 5 year GC run not every draft pick gets a fair crack at a starting job, O'Shea likes his vets and they've established a pecking order that favours experience over youth, that attitude is supported by the vets leading the locker room.  On less established teams there would be more opportunity for rookies to gain playing experience, but that also comes at a cost of multiple rookie mistakes and those teams rarely go far in the playoffs.  Nobody ever said football was easy.

Agree all, well said
Shay and Smith might still work out  way too early to write them off imo

The discourse about safety is a little strange. Back in the day it was a great place to hide a mid-tier Canadian. But we see how much the game changes when we have a lumber-layer there like Loffler and BA.

I like Kramdi as a SAM but I don't think we should be overthinking this - if we are talking about needing improvements at S then to me this is an admission that we are lost on the whole defense (which I guess is the greater discussion in this thread). We have a bunch of DBs and should easily be able to fill a safety in there who should - in a worst case - not get in the way and be a net-negative. In a perfect world, they can be valuable in QBing the secondary out of the huddle, cover their man/zone to prevent the explosion play, and lay some crushing hits that will make QBs think twice about throwing down the middle.

Here's a weird suggestion just for fun - how do we think Griffin would do there? He's probably more valuable as an LB but I bet the guy would blanket the whole field and could do some damage to slotbacks who dare enter his zone!

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 16, 2026, 06:20:49 PMThe discourse about safety is a little strange. Back in the day it was a great place to hide a mid-tier Canadian. But we see how much the game changes when we have a lumber-layer there like Loffler and BA.

I like Kramdi as a SAM but I don't think we should be overthinking this - if we are talking about needing improvements at S then to me this is an admission that we are lost on the whole defense (which I guess is the greater discussion in this thread). We have a bunch of DBs and should easily be able to fill a safety in there who should - in a worst case - not get in the way and be a net-negative. In a perfect world, they can be valuable in QBing the secondary out of the huddle, cover their man/zone to prevent the explosion play, and lay some crushing hits that will make QBs think twice about throwing down the middle.

Here's a weird suggestion just for fun - how do we think Griffin would do there? He's probably more valuable as an LB but I bet the guy would blanket the whole field and could do some damage to slotbacks who dare enter his zone!

Statistically Griffin is one of their better defensive players and I believe the off-season plan was to provide him with a starting job at SAM so he could play every down and not rotate out.  Kramdi is not currently playing the traditional Safety role, sometimes he's deep center but other times he's lined up in the box or even on the line of scrimmage as a pass rusher. I guess this creates confusion, but for who's benefit?  They did not do this with Cam Allen last season, he played the traditional deep Safety role and they kept his job simple, he rarely got involved in run stopping.  It's early in the season but never too early to get back to the basics of sound positional play, running to the ball and good tackling, the athleticism is already in house.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 16, 2026, 05:26:35 PMNothing wrong with their drafting, they've brought in a few good players every year whether they needed them or not. Problem is coming off a 5 year GC run not every draft pick gets a fair crack at a starting job, O'Shea likes his vets and they've established a pecking order that favours experience over youth, that attitude is supported by the vets leading the locker room.  On less established teams there would be more opportunity for rookies to gain playing experience, but that also comes at a cost of multiple rookie mistakes and those teams rarely go far in the playoffs.  Nobody ever said football was easy.

Who are the rookies you feel are talented enough to start or rotate in on a regular basis, but have been blocked by less talented vets and/or O'Shea?

Quote from: bunker on June 16, 2026, 07:16:10 PMWho are the rookies you feel are talented enough to start or rotate in on a regular basis, but have been blocked by less talented vets and/or O'Shea?

I don't feel that way at all, I agree with the approach the Bombers have taken, thus I'm not crying about not drafting Fletcher cause he wouldn't have started here anyway.  Rookies sit at the back of the bus.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 16, 2026, 07:53:16 PMI don't feel that way at all, I agree with the approach the Bombers have taken, thus I'm not crying about not drafting Fletcher cause he wouldn't have started here anyway.  Rookies sit at the back of the bus.

Fletcher??

Quote from: Pigskin on June 16, 2026, 09:03:46 PMFletcher??

He meant Findlay.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 16, 2026, 06:20:49 PMThe discourse about safety is a little strange. Back in the day it was a great place to hide a mid-tier Canadian. But we see how much the game changes when we have a lumber-layer there like Loffler and BA.

I like Kramdi as a SAM but I don't think we should be overthinking this - if we are talking about needing improvements at S then to me this is an admission that we are lost on the whole defense (which I guess is the greater discussion in this thread). We have a bunch of DBs and should easily be able to fill a safety in there who should - in a worst case - not get in the way and be a net-negative. In a perfect world, they can be valuable in QBing the secondary out of the huddle, cover their man/zone to prevent the explosion play, and lay some crushing hits that will make QBs think twice about throwing down the middle.

Here's a weird suggestion just for fun - how do we think Griffin would do there? He's probably more valuable as an LB but I bet the guy would blanket the whole field and could do some damage to slotbacks who dare enter his zone!

I don't want Griffin at S full stop

Love him at LB

Safety is a key position imo

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 16, 2026, 06:52:45 PMStatistically Griffin is one of their better defensive players and I believe the off-season plan was to provide him with a starting job at SAM so he could play every down and not rotate out.  Kramdi is not currently playing the traditional Safety role, sometimes he's deep center but other times he's lined up in the box or even on the line of scrimmage as a pass rusher. I guess this creates confusion, but for who's benefit?  They did not do this with Cam Allen last season, he played the traditional deep Safety role and they kept his job simple, he rarely got involved in run stopping.  It's early in the season but never too early to get back to the basics of sound positional play, running to the ball and good tackling, the athleticism is already in house.

completely agree, last two games it looked like the defensive halfbacks were forced into man to man cause of no support deep. We need our lb to make the run tackles, and our safety to stabilize the secondary

Quote from: Pete on June 15, 2026, 11:54:25 PMWhy haven't we developed the guy we drafted ahead of Findlay, Jaylen Smith as a safety. very good speed, physical and can tackle. He has all the tools to be an impact national

It's better to have him at SLB.  Big, fast, good in coverage.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 16, 2026, 06:20:49 PMHere's a weird suggestion just for fun - how do we think Griffin would do there? He's probably more valuable as an LB but I bet the guy would blanket the whole field and could do some damage to slotbacks who dare enter his zone!

Griffin is bigger and that beef is far more valuable at SAM.  FS needs to be faster & more of a rover.  Kramdi's body type is actually perfect for FS, even though he doesn't really have an abundance of "faster".  We've been getting gashed with strong-side runs for over a season now, and Griffin in theory should be better at solving that.

If you want to see what a FS should be doing, look no further than that challenged INT in our HAM game.  Was it Katsitonis who got that?  Probably ran all the way from the middle for that INT.  Now THAT'S what we need out of a FS.

I don't see that kind of hustle by any of our D, to be frank.  Well, maybe Holm & Jones.  We aren't taking these games seriously like our opponents are.  Eye on the prize.  The top teams are putting in playoff energy performance.  We're playing like it's the PS.  It's a morale/attitude/leadership issue, and not easy to fix.

Quote from: RebusRankin on June 16, 2026, 12:40:19 PMYou actually think its not JY running the D? Its his show.

Yes, I don't think JY is running things like it appears on paper.  I have thought that since the moment JY was given the job that Hall was the man behind the curtain, and have said so here ever since.

I think scheme is >50% Hall's creation.  Operations is mostly Younger.  Hall's health, wanting to keep Younger, and the limitations of the coaches cap are the "why".  If you want to yell at Younger, yell at Hall too.  If you want to fire Younger, you're probably going to have to fire Hall too.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 15, 2026, 08:33:52 PMI don't think Nichols has lost his ability. He may have lost a bit of a step. We moved Alexander from DHB to safety. Same skill sets, High football IQ, communication skills and good tackler.

Nichols can't move to FS if he's slower now, because what we need at FS is precisely the opposite: speed.  Add into that that Nichols would get killed on run stop.  He's already a weak tackler, especially against beef.

I actually think Kramdi is the near perfect choice as he's just beefy enough to put hits on guys and make punishing tackles, yet still fast enough to rove.  The lankier guys like Loffler & Dequoy -- they can't take more than a few years of that body abuse before they break.  I also think Kramdi has a bit (just a bit!) of that Loffler craziness, which really helps at FS.

And I'm not sure why Kramdi/FS is the main talking point here now, because vs HAM I didn't see that as a problem at all.  It was Moxey/Nichols getting picked on and losing that was the big problem.  The worst you can say about Kramdi is he wasn't in the picture helping out very often, but that may be more a function of Bo knowing how to avoid our FS.

Quote from: Jesse on June 15, 2026, 08:22:28 PMI would have liked to see Cam Allen come back on when Woodsbey was injured. Go back to what was working last year.

The D in the ESF was "working"??

Quote from: kkc60 on June 15, 2026, 03:27:12 PMThis defense also is not the same defense of years past. As for the scheme, that's just not true. The scheme changed when Hall was swapped for Younger. Sure, some aspects did not but more or less it's a different defense.

To me I see the same "Smoke & Mirrors" Hall D.  Remember, he wrote an actual book on it.  The over-complication and extreme "disguises" has literally been a Hall trademark since day 1.

And in any event, Younger is a disciple of Hall -- maybe so much so that they are interchangeable now.

Quote from: dd on June 15, 2026, 02:00:37 AMthat was the same problem last year. Yes, our offense sucked mightily, but dang, our defense couldn't stop the run last year and we opted to go with Wilson as our MLB??, while Sankey and Awe were free agents, man that was just plain dumb.

Sankey is highly sought after and buckets of $.  Someone mentioned $50k more for last season, but I bet this season he's more like $100k more than Jones or Wilson.  No way Sankey $ was possible for us after splurging on Ceresna.

Teams salivate over getting Sankey.  No one is interested in our LBers, except as backups or for hard-up teams.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 13, 2026, 07:08:48 PMHe'd still have to wait his turn for an injury to occur, Moxey signed for 2 years, so they won't be quick to give up on him.

If Moxey is the beaten rented mule meme in the next few games, you can bet Mafia will consider parking or cutting him.  Signing bonus be darned.  There is precedent with splashy FAs that let us down.  Chris Matthews, Bowman...

Moxey is at the tail end of his career and may not be fast enough anymore, kind of like Nichols.  And Houston/Taylor last couple of seasons.  DB is very much a young guy's position.

Quote from: Tecno on June 17, 2026, 02:36:08 AMThe D in the ESF was "working"??

Do we just get to pick and chose single games as exemplars for the whole season?

Quote from: Tecno on June 17, 2026, 02:42:49 AMSankey is highly sought after and buckets of $.  Someone mentioned $50k more for last season, but I bet this season he's more like $100k more than Jones or Wilson.  No way Sankey $ was possible for us after splurging on Ceresna.

Teams salivate over getting Sankey.  No one is interested in our LBers, except as backups or for hard-up teams.

I'm not so sure that is true. Montreal released Sankey in Dec and he was signed by the Lions. Because the SMS went up in 2025 and again in 2026 it's harder to evaluate apples to apples in the world of new SMS contracts.

It was me that mentioned he was earning about $50K than Jones last year. I doubt he's making that much more and may have even taken a cut as an aging player.


 T. Jones was the # 13 of 15 highest paid LB's last year.  We might have had him at a bit of a bargain. We added him to our PR after Edmonton released him in 2024.

Quote from: Jesse on June 17, 2026, 11:51:48 AMDo we just get to pick and chose single games as exemplars for the whole season?

It's of course relevant to look at the whole year but you and I both know the  emphasis should be on how the unit performed in the playoffs and against the better teams/QBs. It's really great that we stomped Montreal's 4th string QB into the ground in August but it matters far less than Alexander beating us by half time in November.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 01:07:08 PMI'm not so sure that is true. Montreal released Sankey in Dec and he was signed by the Lions. Because the SMS went up in 2025 and again in 2026 it's harder to evaluate apples to apples in the world of new SMS contracts.

It was me that mentioned he was earning about $50K than Jones last year. I doubt he's making that much more and may have even taken a cut as an aging player.


T. Jones was the # 13 of 15 highest paid LB's last year.  We might have had him at a bit of a bargain. We added him to our PR after Edmonton released him in 2024.

Tony Jones provides great bang for the buck, hard to find fault with a guy that plays with that intensity, Younger needs to let him play MLB and forget about moving him around and chasing QB's on blitzes, that's not a MLB's job.

Darnell Sankey is a tank, 6'0, 242 lbs, he's the Nik Lewis of the LB world, he works well in specific defences but nothing fancy like pass coverage. I think Lions picked him up mainly so he could key on Brady, Mills, Rankin and Oullettie, Western teams all have strong RB's.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 17, 2026, 06:04:22 PMTony Jones provides great bang for the buck, hard to find fault with a guy that plays with that intensity, Younger needs to let him play MLB and forget about moving him around and chasing QB's on blitzes, that's not a MLB's job.

Darnell Sankey is a tank, 6'0, 242 lbs, he's the Nik Lewis of the LB world, he works well in specific defences but nothing fancy like pass coverage. I think Lions picked him up mainly so he could key on Brady, Mills, Rankin and Oullettie, Western teams all have strong RB's.

Yes but players have different skill sets. We're getting good bang for the buck as you suggested, but Jones is not great in coverage as we discussed most of last year. He was moved to WIL to make that less of a liability.

You could argue we were getting good bang for the buck from Randolph instead of Broxton. That doesn't define who is the better player overall. It does impact the strategy a team uses on defence and you suggested what the Lions might have been thinking.

OTOH, 2025 discussion was about lack of pressure from the front 7 and QB's getting too long to throw with receivers always open.

Jones was part of that but now moved to a different place in the front 7.

Ultimately the question is which player was a better choice. If you base quality of player on his salary, then Sankey wins hands down.  The Bombers may have concluded Jones was a better fit based our strategy. The SMS may have been a factor or less so. Hard to argue that either way.
 SMS is cumulative and you can't have every player you might want.

You might want to consider the impact Sankey had on the Bombers in the Grey Cup after he joined the Als. I argued we should have signed him then and we choose not to. Both sides weighed pros and cons.

I'm in the camp that thinks Tony Jones should be used as a traditional MLB. I still like Kyrie at WIL also.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 17, 2026, 06:57:52 PMI'm in the camp that thinks Tony Jones should be used as a traditional MLB. I still like Kyrie at WIL also.

Yes I'd switch back going forward. Regardless of their skill sets I don't understand the logic of the change. I also would have wanted to switch Wilson to JSK but injury prevented that obviously.

Not that it matters now but I wonder what the plan was if JSK didn't get hurt? Neither would likely accept a PR spot so would there have been a move to the reserve list?  There wouldn't have been an extra spot for a DI without something happening. lol

Yes, I also want to see 6'1" 235, Tony Jones back at MLB.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 07:08:56 PMYes I'd switch back going forward. Regardless of their skill sets I don't understand the logic of the change. I also would have wanted to switch Wilson to JSK but injury prevented that obviously.

Not that it matters now but I wonder what the plan was if JSK didn't get hurt? Neither would likely accept a PR spot so would there have been a move to the reserve list?  There wouldn't have been an extra spot for a DI without something happening. lol

Jordan Younger would take Ceresna off the AR and JSK would go in and play DL. He would line up at the A gap and just when the offense thinks they can man handle little bro, he suddenly drops back into coverage down the middle and double-teams the safety zone. The offense is so thrown off that they use their 15 steamboats to throw a strike down the boundary side for a 25 yard gain and be firmly on our side of the field.

Got 'em right where we want 'em.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 17, 2026, 08:08:01 PMJordan Younger would take Ceresna off the AR and JSK would go in and play DL. He would line up at the A gap and just when the offense thinks they can man handle little bro, he suddenly drops back into coverage down the middle and double-teams the safety zone. The offense is so thrown off that they use their 15 steamboats to throw a strike down the boundary side for a 25 yard gain and be firmly on our side of the field.

Got 'em right where we want 'em.

lol :)

I nominate @blue_or_die to be the new DC.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 07:08:56 PMNot that it matters now but I wonder what the plan was if JSK didn't get hurt? Neither would likely accept a PR spot so would there have been a move to the reserve list?  There wouldn't have been an extra spot for a DI without something happening. lol

I bet the idea was to have JSK on AR in rotation, or to outright win Kyrie's spot with Kyrie in rotation.  Ayers or Woodbey would be the odd man out there.

Not only is JSK quicker/stronger than Kyrie at this stage, but he knows the Hall system.  AND he's intelligent, probably as much so as Kyrie.  Meaning he can help direct things and help stop the explosions.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 06:27:05 PMYou could argue we were getting good bang for the buck from Randolph instead of Broxton. That doesn't define who is the better player overall. It does impact the strategy a team uses on defence and you suggested what the Lions might have been thinking.

Bang for buck is important as long as the player is getting their job done.  Rand/Loft were not getting their job done in run support.  Period.  Broxton is here because we felt we needed to spend big to get this job done.  So far it hasn't materialized, but I can see they are trying.  Broxton clearly is used to just sitting there like Big Stan does, as LT's are wont to do.  It might take a bit to turn Broxton into Yoshi -- a real run-blocking RT.

Oh ya, and Broxton is now our built-in guaranteed LT when Stan gets hurt or retires.  We killed a lot of birds with that stone.  Probably the best FA move since we picked up Biggie.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 06:27:05 PMUltimately the question is which player was a better choice. If you base quality of player on his salary, then Sankey wins hands down.  The Bombers may have concluded Jones was a better fit based our strategy. The SMS may have been a factor or less so. Hard to argue that either way.

You ask the league's RBs who they fear more, Sankey or Jones.  LOL, Jones doesn't even register.  Sankey is probably a top-2 "please don't hit me" answer.  But Jones is VERY good and he'll still tackle you.  He just won't take your head off like Sankey does.  So back to "does he do his job" -- yes, Jones does it quite well.  And his increased mobility vs Sankey is more important to what we're trying to do.

And he's way cheaper.  What's not to love?

Quote from: Jesse on June 17, 2026, 11:51:48 AMDo we just get to pick and chose single games as exemplars for the whole season?

When it's a microcosm of all that was wrong in the regular season?  Sure!  And if we didn't get those fortuitous INTs/fumbles, the score would have been even more pathetic.  Our D couldn't stop any run ever, and still can't now.  Our O couldn't move the ball if we tried.  Brady couldn't run for squat in a way that really mattered.

Like was also said: yes, when it's one and done, you can pick & choose that single game.  We didn't even make it close outside of the turnovers.  It was an actual blowout and quite embarrassing.  Everyone saw & knew we were being pwned.  Alexander had his way with us.  Zach struggled for every yard.  Now compare with the MTL/HAM EDF and SSK/BC EDF.  Super close, every team clearly with a competent O and competent D.

2025 WPG was 1 game over 50/50.  That's pure butt, and the ESF directly reflects that buttiness.

from what I've seen in the 2 games they've played, the BB will be a game above 500 team again in 2026. We're going to have our hands absolutely full with Rourke, Harris, Kelly and Alexander

Quote from: dd on June 17, 2026, 10:34:59 PMfrom what I've seen in the 2 games they've played, the BB will be a game above 500 team again in 2026. We're going to have our hands absolutely full with Rourke, Harris, Kelly and Alexander

Agreed.  Or worse.  We aren't going to get the gimmees we got from BC last season.  And TOR isn't a free bingo spot anymore.  Even EDM we probably only go .500 against.

That's why I think we need to stand back and critically evaluate what we've got and what we are doing -- NOW.  The main goals/lessons from 2025 are we need to stop the run, get pressure, make better holes for Brady, protect Zach, and not suck so much at the short pass game.

From my vantage point we've only done 2: protect Zach and better short pass.  Jury is still out on whether we'll get pressure: 1 great game vs a good OL, 1 crap game vs a questionable OL.  The others we haven't improved at all.

The problem with 2026 is you can't take 6 weeks to figure this stuff out.  You need to do it NOW.  The good teams are going to run away with it NOW and the season will be out of reach by the day after the banjo bowl.

Quote from: Tecno on June 17, 2026, 09:22:58 PMI bet the idea was to have JSK on AR in rotation, or to outright win Kyrie's spot with Kyrie in rotation.  Ayers or Woodbey would be the odd man out there.

Not only is JSK quicker/stronger than Kyrie at this stage, but he knows the Hall system.  AND he's intelligent, probably as much so as Kyrie.  Meaning he can help direct things and help stop the explosions.

I thought about that but Ayers seems untouchable with O'Shea. Woodbey is a different player and would be difficult to bump.

Anyway, we'll never find out so it's just a rhetorical thought.

Quote from: Tecno on June 17, 2026, 09:30:47 PMBang for buck is important as long as the player is getting their job done.  Rand/Loft were not getting their job done in run support.  Period.  Broxton is here because we felt we needed to spend big to get this job done.  So far it hasn't materialized, but I can see they are trying.  Broxton clearly is used to just sitting there like Big Stan does, as LT's are wont to do.  It might take a bit to turn Broxton into Yoshi -- a real run-blocking RT.

Oh ya, and Broxton is now our built-in guaranteed LT when Stan gets hurt or retires.  We killed a lot of birds with that stone.  Probably the best FA move since we picked up Biggie.

You ask the league's RBs who they fear more, Sankey or Jones.  LOL, Jones doesn't even register.  Sankey is probably a top-2 "please don't hit me" answer.  But Jones is VERY good and he'll still tackle you.  He just won't take your head off like Sankey does.  So back to "does he do his job" -- yes, Jones does it quite well.  And his increased mobility vs Sankey is more important to what we're trying to do.

And he's way cheaper.  What's not to love?

Not every player on any roster is going to be top tier. Some will be blue collar players that every team has to have.

I think it's debatable whether Jones is getting the job done or whether he falls into good bang for the buck. Ask your self why did he get moved to WIL? MLB is a more significant position on defence. Call it a sliding scale.  Typically the MLB is in control of the front 7 ( Bighill ).

Similar to the importance of the LT on offence, I don't think getting good bang for the buck is what I want at either position. When Bighill was a Bomber ( under Hall ) he was close to the top of salaries at MLB.

We know that for every player added at top dollar then another player has to fill a position for less money. On a scale of 1 - 10 where would we rank Jones or Wilson?

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 11:29:27 PMNot every player on any roster is going to be top tier. Some will be blue collar players that every team has to have.

I think it's debatable whether Jones is getting the job done or whether he falls into good bang for the buck. Ask your self why did he get moved to WIL? MLB is a more significant position on defence. Call it a sliding scale.  Typically the MLB is in control of the front 7 ( Bighill ).

Similar to the importance of the LT on offence, I don't think getting good bang for the buck is what I want at either position. When Bighill was a Bomber ( under Hall ) he was close to the top of salaries at MLB.

We know that for every player added at top dollar then another player has to fill a position for less money. On a scale of 1 - 10 where would we rank Jones or Wilson?

Tony Jones is both, bargain MLB playing at a high level that has remained healthy, perfect scenario that allows them to spend bigger money elsewhere.  Don't waste time pointing fingers at players that are near all-stars as problems, Younger chose to play him at WIL, maybe Kyrie is the better communicator of the two or could be some other factor we are not aware of yet.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 18, 2026, 12:32:35 AMTony Jones is both, bargain MLB playing at a high level that has remained healthy, perfect scenario that allows them to spend bigger money elsewhere.  Don't waste time pointing fingers at players that are near all-stars as problems, Younger chose to play him at WIL, maybe Kyrie is the better communicator of the two or could be some other factor we are not aware of yet.

We'll see. I mentioned there was a a lot of conversation about Jones last year. IMO he's a good LB but not a great LB. That can work but it depends on the rest of the defence around him

At the moment we have a bunch of rookies that are TBD and several others that have been moved into new roles.

Quote from: blue_gold_84 on June 17, 2026, 08:37:45 PMI nominate @blue_or_die to be the new DC.

I'm not the hero this forum wanted.

Im the hero this forum deserves.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 18, 2026, 03:51:16 AMI'm not the hero this forum wanted.

Im the hero this forum deserves.

(https://y.yarn.co/8db7a560-6dd8-4824-8598-2c71e7177f22_text.gif)

Sounds like.....

The Season's over.

Start planning for next season, and figure out new head coach.

You people are funny.

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 03:25:50 PMSounds like.....

The Season's over.

Start planning for next season, and figure out new head coach.

You people are funny.

sounds like you don't know how to interpret valid criticisms

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 03:25:50 PMSounds like.....

The Season's over.

Start planning for next season, and figure out new head coach.

You people are funny.

thats the point to make suggestions/identify needs so the season isnt lost. What did u think a forum is for, to simply say " go Bombers go"? We have posters for that too

Yes we have more injuries than normal this early that we have to adjust our roster. New players and the usual short pre season means some cohesion work in process.

It's difficult to know how well or how quickly this all works out. Nothing out of the norm.

Quote from: kkc60 on June 18, 2026, 04:38:01 PMsounds like you don't know how to interpret valid criticisms

Clever.

Didn't see much other than criticism here lately.

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 07:20:29 PMClever.

Didn't see much other than criticism here lately.

I guess we could and maybe should do a thread on the offense for putting together a mostly good game. The problem is that it wasn't enough to make up for the defense's very poor performance. If it was a few bad plays we can complain and move on but this thread is about a greater, more systemic issue that warrants criticisms and solutions.

It's actually the opposite of wanting to blow it all up and move on - it's "what should we do to make sure this doesn't happen again". I think it's fair to hold one phase of the team to that standard.

Next week if we win, it'll be roses again around here.

Quote from: blue_or_die on June 18, 2026, 07:31:35 PMI guess we could and maybe should do a thread on the offense for putting together a mostly good game. The problem is that it wasn't enough to make up for the defense's very poor performance. If it was a few bad plays we can complain and move on but this thread is about a greater, more systemic issue that warrants criticisms and solutions.

It's actually the opposite of wanting to blow it all up and move on - it's "what should we do to make sure this doesn't happen again". I think it's fair to hold one phase of the team to that standard.

Next week if we win, it'll be roses again around here.

O'Shea said during the offseason he should have been more involved with his coordinators last season, that comment may have been spurred by post season conversations he had with players during exit interviews or maybe there were things he saw on both sides of the ball he didn't like, but hesitated to interfere with their game planning.

Wonder if he is keeping a tighter check this season?  He's probably out of his league when it comes to play calling or the schemes they're using, but he can definitely push them in any direction he wants them to go.

 

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 03:25:50 PMSounds like.....

The Season's over.

Start planning for next season, and figure out new head coach.

You people are funny.

I don't post a lot but I too made comments about our D that I think need to change ie run D, middle LB switch etc.

I took markf's comment as a reminder that it's only 2 games this year so maybe we need to see what if any adjustments are made.

I know some will say that we have had these issues in past years as well but I think the team made some very good moves - Ceresna and Broxton as examples to address those areas many thought needed addressing.

Just my opinion.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 18, 2026, 05:22:35 PMYes we have more injuries than normal this early that we have to adjust our roster. New players and the usual short pre season means some cohesion work in process.

Normally that would be fine.  But the clearly top-4 teams hit the 2026 ground sprinting.  Whatever the reason -- bad luck, whatever -- we don't have the luxury of taking until Oct to solve our glaring holes.

Lucky for us the next game is EDM, which is probably the 2nd worst team, so maybe we can fake it until we make it.

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 03:25:50 PMThe Season's over.

Normally every team but maybe 1 or 2 is floundering just like we are now.  That buys everyone time.  No such luxury in 2026.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 11:29:27 PMI think it's debatable whether Jones is getting the job done or whether he falls into good bang for the buck. Ask your self why did he get moved to WIL? MLB is a more significant position on defence. Call it a sliding scale.  Typically the MLB is in control of the front 7 ( Bighill ).

I posit Jones to WILL because teams reamed our edges in the run game.  Jones will stop weak side runs.  (Same reason Griffin to SAM.)  I also posit Kyrie is the brains, Jones the muscle, thus Kyrie to MLB ("QB of D").

Whether this is actually working out so far is debatable.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 17, 2026, 11:29:27 PMWe know that for every player added at top dollar then another player has to fill a position for less money. On a scale of 1 - 10 where would we rank Jones or Wilson?

In terms of Jones vs all CFL WILL/MLBs, I'd give him a 7.  Beverrette would be above him.  I don't value "take-yer-head-off" as much at MLB so I also rate him highly, 6-7 at MLB.  His 2025 numbers don't lie.  Jones is a steal at his SMS hit.  The only downside is he's not cerebral like Biggie.

Quote from: TrueBlue4 on June 19, 2026, 12:18:23 AMI don't post a lot but I too made comments about our D that I think need to change ie run D, middle LB switch etc.

I took markf's comment as a reminder that it's only 2 games this year so maybe we need to see what if any adjustments are made.

I know some will say that we have had these issues in past years as well but I think the team made some very good moves - Ceresna and Broxton as examples to address those areas many thought needed addressing.

Just my opinion.

Thanks, that is what I meant.

Quote from: markf on June 18, 2026, 03:25:50 PMSounds like.....

The Season's over.

Start planning for next season, and figure out new head coach.

You people are funny.

I agree game 2 and the forum swung manic early and often here, patience my friends.  Deep breath.  Nice to have someone on here with a similar take as me.  All opinions are welcome on here.  The swings on here are like the stock market.  Buy low now! LOL

I'm pretty critical of our defense but the season is absolutely not over by any stretch.

I think Younger needs an intervention if we're going to do anything down the stretch but if things are going to bottom out, good to do so in week two. There's plenty of time to course correct.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 19, 2026, 02:56:49 PMI'm pretty critical of our defense but the season is absolutely not over by any stretch.

I think Younger needs an intervention if we're going to do anything down the stretch but if things are going to bottom out, good to do so in week two. There's plenty of time to course correct.

Terrible idea imo.  Intervention on a proven, respected veteran coach backed by one of the better defensive minds, no thanks.  Tweek, evolve, fix schemes.  Try different rotations or people in different roles.  Stay the course.  Game 2.  Wow. 

D has issues but you are prescribing the wrong meds imo. Heard this story before, some wanted Halls head before our mini dynasty run.  That worked out ok and this will as well imo, but likely more work to do this time than last.

Agree nothing but time.  Too early to call this bottom.

Quote from: Tecno on June 19, 2026, 05:57:24 AMI posit Jones to WILL because teams reamed our edges in the run game.  Jones will stop weak side runs.  (Same reason Griffin to SAM.)  I also posit Kyrie is the brains, Jones the muscle, thus Kyrie to MLB ("QB of D").

Whether this is actually working out so far is debatable.

In terms of Jones vs all CFL WILL/MLBs, I'd give him a 7.  Beverrette would be above him.  I don't value "take-yer-head-off" as much at MLB so I also rate him highly, 6-7 at MLB.  His 2025 numbers don't lie.  Jones is a steal at his SMS hit.  The only downside is he's not cerebral like Biggie.

Re-watched the Ti-Cat game last night and have to conclude, Tony Jones, Kramdi, Kyrie and Griffin are not the problem, plenty of plays they are making trouble in the backfield.  Individually they were making plays whenever the ball came their way, unfortunately they were not always in the right place at the right time to shut down Roundtree.  I would estimate Jones and Kyrie shared equal snaps at MLB, so the position chart is not that important.

It's difficult to move Kramdi to Safety as he's better in the box making big plays but Griffin is bigger, faster and more efficient, if less flashy.  He doesn't necessarily make the big play but he covers his side very well and is always in on the tackle, if anything he plays conservatively. Kramdi may learn to adapt his game to Safety but running and pass coverage doesn't really suit his style, maybe when Allen comes back they figure out the ratio to allow him to play high while Kramdi assumes the role of a roaming 4th linebacker.

We need a safety and CB's that can cover, Moxey got hosed last game severly. You aint winning anything with that secondary, Holm is the only one worthy of starting, others need to improve or be replaced, as they are sub-par talent wise, always trailing the play, never breaking up the play like other secondaries do.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 18, 2026, 08:24:51 PMO'Shea said during the offseason he should have been more involved with his coordinators last season, that comment may have been spurred by post season conversations he had with players during exit interviews or maybe there were things he saw on both sides of the ball he didn't like, but hesitated to interfere with their game planning.

Wonder if he is keeping a tighter check this season?  He's probably out of his league when it comes to play calling or the schemes they're using, but he can definitely push them in any direction he wants them to go.

 

I think that comment was about rookie OC Hogan.

Having JY at DC with Hall overseeing, and Condell at OC, pretty sure he has confidence in the way they run their squads in general.

Quote from: theaardvark on June 19, 2026, 05:30:14 PMI think that comment was about rookie OC Hogan.

Having JY at DC with Hall overseeing, and Condell at OC, pretty sure he has confidence in the way they run their squads in general.

Even so, a HC has to keep his finger in the pie on both sides of the ball to understand the dynamic in the room, providing no guidance to coordinators is risky to career longevity.

Quote from: TrueBlue4 on June 19, 2026, 12:18:23 AMI don't post a lot but I too made comments about our D that I think need to change ie run D, middle LB switch etc.

I took markf's comment as a reminder that it's only 2 games this year so maybe we need to see what if any adjustments are made.

I know some will say that we have had these issues in past years as well but I think the team made some very good moves - Ceresna and Broxton as examples to address those areas many thought needed addressing.

Just my opinion.

I don't understand why when people discuss things (especially things that are true) and suggest change is needed in order to correct, some people react by saying "we just need to wait and see". Obviously we will wait and see - as fans we have zero influence lol. Are we not supposed to talk about these truths because we have to assume they will get taken care of because players and coaches have done good in the past, or because we did a good job in free agency like you suggest? It's so thought-terminating.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 19, 2026, 05:07:10 PMTerrible idea imo.  Intervention on a proven, respected veteran coach backed by one of the better defensive minds, no thanks.  Tweek, evolve, fix schemes.  Try different rotations or people in different roles.  Stay the course.  Game 2.  Wow. 

D has issues but you are prescribing the wrong meds imo. Heard this story before, some wanted Halls head before our mini dynasty run.  That worked out ok and this will as well imo, but likely more work to do this time than last.

Agree nothing but time.  Too early to call this bottom.

Would you really call Jordan Younger a vet coach? This is his first job as a DC. He's done it for 2 years. And he took over a veteran laden group that starts very few Canadians.

Quote from: Jesse on June 19, 2026, 06:17:42 PMWould you really call Jordan Younger a vet coach? This is his first job as a DC. He's done it for 2 years. And he took over a veteran laden group that starts very few Canadians.

I think that's the frustrating part with the defense underperforming as it has. It's a lot of vets and 3/4 DI spots (yes, Vaval is STs but still). If the struggles continue, there really is no excuse for Younger. Yeah, injuries happen but other teams have them too.

Younger is totally unproven. He had some good initial success and hasn't at all been able to adapt to the adjustments that offensive coordinators have made over the last year and a half when they face his system.

From where the unit was when he took over, to where it is now, you can only conclude there's been regression. How much is up for debate. I'd say a concerning amount, but there's some factors to account for also. I also put more of the personnel issues at his feet at this point, his system needs a certain type of player and he's largely had a chance to mould the pipeline to his liking, yet the results keep getting worse.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 19, 2026, 07:44:00 PMYounger is totally unproven. He had some good initial success and hasn't at all been able to adapt to the adjustments that offensive coordinators have made over the last year and a half when they face his system.

From where the unit was when he took over, to where it is now, you can only conclude there's been regression. How much is up for debate. I'd say a concerning amount, but there's some factors to account for also. I also put more of the personnel issues at his feet at this point, his system needs a certain type of player and he's largely had a chance to mould the pipeline to his liking, yet the results keep getting worse.

He isn't unproven.  Hogan was unproven.  I firmly believe we are well positioned in our defensive coaches.

Quote from: kkc60 on June 19, 2026, 06:55:05 PMI think that's the frustrating part with the defense underperforming as it has. It's a lot of vets and 3/4 DI spots (yes, Vaval is STs but still). If the struggles continue, there really is no excuse for Younger. Yeah, injuries happen but other teams have them too.

Had a good D for a long time, 2 games in not so much let her cook before you turn off the smoker early.

Quote from: Jesse on June 19, 2026, 06:17:42 PMWould you really call Jordan Younger a vet coach? This is his first job as a DC. He's done it for 2 years. And he took over a veteran laden group that starts very few Canadians.

Yes I do.  He found some incredible success early.

His resume speaks for itself

Jordan Younger - Wikipedia https://share.google/5SY3EkzhQ61KEXPzq

You can probably say he's a young, exciting, up and coming defensive mind with some new ideas.

But in no professional line of work that I can think of would two and a bit years on the job really be considered experienced.

You can have an opinion but you can't create your own facts.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 19, 2026, 07:57:48 PMYou can probably say he's a young, exciting, up and coming defensive mind with some new ideas.

But in no professional line of work that I can think of would two and a bit years on the job really be considered experienced.

You can have an opinion but you can't create your own facts.

He has played football for a long time, his resume includes years of coaching. He is anchored by one of the best in the biz.  A younger veteran coach imo.  His resume is so much more than two years at DC.

My opinion is based on the fact he has been in football at many levels for decades.  You seam to be ignoring the facts more than I to suit your narrative of an intervention which I'll pay 10 to 1 odds that ain't happening.

He has 4 cups.  If that's not proven and veteran what is? Yes he ain't Ritchie Hall or Dave Ritchie level (yet).  It's ok to consider someone's else point of view.  The truth likely lies in the middle of two polarized positions.

He has been in our system since 2018.  Guess all those years don't count.  Telling me to use facts is an old line imo, I believe wiki did that for me.  Bit of years on the job..... right.

Some don't like his system and that's ok but let's  don't down play his successful career to date.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 19, 2026, 08:11:48 PMHe has played football for a long time, his resume includes years of coaching. He is anchored by one of the best in the biz.  A younger veteran coach imo.  His resume is so much more than two years at DC.

My opinion is based on the fact he has been in football at many levels for decades.  You seam to be ignoring the facts more than I to suit your narrative of an intervention which I'll pay 10 to 1 odds that ain't happening.

He has 4 cups.  If that's not proven and veteran what is? Yes he ain't Ritchie Hall or Dave Ritchie level (yet).  It's ok to consider someone's else point of view.  The truth likely lies in the middle of two polarized positions.

He has been in our system since 2018.  Guess all those years don't count.  Telling me to use facts is an old line imo, I believe wiki did that for me.  Bit of years on the job..... right.

Some don't like his system and that's ok but let's  don't down play his successful career to date.

His background in football got him the job. It doesn't mean he'll be a good coordinator.

Generally speaking, as you progress in your career the things that you were really good at, that got you the promotion in the first place, are not the things that define your success in the next one.

Being a good defensive back is no guarantee you'll be a good positional coach and being a good positional coach is no guarantee you'll be a good coordinator which is no guarantee you'll be a good head coach.

The skills you need and require at each level change drastically. It's true for sports, business, and just about anything else.

Quote from: dd on June 19, 2026, 05:18:15 PMWe need a safety and CB's that can cover, Moxey got hosed last game severly. You aint winning anything with that secondary, Holm is the only one worthy of starting, others need to improve or be replaced, as they are sub-par talent wise, always trailing the play, never breaking up the play like other secondaries do.

Seems harsh.  I always used to wonder why Mafia was so darn harsh with DBs.  Fogg, Randle, Moe, Taylor... all just used up and tossed aside.  I always thought they were cut way too early.

But it turns out DBs, all but the most exceptional ones, lose it super fast & young.  Mafia used to recognize this.  They were ruthless in their cuts.

It would appear that's what we need to start doing again.  And I need to be less sentimental.  Moxey looks like Moe & Randle after their return from injury.  Nichols maybe like Fogg: just rapidly losing it.

Luckily Holm seems more like Sayles: a guy with longevity.  Major is young and could be the next big thing.  I liked Bonds and would ask him back.  Maybe splash FA at DB isn't a good idea anymore.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 19, 2026, 08:25:43 PMHis background in football got him the job. It doesn't mean he'll be a good coordinator.

Generally speaking, as you progress in your career the things that you were really good at, that got you the promotion in the first place, are not the things that define your success in the next one.

Being a good defensive back is no guarantee you'll be a good positional coach and being a good positional coach is no guarantee you'll be a good coordinator which is no guarantee you'll be a good head coach.

The skills you need and require at each level change drastically. It's true for sports, business, and just about anything else.

Missing the point imo.  He has years of experience both coaching and playing.  I firmly believe he is already a good DC who might be great one day. You are trying to resell your narrative by not acknowledging his past success and experience (see wiki for facts).  Agree to disagree.

Not that many players have the skill set to transfer from the field to coaching.  Those special skills have keep him employed as a coach for many years.

I don't believe speaking in general terms without specific facts to back your argument has advanced your position.  4 rings.  Rare company there.

Quote from: Tecno on June 19, 2026, 09:52:28 PMSeems harsh.  I always used to wonder why Mafia was so darn harsh with DBs.  Fogg, Randle, Moe, Taylor... all just used up and tossed aside.  I always thought they were cut way too early.

But it turns out DBs, all but the most exceptional ones, lose it super fast & young.  Mafia used to recognize this.  They were ruthless in their cuts.

It would appear that's what we need to start doing again.  And I need to be less sentimental.  Moxey looks like Moe & Randle after their return from injury.  Nichols maybe like Fogg: just rapidly losing it.

Luckily Holm seems more like Sayles: a guy with longevity.  Major is young and could be the next big thing.  I liked Bonds and would ask him back.  Maybe splash FA at DB isn't a good idea anymore.

the defense reminds me of a previous version, where it was bad until we got an effective safwty in Alexander , right now it looks like the dbs are being asked too much, with
Kramdl being utilized to stop the run and not having the speed needed by a safety in coverage.

The funny thing is, I think the D, even the DBs, would be great if we could get pressure.  Look at week 1 vs week 2.  One game we got pressure on a good QB/O and we creamed them.  The other we got zero pressure.  Nada.  Nothing.  And our DBs were eaten alive.

It's like Younger/Hall/Mafia decided the 2025 scheme was fine, and all it needed was pressure.  And so they got Ceresna, and ditched underperforming DL.  So on paper problem solved, right?

But then our pressure is negated and we're straight back to the DBs being unable to cover when the QB has all day.  And we have no plan B.

So if we're sticking with this system, we have to solve that pressure problem, even when the OL isn't giving up pressure.  Only then maybe our DBs will start to look good.  The only alternative is blowing up the system and starting from scratch.  Might we be able to sign another beast on DL?  Couch sitter?  Trade?

Quote from: Pete on June 19, 2026, 11:42:32 PMthe defense reminds me of a previous version, where it was bad until we got an effective safwty in Alexander , right now it looks like the dbs are being asked too much, with
Kramdl being utilized to stop the run and not having the speed needed by a safety in coverage.

Safety is a key position on D, look at how many plays Hamilton's safety has made tonight, he's a game changer. Ours is a game changer too, just in the other direction!!

Quote from: dd on June 20, 2026, 02:27:10 AMSafety is a key position on D, look at how many plays Hamilton's safety has made tonight, he's a game changer.

Which is weird, as Katsantonis has the wrong body type for a roving FS.  He's like a little ball of beef, not a lanky Dequoy.  And yet he's hustling his butt off to get to where the ball is going to be and make the INT/knockdown.  And he's always allowed to play the ball, not sit back to be a backup to the tackler.

Maybe half of a good FS is pure hustle.  Just move your butt fast to the ball.  And maybe a good nose for sniffing out the play to cheat to the correct side while the QB is winding up.

Something that I didn't really see out of Allen, and clearly not Kramdi yet.

QuoteWhich is weird, as Katsantonis has the wrong body type for a roving FS.  He's like a little ball of beef, not a lanky Dequoy.  And yet he's hustling his butt off to get to where the ball is going to be and make the INT/knockdown.  And he's always allowed to play the ball, not sit back to be a backup to the tackler.

Maybe half of a good FS is pure hustle.  Just move your butt fast to the ball.  And maybe a good nose for sniffing out the play to cheat to the correct side while the QB is winding up.

Something that I didn't really see out of Allen, and clearly not Kramdi yet.

Ya your safety has got to have serious speed and aggression to make plays. Kramdi is gross at the position, same with Allen. As soon as Alexander moved to safety our defense changed instantly. We need BA  II !!

After watching the bc/hamilton game maybe our defense isnt quite as bad as indicated, Hamiltons offense is just that good
 Having said that the concerns are still legitimate.

Quote from: Pete on June 20, 2026, 02:08:55 PMAfter watching the bc/hamilton game maybe our defense isnt quite as bad as indicated, Hamiltons offense is just that good
 Having said that the concerns are still legitimate.

Yes we are nowhere close to being able to stop Hammy at the moment.

I wonder if the BC forums are calling for the DC's head.....

Quote from: Pete on June 20, 2026, 02:08:55 PMAfter watching the bc/hamilton game maybe our defense isnt quite as bad as indicated, Hamiltons offense is just that good
 Having said that the concerns are still legitimate.

Hamilton currently looks stronger than the Bombers did 3-4 years ago when Zach was dominating games, but I wouldn't put money down on a Grey Cup appearance yet, we'll see if they can keep it up as that organization has been super inconsistent over the last decade.  They're notorious for injuries along their O-line and D-line, that might be the rock that sinks their boat this season.

To some degree, watching the TiCats destroy the Lions, I feel a little better about our problems on defence.

Younger's record as a coach here is 94–46.  AI told me hopefully its close to being right, includes playoffs.

#facts

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 21, 2026, 01:49:24 AMYounger's record as a coach here is 94–46.  AI told me hopefully its close to being right, includes playoffs.

#facts

Why don't you pull his Pop Warner record while you're at it?  :D 

How'd he do in middle school volleyball?

Yes,  for sure, include how he did when Richie Hall was calling plays. Maybe we should go back to that. It's a heck of a lot better record than when he has been calling them (ESPECIALLY playoffs).

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 21, 2026, 01:49:24 AMYounger's record as a coach here is 94–46.  AI told me hopefully its close to being right, includes playoffs.

"coach" maybe, but not DC.  He's only on year 3 or 4 as DC?  3 x roughtly-20 = 60 games total

Not arguing his record is pretty good, though.  And even at least 1 season where the D carried the O.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 21, 2026, 01:49:24 AMYounger's record as a coach here is 94–46.  AI told me hopefully its close to being right, includes playoffs.

#facts

the thing is the record doesnt mean much if the other teams have now figured out how to beat it .

what is younger's record as DC you ask?? its 21 wins and 15 losses, hardly stellar stats.

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 02:40:17 AMwhat is younger's record as DC you ask?? its 21 wins and 15 losses, hardly stellar stats.

Well I'll be, that pretty much coincides with the Bombers downturn!

His record indicates experience, success, continuity and his football background tells me that he can adapt.

He has lead a very good Bomber defense for a few years, which has been challenged lately.  His track record in football speak for itself.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 21, 2026, 02:05:13 AMWhy don't you pull his Pop Warner record while you're at it?  :D 

How'd he do in middle school volleyball?

Yes,  for sure, include how he did when Richie Hall was calling plays. Maybe we should go back to that. It's a heck of a lot better record than when he has been calling them (ESPECIALLY playoffs).

Making ridiculous suggestions adds nothing to the discussion.  It only adds to the weakness of your position on the matter imo.

 His record as pro coach for the Bomber is based on facts and 100% relevant to the discussion.  You can have an opinion but it should be backed up by facts.  Your words not mine. 

Replacing your DC after two games is as bad an idea as I have heard.  We have the ability for these two good to great defensive minds to figure this out together.  Paying 10 to 1 odds that ain't happening.

Quote from: Tecno on June 21, 2026, 02:09:26 AM"coach" maybe, but not DC.  He's only on year 3 or 4 as DC?  3 x roughtly-20 = 60 games total

Not arguing his record is pretty good, though.  And even at least 1 season where the D carried the O.

Yup his D can preform well even when our O sucks.  This year our O will be average to great at times.  Receipe for success.

Quote from: Pete on June 21, 2026, 02:27:13 AMthe thing is the record doesnt mean much if the other teams have now figured out how to beat it .

Many more games where they didn't beat it to one's they did.

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 02:40:17 AMwhat is younger's record as DC you ask?? its 21 wins and 15 losses, hardly stellar stats.

With the stinky O last year, not too shabby imo

Real easy to kick a dog when down.  People were punting at Hall pre mini dynasty run.  Hmmmm?

Will be a fun ride this season to see how this story ends.  The parity in the league won't make it easy but will make for awesome football.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 21, 2026, 02:50:58 AMWell I'll be, that pretty much coincides with the Bombers downturn!

The game has 3 phases, the D hasn't been the main issue.  Please provide us the defensive and offensive stats for last couple years.  I'll drop a hint, D been near top, O been a little lacking.  Don't fix what ain't broke but a little mending is ok lol.
#morefacts

If Younger's system sucks and is doomed to lose, then why is Hall sitting there putting up with it?  He's present every game, every meeting.  He'd speak up if he thought there was a major problem.  And that's assuming my theory about Hall still being the big brain/boss is wrong...

What's more likely is both Younger & Hall both agree on whatever mad science it is they have swirling around their heads.  Hopefully they see what we do though and realize tweaks need to be made.  If it's personnel, change the personnel or change the scheme to suit the weak links you have.  If it's scheme that good teams have found the cheat code for, then tweak the schemes.

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 02:40:17 AMwhat is younger's record as DC you ask?? its 21 wins and 15 losses, hardly stellar stats.

It wouldn't hurt as much if they'd get back to being dominant at home.  So many home losses last year and now this year (if the opener is anything to go by).  We're used to being 85% at home.

I know, I know, stupid to focus more on home games... but this is a business and you need to keep the fans happy.  Go 0-9 at home this season and see if you can still get sell-outs.

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 02:40:17 AMwhat is younger's record as DC you ask?? its 21 wins and 15 losses, hardly stellar stats.

I've got my concerns about Younger and our defense, but our offense is more responsible for this record than the defense, especially last year.

Quote from: bunker on June 21, 2026, 03:21:53 AMI've got my concerns about Younger and our defense, but our offense is more responsible for this record than the defense, especially last year.

Yup, even a good D can look bad when on the field too much

Quote from: Tecno on June 21, 2026, 03:21:10 AMIt wouldn't hurt as much if they'd get back to being dominant at home.  So many home losses last year and now this year (if the opener is anything to go by).  We're used to being 85% at home.

I know, I know, stupid to focus more on home games... but this is a business and you need to keep the fans happy.  Go 0-9 at home this season and see if you can still get sell-outs.

We got spoiled but yes a big factor.  We want that home success to keep the house packed!

Quote from: Tecno on June 21, 2026, 03:18:21 AMIf Younger's system sucks and is doomed to lose, then why is Hall sitting there putting up with it?  He's present every game, every meeting.  He'd speak up if he thought there was a major problem.  And that's assuming my theory about Hall still being the big brain/boss is wrong...

What's more likely is both Younger & Hall both agree on whatever mad science it is they have swirling around their heads.  Hopefully they see what we do though and realize tweaks need to be made.  If it's personnel, change the personnel or change the scheme to suit the weak links you have.  If it's scheme that good teams have found the cheat code for, then tweak the schemes.

A very good likely take on the reality of the situation

I m not so sure it's the system than I am it's the lack of talent. We never have effectively replace Alexander at safety, we used to have decent defensive tackles but did nothing when we lost stove and then sayles. We lost Jeffcoat and our pass rush has suffered ever since, sure we got ceresna, but Jefferson has aged out and does nothing but volleyball blocks. No pass rush threat from him, not like it used to be with him and Jeffcoat. Bighill aged out and we haven't had the dominant monster in the middle for seasons now. We lost a shutdown corner in ford and replaced him with 2 cornerbacks that get beat routinely. So add all that up and you could have Vince Lombardi coaching our D, it would still suck cause we ve lost too much talent and have failed to adequately replace it

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 04:35:59 AMI m not so sure it's the system than I am it's the lack of talent. We never have effectively replace Alexander at safety, we used to have decent defensive tackles but did nothing when we lost stove and then sayles. We lost Jeffcoat and our pass rush has suffered ever since, sure we got ceresna, but Jefferson has aged out and does nothing but volleyball blocks. No pass rush threat from him, not like it used to be with him and Jeffcoat. Bighill aged out and we haven't had the dominant monster in the middle for seasons now. We lost a shutdown corner in ford and replaced him with 2 cornerbacks that get beat routinely. So add all that up and you could have Vince Lombardi coaching our D, it would still suck cause we ve lost too much talent and have failed to adequately replace it

I think it's both

I think it's a few things:

The system forces some tough personnel choices which can make it hard to scout or recruit for especially at the spots with the greatest degree of difference, linebacker and safety and moderately on the defensive line.

The approach looks and feels exceptionally bad when it doesn't work due to how passive it is. The eye test is terrible. High pressure defenses can also get shredded but they at least go down making the odd play. That feels (and I'd argue it is) better even if it's a tough day at the office for both.

The last is my biggest concern though: Younger has really only had success in a three lineman, 9 drop base package and when you take that away from him because either: the offense has schemed it or he doesn't have the hybid athletes he need to pull it off, he isn't able to do anything else.

I am hard on Younger and some of you like him but that last point is, for my money, undeniably true and the biggest problem on that side of the ball over the last year and half. It been three years and he's done one thing well and that one thing is being increasingly countered by OCs/QBs who have put in the time.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 21, 2026, 11:56:33 AMI think it's a few things:

The system forces some tough personnel choices which can make it hard to scout or recruit for especially at the spots with the greatest degree of difference, linebacker and safety and moderately on the defensive line.

The approach looks and feels exceptionally bad when it doesn't work due to how passive it is. The eye test is terrible. High pressure defenses can also get shredded but they at least go down making the odd play. That feels (and I'd argue it is) better even if it's a tough day at the office for both.

The last is my biggest concern though: Younger has really only had success in a three lineman, 9 drop base package and when you take that away from him because either: the offense has schemed it or he doesn't have the hybid athletes he need to pull it off, he isn't able to do anything else.

I am hard on Younger and some of you like him but that last point is, for my money, undeniably true and the biggest problem on that side of the ball over the last year and half. It been three years and he's done one thing well and that one thing is being increasingly countered by OCs/QBs who have put in the time.

I agree. We've seen more four man pressures this year but we're playing soft zones behind that are being shredded.  There seems to be an unwillingness to play man coverage; maybe that's due to a lack in confidence regarding personnel, or philosophy or both.

It's been frustrating through the first two weeks seeing teams get big chunks especially on second and long...not through YAC yards...but instead by having receivers easily run their routes to the sticks and beyond because there's a gaping hole in the zone or we're giving a 15-20 yard cushion off the line or both...that can't be by design...can it?

Quote from: Slingin Sammy on June 21, 2026, 01:17:38 PMI agree. We've seen more four man pressures this year but we're playing soft zones behind that are being shredded.  There seems to be an unwillingness to play man coverage; maybe that's due to a lack in confidence regarding personnel, or philosophy or both.

It's been frustrating through the first two weeks seeing teams get big chunks especially on second and long...not through YAC yards...but instead by having receivers easily run their routes to the sticks and beyond because there's a gaping hole in the zone or we're giving a 15-20 yard cushion off the line or both...that can't be by design...can it?

If so this a big fail on Walters. We are paying huge money in our secondary. Holm,Nichols and Kramdi all making 180,000 per year, and I would bet Moxey is making at least 120-130,000 as a free agent signing, maybe more. We likely have the highest paid secondary in the league.

The other thing that gets lost in the discussion of the defense is that football is ultimately entertainment. Obviously its more fun when we win, but for me, how we win affects my enjoyment of the game. If we play a soft, prevent defense all game, with no pressure on the QB and no physicality, but eak out win, it lacks the same satisfaction, compared to the days where we emphasized winning the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball, and were usually the more physical team on the field. Yes, the W is the most important thing in the end for the coaches, but for the fans, it does matter how we win.

Quote from: dd on June 21, 2026, 04:35:59 AMI m not so sure it's the system than I am it's the lack of talent. We never have effectively replace Alexander at safety, we used to have decent defensive tackles but did nothing when we lost stove and then sayles. We lost Jeffcoat and our pass rush has suffered ever since, sure we got ceresna, but Jefferson has aged out and does nothing but volleyball blocks. No pass rush threat from him, not like it used to be with him and Jeffcoat. Bighill aged out and we haven't had the dominant monster in the middle for seasons now. We lost a shutdown corner in ford and replaced him with 2 cornerbacks that get beat routinely. So add all that up and you could have Vince Lombardi coaching our D, it would still suck cause we ve lost too much talent and have failed to adequately replace it

Don't know where to find the turnover stats anymore but it seems there's been a big decline in defensive turnovers created in the last few seasons, which used to create a huge advantage for the offence going back well before they won the GC in 2019.  Ty Ford was the last ball hawk in house.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 21, 2026, 04:45:00 PMDon't know where to find the turnover stats anymore but it seems there's been a big decline in defensive turnovers created in the last few seasons, which used to create a huge advantage for the offence going back well before they won the GC in 2019.  Ty Ford was the last ball hawk in house.

And unfortunately, it seems to have coincided with Zach throwing more interceptions on offense over the last year or two.

Quote from: bunker on June 21, 2026, 01:39:13 PMIf so this a big fail on Walters. We are paying huge money in our secondary. Holm,Nichols and Kramdi all making 180,000 per year, and I would bet Moxey is making at least 120-130,000 as a free agent signing, maybe more. We likely have the highest paid secondary in the league.

Nichols had lost a step last year and has lost another one this year. He'd be okay playing in Saskatchewan but it's really hard playing in our secondary in our system. It's easily the hardest defensive back assignment in the league and it's not particularly close. Younger needs four Evan Holm clones. I really have no idea why everyone loves Kramdi. He has always been an average player who gets outsized respect because he's a Canadian who can play a bit in a spot where usually they don't, but I have to say he's also a very average SAM and, so far, a pretty below average safety. And if you don't believe me, just follow the move: he's such a good SAM they moved him to safety this year and they only did that because of his passport.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 21, 2026, 06:50:21 PMNichols had lost a step last year and has lost another one this year. He'd be okay playing in Saskatchewan but it's really hard playing in our secondary in our system. It's easily the hardest defensive back assignment in the league and it's not particularly close. Younger needs four Evan Holm clones. I really have no idea why everyone loves Kramdi. He has always been an average player who gets outsized respect because he's a Canadian who can play a bit in a spot where usually they don't, but I have to say he's also a very average SAM and, so far, a pretty below average safety. And if you don't believe me, just follow the move: he's such a good SAM they moved him to safety this year and they only did that because of his passport.

Not a fair assessment in imo.  A very good LB that we developed and was on a steady progression.  Unfortunately due to injuries and lack of depth at safety he was required to change positions.  Agree not a good safety.  A proven veteran who communicates exceptionally well.  Overstating the negative on him and under valuing his prior and future worth to the club (as a LB).  The defense went through a big change, let it simmer before we dump on one of our core.

Not everyone loves Kramdi, that's your opinion, not backed by facts.  I love him lol (at LB).  If you made a poll on that, it would be fairly divisive result.

Canadians always have and always will be a critical part of this great league.  Your anti Canadian talent bias doesn't help sell your arguments imo.  An over used narrative imo.  I don't agree his move to safety is only due to his passport as suggested.

Not a fair characterization of Younger's D.  It's strength is its ability to allow a heavy rotation and plenty of reps for most of the AR.  It has found success with a lot of different players.  Does he ask a lot of his players, absolutely.  Is it as hard to play here as you suggest, likely not.  Players (past and present Bombers) would be the ones that would answer that with any validity.

I believe we need a safety and need to put Kramdi back at home at LB.

Might be right about Nichols.  My buddy seen that last year, I was hoping he was wrong.

A good take of your opinion here but lacking factual backing in some areas imo.  Makes for a good debate, curious on the herds take.

I would love to know from the Bomber brass if Kramdi was penciled in early for safety or was a backup plan.  Gut tells me they thought he might be the answer there as they develop the next gen and seeing how deep we are at LB.

...Think whatever you want but teams don't move Canadians playing at very high levels at their positions. Kramdi got moved because he got beat out and you have to get beat pretty conclusively for them to move you because "good enough" still works for a lot of nationals.

Either that or you have to admit that Younger, who you think is the bees knees, took a look at an all star Canadian SAM and moved him to safety just to see how he'd do. As much as I don't love Younger he isn't that bad. It's the former.

And your buddy apparently knows football, you should listen to him.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 22, 2026, 02:00:40 AM...Think whatever you want but teams don't move Canadians playing at very high levels at their positions. Kramdi got moved because he got beat out and you have to get beat pretty conclusively for them to move you because "good enough" still works for a lot of nationals.

Either that or you have to admit that Younger, who you think is the bees knees, took a look at an all star Canadian SAM and moved him to safety just to see how he'd do. As much as I don't love Younger he isn't that bad. It's the former.

And your buddy apparently knows football, you should listen to him.

Please inform us who is or was a better option at safety on our roster?

Your 1st narrative was he got moved because he was Canadian, now you are changing the channel that he got beat out..... You failed to counter any of my points or arguments.  Very telling.

Kramdi, was, is and will continue to be a good to great Canadian LB in the league and I believe will be retained as a Bomber for years to come as SMS allows. I don't think he is the answer at safety but you never know he has proven some on here wrong for years after some early heavy criticism.  I seen promise from the very early days.

Your anti Canadian bias is showing clearly in your assessment of Kramdi.  You are simply are overstating the negative about his role as leader and core member of this ball club over a very long period of incredibly good defense.  He has shown the ability to get better each year.  He doesn't get hurt, has some stats on teams.  I believe is well respected by his coaches, teammates and management.  He isn't a star but steady, reliable and a reasonable value. He has had some very good games for us.

Facts are presented below.
Redha Kramdi - CFL.ca https://share.google/eWfGxa9o1Xx1hpodi

Yes my buddy knows CFL ball and so do I, please keep the personal shots out of this.  And yes I will listen to him and so will he to I.  That's how one learns by considering other people's points of view.  I have been going to games with him for decades.

Younger nor Kramdi is our problem on D.  We need a safety with experience and time for our new faces to adjust to their new team and schemes.  We need to allow young players to grow through learning from their mistakes.  We need patience when there seams to be very little by some on here.  We need to make some adjustments on our schemes.  We need vet players to step up and be consistent with their assignments.  We need our young studs to start to flash.  We need to get healthy.  We can discount or forget what brought us great success for a long time, while adjusting both in season and in game. 

Lots of opinions here imo, without factual evidence at time yet again. Agree to disagree.  Yes we all think what we want. 

 

You get offended by the silliest things. If he was our best SAM linebacker, he'd be playing SAM, ya? OR has Younger moved out best SAM to safety? It can't be both. And before you say we have the best players everywhere: please review what the defense has given up in two games.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 22, 2026, 03:13:52 AMYou get offended by the silliest things. If he was our best SAM linebacker, he'd be playing SAM, ya? OR has Younger moved out best SAM to safety? It can't be both. And before you say we have the best players everywhere: please review what the defense has given up in two games.

I get offended when the same people resort to same personal remarks time and time again, when we all come here to talk ball.

We are deep at LB.  Kramdi had played some FS last year.  We didn't have a good option at FS due to lack of depth, experience and injury.

I see our starting LBs and Kramdi pretty close in terms of abilities. I like them all, all four have different pros and cons, strengths etc.  I seen Knox at that level as well.  Wilson been a fav. of mine, who I defended when his stock was down (injuries).

Like some other posters, hyper focused on two games.  Means almost nothing imo. 

Who is a better option at FS?

Which was it now? He was moved to FS because he was Cdn or because he got beat out.  Your story changed quickly there.

Not buying what you are selling but that's ok, we will not see eye to eye on this one and likely best to move on.

I never said we had the best players everywhere.  Such a stretch there and shows weakness in your position.

We will not know much about this ball club to 1/4 or 1/2 way.  2 games in wow.  Check the sky,  too early to say its falling.

Quote from: bunker on June 21, 2026, 04:12:07 PMThe other thing that gets lost in the discussion of the defense is that football is ultimately entertainment. Obviously its more fun when we win, but for me, how we win affects my enjoyment of the game. If we play a soft, prevent defense all game, with no pressure on the QB and no physicality, but eak out win, it lacks the same satisfaction

We could win with our D all wearing pink tutus and doing a ballet at the 55 all game and I'd still be overjoyed we won.  Same reason I'm overjoyed if we win 59 to 0. Don't care -- Just win.

(But I do get what you are saying!)

Quote from: Slingin Sammy on June 21, 2026, 01:17:38 PMI agree. We've seen more four man pressures this year but we're playing soft zones behind that are being shredded.  There seems to be an unwillingness to play man coverage; maybe that's due to a lack in confidence regarding personnel, or philosophy or both.

But think back to prior seasons.  Don't we often start the year with way more zone because we feel it takes the DBs a long time to acclimatize to the system and/or get better at man?  Usually that means the new guys/rookies.

MOS/Hall have referenced this in the past.  At one time, many years ago, they would talk how they didn't have the talent to do man at all.  Like '14-'17.

It could be MOS/Younger/Hall are not ready to let the dogs "off leash" yet.  We could see a completely different D when the braintrust finally decides to do so.  In general, with a MOS team, you do see the D get better as the season goes on.  And often they come out as a fairly highly-rated D.

My beef with this is HAM, MTL, SSK have already taken that leash off and are play mid-Oct ball.  We don't have the time to wait.

Quote from: bunker on June 21, 2026, 01:39:13 PMIf so this a big fail on Walters. We are paying huge money in our secondary. Holm,Nichols and Kramdi all making 180,000 per year, and I would bet Moxey is making at least 120-130,000 as a free agent signing, maybe more. We likely have the highest paid secondary in the league.

Not sure about that.  SSK has to pay Sayles and Milligan, who are arguably better than all but Holm.  MTL paid big for Ento and some of the others.  That said, we may be the highest total, but it's not by a ton.  Yes, the fact that we are that expensive means they should produce more.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 21, 2026, 11:56:33 AMI am hard on Younger and some of you like him but that last point is, for my money, undeniably true and the biggest problem on that side of the ball over the last year and half. It been three years and he's done one thing well and that one thing is being increasingly countered by OCs/QBs who have put in the time.

This is one of my biggest beefs with Mafia & crew the last 2-ish seasons.  It really seems like they simply aren't putting in the time it takes to be a top team and beat the top teams.  You can tell SSK/HAM/MTL have been doing it.  I bet those guys (Mace, Milanovitch, et al) spent 14-hours a day in the off-season figuring out how to beat their main rivals and overcome any 2025 issues.

When Mafia spouts about the "one week at a time" mantra, I think they are telling us the truth: they only put thought & effort into each game for 1 week before that game.  No high-brain is sitting there in Feb thinking up ways to beat the SSK dink & dunk.  And that's exactly what it will take to beat it.  And so we will lose.

Sir B&G's comments hint at another aspect of what we seem to do.  Our D fairly often gets success on 1st down: either an incomplete or a sack or TFL.  We seem aggressive on 1st.  But right after that we go into some weird "prevent D" on 2nd.  Everything mega-soft and our weird/stupid zone getting easily fooled & cleared by smart routes.  Then O's take the 10-14Y we give them -- and there's always one.

Have we ever followed up a successful 1st down with the same aggressiveness?  I didn't see it.  Teams know they'll have all day on that 2nd and long.  In fact, I think we may be much better at protecting a 2nd & short pass compared to this because we know we have to play tighter!

It's super frustrating.  It means all of those great sacks & pressures & batdowns are.for.nothing.

makes some good points here tecno, thanks for the take, I don't agree with all of it but a good read

Younger nailed it, we got nailed by Bo.  Hopefully we can learn from it.  Younger still looks in good shape.

Quote from: Tecno on June 22, 2026, 07:13:38 AMThis is one of my biggest beefs with Mafia & crew the last 2-ish seasons.  It really seems like they simply aren't putting in the time it takes to be a top team and beat the top teams.  You can tell SSK/HAM/MTL have been doing it.  I bet those guys (Mace, Milanovitch, et al) spent 14-hours a day in the off-season figuring out how to beat their main rivals and overcome any 2025 issues.

When Mafia spouts about the "one week at a time" mantra, I think they are telling us the truth: they only put thought & effort into each game for 1 week before that game.  No high-brain is sitting there in Feb thinking up ways to beat the SSK dink & dunk.  And that's exactly what it will take to beat it.  And so we will lose.

I don't think that's true at all. In season, for the purposes of in-game execution/focus, I think it's a moment-to-moment mentality especially for the players and coordinators. I think in the off-season and even during the season for the head coach and above, there's quite a bit more self-scouting/competition scouting and scenario planning.

Quote from: Tecno on June 22, 2026, 10:27:25 AMSir B&G's comments hint at another aspect of what we seem to do.  Our D fairly often gets success on 1st down: either an incomplete or a sack or TFL.  We seem aggressive on 1st.  But right after that we go into some weird "prevent D" on 2nd.  Everything mega-soft and our weird/stupid zone getting easily fooled & cleared by smart routes.  Then O's take the 10-14Y we give them -- and there's always one.

Have we ever followed up a successful 1st down with the same aggressiveness?  I didn't see it.  Teams know they'll have all day on that 2nd and long.  In fact, I think we may be much better at protecting a 2nd & short pass compared to this because we know we have to play tighter!

It's super frustrating.  It means all of those great sacks & pressures & batdowns are.for.nothing.

We had an issue with having the opponent in 2nd and long or very long for a couple of years. I don't know what's going on but it almost seems a given that a team with 2nd and 20 will succeed.

The flats are continuosly open on 2nd down, they toss for 7 yds , reciever makes  more and its 3rd and inches.
I've been harping on this but we need a proper safety back in coverage to back up secondary to all our dbs to be more aggressive

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 22, 2026, 03:13:06 PMWe had an issue with having the opponent in 2nd and long or very long for a couple of years. I don't know what's going on but it almost seems a given that a team with 2nd and 20 will succeed.

Would be interested to see the stats on this vs. others clubs.  I think at times we remember the successful conversions and don't recall the stops.  I will hold my judgement on this take until I see the facts.  I don't have the skills or energy to dig them up but it would be very telling.

Quote from: Pete on June 22, 2026, 03:26:30 PMThe flats are continuosly open on 2nd down, they toss for 7 yds , reciever makes  more and its 3rd and inches.
I've been harping on this but we need a proper safety back in coverage to back up secondary to all our dbs to be more aggressive

One of our weaknesses for a long time

Quote from: Tecno on June 22, 2026, 07:13:38 AMThis is one of my biggest beefs with Mafia & crew the last 2-ish seasons.  It really seems like they simply aren't putting in the time it takes to be a top team and beat the top teams.  You can tell SSK/HAM/MTL have been doing it.  I bet those guys (Mace, Milanovitch, et al) spent 14-hours a day in the off-season figuring out how to beat their main rivals and overcome any 2025 issues.

When Mafia spouts about the "one week at a time" mantra, I think they are telling us the truth: they only put thought & effort into each game for 1 week before that game.  No high-brain is sitting there in Feb thinking up ways to beat the SSK dink & dunk.  And that's exactly what it will take to beat it.  And so we will lose.

The coaching staff can spend 24 hrs. a day scheming and coming up with new strategies but it wouldn't help if the players can't absorb and execute their assignments on the field. How many of these players automatically bob their heads as if they understand the formation, even when they're completely lost?  Their main driver is the fear of getting cut!

That's one reason O'Shea is so wedded to his veteran players and why he often says the coach's job is to become better teachers.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 22, 2026, 06:24:29 PMThe coaching staff can spend 24 hrs. a day scheming and coming up with new strategies but it wouldn't help if the players can't absorb and execute their assignments on the field. How many of these players automatically bob their heads as if they understand the formation, even when they're completely lost?  Their main driver is the fear of getting cut!

That's one reason O'Shea is so wedded to his veteran players and why he often says the coach's job is to become better teachers.

Execution at the highest level is required to stop an on fire attack like the one we seen from Bo.  Agree with a lot of this but I don't think fear drives most.  Well written.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 22, 2026, 02:57:36 PMI don't think that's true at all. In season, for the purposes of in-game execution/focus, I think it's a moment-to-moment mentality especially for the players and coordinators. I think in the off-season and even during the season for the head coach and above, there's quite a bit more self-scouting/competition scouting and scenario planning.

Oh for sure, ya, when it comes to FA/DP choices MOS/Walters are giving this stuff thought.  But not the nitty gritty X/O's.  They aren't trying to figure out how they can get WILL or SAM in passing lanes or backup Willy or whatever, to stop the T.Harris 99% completion attack.

That's my beef.  Milanovitch & Mace are doing that.  That's why they are ready for each unique team that comes their way.  They drew out the plan on how to beat that scheme in the off-season.

Heck, MOS says over and over how he doesn't do any X/O's at all.  So he should be taskmastering his OC/DC underlings to be doing this all off-season.  Or he should be high-braining some of it himself!  In any event, it's not getting done and the buck stops with him.

Quote from: Tecno on June 23, 2026, 01:40:00 AMOh for sure, ya, when it comes to FA/DP choices MOS/Walters are giving this stuff thought.  But not the nitty gritty X/O's.  They aren't trying to figure out how they can get WILL or SAM in passing lanes or backup Willy or whatever, to stop the T.Harris 99% completion attack.

That's my beef.  Milanovitch & Mace are doing that.  That's why they are ready for each unique team that comes their way.  They drew out the plan on how to beat that scheme in the off-season.

Heck, MOS says over and over how he doesn't do any X/O's at all.  So he should be taskmastering his OC/DC underlings to be doing this all off-season.  Or he should be high-braining some of it himself!  In any event, it's not getting done and the buck stops with him.

I need to be honest and say I think you're just making up narratives in your head on this one. We have good coaches who do all the right things. I think the system Younger uses is terrible but he's a good enough coach and certainly no one is out coaching O'Shea in any area. Styles might be different but we're not lacking for coaching process or best practices I don't think.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 23, 2026, 03:10:22 AMI need to be honest and say I think you're just making up narratives in your head on this one. We have good coaches who do all the right things.

It really looks to you like we come into each season having thought for 6 months how to beat each of the league contenders?  We really spent all off-season game-planning how to beat, say, 2026 HAM which is exactly what 2025 HAM was, just better?

If you're right, I'd really hate to see what the last game would have looked like had they spent all off-season twiddling their thumbs like I'm theorizing!!  HAM would win 100-0?

All I know is if we play SSK tomorrow, it's 50-3 and we have no chance, because Mace & co spent 2 whole off-seasons figuring out how to neuter WPG (and other top teams), and our guys only think about it for 7 days prior.

Yes, at the heart of it I'm saying our coaches/coords don't work hard enough.  They work to what their contract & schedule says, sure.  And probably very diligently.  The problem is the hungry & serious crews on some teams are working non-stop, all in-season, all off-season, all the time.

If we come out and handily beat SSK or MTL (and HAM) soon with clearly novel, creative & high-brain schemes, then I'll take that back.  But I'm pretty confident I'm right because we've seen this year after year after year after year.  At least since 2022.  Why?  Because the Mafia & crew lost the hunger after winning it all twice.

The saving grace might be Condell, who I don't think has ever won it.  Maybe his energy is a function of his hunger.  Maybe he can impart some onto the rest of the "meh, tried my best" guys.

Quote from: Tecno on June 23, 2026, 03:50:32 AMIt really looks to you like we come into each season having thought for 6 months how to beat each of the league contenders?  We really spent all off-season game-planning how to beat, say, 2026 HAM which is exactly what 2025 HAM was, just better?

If you're right, I'd really hate to see what the last game would have looked like had they spent all off-season twiddling their thumbs like I'm theorizing!!  HAM would win 100-0?

All I know is if we play SSK tomorrow, it's 50-3 and we have no chance, because Mace & co spent 2 whole off-seasons figuring out how to neuter WPG (and other top teams), and our guys only think about it for 7 days prior.

Yes, at the heart of it I'm saying our coaches/coords don't work hard enough.  They work to what their contract & schedule says, sure.  And probably very diligently.  The problem is the hungry & serious crews on some teams are working non-stop, all in-season, all off-season, all the time.

If we come out and handily beat SSK or MTL (and HAM) soon with clearly novel, creative & high-brain schemes, then I'll take that back.  But I'm pretty confident I'm right because we've seen this year after year after year after year.  At least since 2022.  Why?  Because the Mafia & crew lost the hunger after winning it all twice.

The saving grace might be Condell, who I don't think has ever won it.  Maybe his energy is a function of his hunger.  Maybe he can impart some onto the rest of the "meh, tried my best" guys.

That's a whole can of worms you're opening up, much of it valid.  If their goal is to win the Grey Cup this season I believe they will fall short, not because the coaching staff doesn't work hard enough, that's a bit silly, but because they don't have the best horses in the barn anymore. Nostalgia is not a plan, success did go to their heads but what slipped was the recruitment and turnover of players, they stuck with the status quo through the downturn and have yet to acknowledge deficiencies.

If it wasn't for the resurgence of BLM and Trevor Harris I believe Zach would have retired after last season, he keeps renewing his contract based on "why not me too" I can still play.  The difference is both Harris and BLM went through a re-evaluation based on losing seasons and severe paycuts, were they had to rebuild their games from scratch after they were virtually discarded.  Zach has experienced none of those shocks since coming to Wpg, he's produced a winning record every year and went to the GC 5 years in a row. In his mind why would he ever consider a re-evaluation, even though his recent stats. suggest whatever he was doing a few years ago is not working as well as it once did.

Quote from: Tecno on June 23, 2026, 03:50:32 AMIt really looks to you like we come into each season having thought for 6 months how to beat each of the league contenders?  We really spent all off-season game-planning how to beat, say, 2026 HAM which is exactly what 2025 HAM was, just better?

If you're right, I'd really hate to see what the last game would have looked like had they spent all off-season twiddling their thumbs like I'm theorizing!!  HAM would win 100-0?

All I know is if we play SSK tomorrow, it's 50-3 and we have no chance, because Mace & co spent 2 whole off-seasons figuring out how to neuter WPG (and other top teams), and our guys only think about it for 7 days prior.

Yes, at the heart of it I'm saying our coaches/coords don't work hard enough.  They work to what their contract & schedule says, sure.  And probably very diligently.  The problem is the hungry & serious crews on some teams are working non-stop, all in-season, all off-season, all the time.

If we come out and handily beat SSK or MTL (and HAM) soon with clearly novel, creative & high-brain schemes, then I'll take that back.  But I'm pretty confident I'm right because we've seen this year after year after year after year.  At least since 2022.  Why?  Because the Mafia & crew lost the hunger after winning it all twice.

The saving grace might be Condell, who I don't think has ever won it.  Maybe his energy is a function of his hunger.  Maybe he can impart some onto the rest of the "meh, tried my best" guys.

Again, this is all a made up narrative in your head.

But like most things, any plan will work, it just needs to be executed effectively. It doesn't matter how spart the plan is if the players can't do it or make a mistake.

That said, the common belief is the opposite of what you claim. That JY has too many things going on and the players can't quite operate it effectively yet, leading to missed assignments.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 23, 2026, 03:10:22 AMI need to be honest and say I think you're just making up narratives in your head on this one. We have good coaches who do all the right things. I think the system Younger uses is terrible but he's a good enough coach and certainly no one is out coaching O'Shea in any area. Styles might be different but we're not lacking for coaching process or best practices I don't think.

If Youngers systems was terrible our defensive stats would be terrible during his period here which they are not, so this is simply an opinion based on no facts.

Quote from: Jesse on June 23, 2026, 05:34:19 PMAgain, this is all a made up narrative in your head.

But like most things, any plan will work, it just needs to be executed effectively. It doesn't matter how spart the plan is if the players can't do it or make a mistake.

That said, the common belief is the opposite of what you claim. That JY has too many things going on and the players can't quite operate it effectively yet, leading to missed assignments.

The complexity of our D is it's strength.  It will come together, in time.  Missed assignments are for sure an issue.  Lots of new faces.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 23, 2026, 04:29:29 PMThat's a whole can of worms you're opening up, much of it valid.  If their goal is to win the Grey Cup this season I believe they will fall short, not because the coaching staff doesn't work hard enough, that's a bit silly, but because they don't have the best horses in the barn anymore. Nostalgia is not a plan, success did go to their heads but what slipped was the recruitment and turnover of players, they stuck with the status quo through the downturn and have yet to acknowledge deficiencies.

If it wasn't for the resurgence of BLM and Trevor Harris I believe Zach would have retired after last season, he keeps renewing his contract based on "why not me too" I can still play.  The difference is both Harris and BLM went through a re-evaluation based on losing seasons and severe paycuts, were they had to rebuild their games from scratch after they were virtually discarded.  Zach has experienced none of those shocks since coming to Wpg, he's produced a winning record every year and went to the GC 5 years in a row. In his mind why would he ever consider a re-evaluation, even though his recent stats. suggest whatever he was doing a few years ago is not working as well as it once did.

Zach keep playing for three primary reasons imo:
1. He still is a good QB
2a. Money
2b. Love of the game

The suggestion that he is only playing b/c two other older QBs are killing it late it a HUGE stretch imo.  I guess he wakes up and looks at the others players stats and decides if he can still go to work LOL

Quote from: Tecno on June 23, 2026, 03:50:32 AMIt really looks to you like we come into each season having thought for 6 months how to beat each of the league contenders?  We really spent all off-season game-planning how to beat, say, 2026 HAM which is exactly what 2025 HAM was, just better?

If you're right, I'd really hate to see what the last game would have looked like had they spent all off-season twiddling their thumbs like I'm theorizing!!  HAM would win 100-0?

All I know is if we play SSK tomorrow, it's 50-3 and we have no chance, because Mace & co spent 2 whole off-seasons figuring out how to neuter WPG (and other top teams), and our guys only think about it for 7 days prior.

Yes, at the heart of it I'm saying our coaches/coords don't work hard enough.  They work to what their contract & schedule says, sure.  And probably very diligently.  The problem is the hungry & serious crews on some teams are working non-stop, all in-season, all off-season, all the time.

If we come out and handily beat SSK or MTL (and HAM) soon with clearly novel, creative & high-brain schemes, then I'll take that back.  But I'm pretty confident I'm right because we've seen this year after year after year after year.  At least since 2022.  Why?  Because the Mafia & crew lost the hunger after winning it all twice.

The saving grace might be Condell, who I don't think has ever won it.  Maybe his energy is a function of his hunger.  Maybe he can impart some onto the rest of the "meh, tried my best" guys.

Blm worked on his short game and trying not to make everything happen by himself. Zac's short game isn't good but we have seen him utilizing more players rather than always going to certain targets which has helped.

Quote from: Pete on June 23, 2026, 07:56:44 PMBlm worked on his short game and trying not to make everything happen by himself. Zac's short game isn't good but we have seen him utilizing more players rather than always going to certain targets which has helped.

BLM fixed his throwing motion after his injury and had to relearn his mechanics.  He found his arm strength and deep ball accuracy.  His confidence came back.  He checked his ego a bit.  He adapted to Hammy's offense.  That said this season it's old Bo and he is just slinging nasty and that's all he has ever done.  His deep ball looks as nice as any I have ever seen in the CFL.  I think Bo started listening better likely.

I don't see much wrong with Zac's short game but he is a slinger, always will be.  Without the deep ball he is nothing.  Both these guys will also rely on their favorites and timing on the deep ball.  Both can throw dimes.  Bo's arm is somehow just as good or better that this stage.  Zach didn't look great last year, looks a little better this year, I think the strength training might have helped.  Time will tell.

I love an offense that gets all the receivers the ball

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 23, 2026, 08:00:08 PMBLM fixed his throwing motion after his injury and had to relearn his mechanics.  He found his arm strength and deep ball accuracy.

We need to find out whoever BLM hired as his trainer / strategist and hire him for Zach.  Zach never got as bad as BLM (who was throwing nothing but Brohm turf-balls for a season), but Zach is easily 15Y weaker than BLM.  And Zach has real zip problems, yet Bo can still zip it 50 on a line.

If they can rehab that washed-up BLM arm, surely they can beef up Zach's?  No idea why someone isn't getting this done.  Zach's balls take FOREVER to arrive at the target, and that is why every DB is creaming our REC right at the catch.  If someone did a speed gun test, I bet Zach is throwing half the velocity of Alexander or Rourke.

Quote from: Jesse on June 23, 2026, 05:34:19 PMAgain, this is all a made up narrative in your head.

Maybe, but it sure does fit the visible facts!  So call it a theory, a hypothesis.  And it's just as valid as any other until proven wrong.

Quote from: Jesse on June 23, 2026, 05:34:19 PMThat said, the common belief is the opposite of what you claim. That JY has too many things going on and the players can't quite operate it effectively yet, leading to missed assignments.

My theory doesn't preclude Younger from having a complicated scheme.  He's had it since day 1.  He doesn't have to spend a ton of off-season time making it even more complicated.  And even if he does, the other part of my theory is that our braintrust is not spending all off-season thinking of specific ways to beat each GC contender.

My example is always SSK.  I don't think we'll see anything different from our D when we face SSK.  We'll just play our normal ball.  It'll look just like it did in 2025.  It hasn't been since like '18-'21 Hall that we've seen a specific plan to stop the SSK dink & dunk powerhouse.  Harris & Oullette will rip us a new one, 6-12Y at a time, with 2-3 25-35Y shots and lots of YAC.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong for LDC/BB.

Simple question: why are other top teams clicking & humming perfectly and we're sputtering?  Other years everyone was sputtering, or, like 2021 we were the ones being perfect in week 1.

HAM & SSK are ready for GC football today.  MTL too, probably.  BC on its way.  TOR even up there.  My hunch is EDM got lucky twice... but if they win the next 2 then lump them in with the "working perfectly from week 1" group.

It can't all be continuity.  No one had super continuity, except maybe SSK on O.  Doesn't explain HAM with half their O changed.  And our continuity has been OK-ish.

The one saving grace: CGY is in the same boat as us.

Quote from: Tecno on June 24, 2026, 01:20:22 AMWe need to find out whoever BLM hired as his trainer / strategist and hire him for Zach.  Zach never got as bad as BLM (who was throwing nothing but Brohm turf-balls for a season), but Zach is easily 15Y weaker than BLM.  And Zach has real zip problems, yet Bo can still zip it 50 on a line.

If they can rehab that washed-up BLM arm, surely they can beef up Zach's?  No idea why someone isn't getting this done.  Zach's balls take FOREVER to arrive at the target, and that is why every DB is creaming our REC right at the catch.  If someone did a speed gun test, I bet Zach is throwing half the velocity of Alexander or Rourke.

Not possible, not that easy
Bo had NFL level arm strength imo early, lost it, came back, magic rehab and somehow it come back as strong
Zach has always had a good arm, age took away some range but his gift is his touch

Quote from: Tecno on June 24, 2026, 02:52:54 AMSimple question: why are other top teams clicking & humming perfectly and we're sputtering?  Other years everyone was sputtering, or, like 2021 we were the ones being perfect in week 1.

HAM & SSK are ready for GC football today.  MTL too, probably.  BC on its way.  TOR even up there.  My hunch is EDM got lucky twice... but if they win the next 2 then lump them in with the "working perfectly from week 1" group.

It can't all be continuity.  No one had super continuity, except maybe SSK on O.  Doesn't explain HAM with half their O changed.  And our continuity has been OK-ish.

The one saving grace: CGY is in the same boat as us.

Two games in car just got plugged in, let her warm up a bit and the stuttering will settle down

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 03:09:12 AMTwo games in car just got plugged in, let her warm up a bit and the stuttering will settle down

Or a fire is started and it burns to the ground. It's 2 games following a 10-8 season and a 4th place finish.

The game against the Elks could be a turning point but in which direction. Do we shut Rankin down or does he rush for another 150+ yards?

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 03:09:12 AMTwo games in car just got plugged in, let her warm up a bit and the stuttering will settle down

If the car isn't already running optimally now that the race is underway, that's a problem.

Tomorrow should be a good test. The Bombers need to be up to the task in every phase of their game.

Quote from: blue_gold_84 on June 24, 2026, 01:17:52 PMIf the car isn't already running optimally now that the race is underway, that's a problem.

Tomorrow should be a good test. The Bombers need to be up to the task in every phase of their game.

This early in the race 🏁 don't rule out a pit stop

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 01:00:44 PMOr a fire is started and it burns to the ground. It's 2 games following a 10-8 season and a 4th place finish.

The game against the Elks could be a turning point but in which direction. Do we shut Rankin down or does he rush for another 150+ yards?

Or too early to declare a season a failure

Or coming off many years of successful play

Or with an upcoming season with a much better offense

Glass can be half full but some have thrown it out the window too early in frustration imo

Stay away from the edge, seen this level of worry before our mini dynasty run, somethings never change around here
 

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 01:40:39 PMThis early in the race 🏁 don't rule out a pit stopOr too early to declare a season a failure

Or coming off many years of successful play

Or with an upcoming season with a much better offense

Glass can be half full but some have thrown it out the window too early in frustration imo

Stay away from the edge, seen this level of worry before our mini dynasty run, somethings never change around here
 

I didn't say the season is a failure but many of us continue to point out systemic issues over an extended period of time.  The last 2 seasons and 2026.  The slide started in 2024 IMO.

You can't stick your head in the sand.

Talk to me after the Elks game. If we can't stop the run and can't pressure the QB more than we have so far in 2026, then we've have problems.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 02:06:57 PMI didn't say the season is a failure but many of us continue to point out systemic issues over an extended period of time.  The last 2 seasons and 2026.  The slide started in 2024 IMO.

You can't stick your head in the sand.

Talk to me after the Elks game. If we can't stop the run and can't pressure the QB more than we have so far in 2026, then we've have problems.

And I quote

"Or a fire is started and it burns to the ground"

Sounds like a failure prediction to me

I have pointed about success over a long period of time, yes we sliding but too early to say what we are yet

After the Elks game regardless of the outcome my position will remain the same, we don't know what we got till 1/4 or 1/2 way.

We pressured the QB fine game 1, game 2 not so much.  Your sample size is not sufficient to draw conclusions (yet).

Stopping the run is critical, we won't stop Rankin, might limit the damage.  We will get some pressure Cody good at limiting that. Will be better than last game imo.

Head ain't in the sand, sand ain't deep enough at game 2 for that, can't stick your neck over the ledge. Try looking up not down.  Fill your cup to a 1/4 just for me.  Pour it on my head if we suck but just give her time.  We got lots of bird in the freezer as needed.  I don't think I'll be eating it this year.  Already had my Kramdi bird

The forum mood would almost benefit more from the win than the team lol.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 02:32:43 PMAnd I quote

"Or a fire is started and it burns to the ground"

Sounds like a failure prediction to me

I have pointed about success over a long period of time, yes we sliding but too early to say what we are yet

After the Elks game regardless of the outcome my position will remain the same, we don't know what we got till 1/4 or 1/2 way.

We pressured the QB fine game 1, game 2 not so much.  Your sample size is not sufficient to draw conclusions (yet).

Stopping the run is critical, we won't stop Rankin, might limit the damage.  We will get some pressure Cody good at limiting that. Will be better than last game imo.

Head ain't in the sand, sand ain't deep enough at game 2 for that, can't stick your neck over the ledge. Try looking up not down.  Fill your cup to a 1/4 just for me.  Pour it on my head if we suck but just give her time.  We got lots of bird in the freezer as needed.  I don't think I'll be eating it this year.  Already had my Kramdi bird

The forum mood would almost benefit more from the win than the team lol.

The key word being " Or ". How is that different than you predicting it's not a problem?

Again. I'm not talking about 2 games this season. It goes back into all of 2025 and before. Against good QB's we struggle against the pass and against good RB's we have issues.

Game 3 is a test and it's not just about whether we win or lose. It's whether we look competitive of whether we look lost. Are we improving or not etc etc. Do we allow another 100+ yard TD drive when we're trying to get the ball back for our offence. Can we establish the run game. There are meany measuring sticks.

Teams can lose games they play well and vice versa.

The defense of late has been bad. No sugarcoating it. It was bad before and became good. Maybe that happens again. But anything that happened a year ago + is much less relevant than what we have seen the past two games

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 02:47:16 PMThe key word being " Or ". How is that different than you predicting it's not a problem?

Again. I'm not talking about 2 games this season. It goes back into all of 2025 and before. Against good QB's we struggle against the pass and against good RB's we have issues.

Game 3 is a test and it's not just about whether we win or lose. It's whether we look competitive of whether we look lost. Are we improving or not etc etc. Do we allow another 100+ yard TD drive when we're trying to get the ball back for our offence. Can we establish the run game. There are meany measuring sticks.

Teams can lose games they play well and vice versa.

The difference is the back track

I believe its too early to know, never said its not a problem, I have clearly presented my position on the D and some of its issues.  You have been crapping on the d and schemes and then mentioned the fire.

Agree with most of rest.  Good pts.

I reserve my judgment on this club till 1/4 1/2 way.

Last season we had a O problem not a D problem, look up the stats, facts.

Quote from: kkc60 on June 24, 2026, 02:55:45 PMThe defense of late has been bad. No sugarcoating it. It was bad before and became good. Maybe that happens again. But anything that happened a year ago + is much less relevant than what we have seen the past two games

Agree most

Will be fun to see how the story unfolds, I have an open mind in this regard

Cautiously optimistic

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 02:59:21 PMThe difference is the back track

I believe its too early to know, never said its not a problem, I have clearly presented my position on the D and some of its issues.  You have been crapping on the d and schemes and then mentioned the fire.

Agree with most of rest.  Good pts.

I reserve my judgment on this club till 1/4 1/2 way.

Last season we had a O problem not a D problem, look up the stats, facts.
Agree most

Will be fun to see how the story unfolds, I have an open mind in this regard

Cautiously optimistic

The defence was good against bad teams. It was not good against good teams. We lost all the games we played against Regina and Calgary. That's the point. We finished 10 - 8 in 4th as a crossover team. Feel free to look up systemic.

In 2026 we beat a team that is now 0 - 2. We lost to a team that is now 2 - 0. See the pattern? Patience is not always a solution.

Zero back track from me. Read what the other posters are saying before, during and since TC.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 03:10:57 PMThe defence was good against bad teams. It was not good against good teams. We lost all the games we played against Regina and Calgary. That's the point. We finished 10 - 8 in 4th as a crossover team. Feel free to look up systemic.

In 2026 we beat a team that is now 0 - 2. We lost to a team that is now 2 - 0. See the pattern? Patience is not always a solution.

Zero back track from me. Read what the other posters are saying before, during and since TC.

The back track is on the fire comment

The D had good stats last year, numbers don't lie, O left it high and dry.

The past success anchors us, gives hope, this year team needs to pull up the pants and stomp the throat, would be nice soon but I'll be patient, always have been with this club over its current run, hasn't let me down.

There are no patterns 2 games in, the narrative that there are is oversold.

All clubs records at this stage don't mean much to me.

Forest through the trees. Deep breath.

Hard to compare as last years offence was really, I mean really bad.....This year they are much improved, our defence which held us in almost all games last year, has looked pretty bad to start...both Osh and Younger as well as some player interviewed have explained it as guys not executing.....yea that is a broad term, but I believe it boils down to the defensive play call was a match, but one, two or more players didn't execute as they should. whether it was inexperience, impatience or confusion....All indications are Youngers system is tough to grasp with many, many moving parts....the question is, is his system and the players we have not a fit, or can they fit together and execute what is being designed.....Cause to be honest they sure haven't looked like they can so far this season, and if we keep waiting and some losses pile up the problem only magnifies...

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 24, 2026, 03:23:58 PMThe back track is on the fire comment

The D had good stats last year, numbers don't lie, O left it high and dry.

The past success anchors us, gives hope, this year team needs to pull up the pants and stomp the throat, would be nice soon but I'll be patient, always have been with this club over its current run, hasn't let me down.

There are no patterns 2 games in, the narrative that there are is oversold.

All clubs records at this stage don't mean much to me.

Forest through the trees. Deep breath.

As I said, the defence did not play well against the good teams. Look at the points against for those match ups. The cumulative effort is less relevant than the ability to play well against top opponents.

Even when the offence struggles, it doesn't mean the defence shouldn't be forcing 2 and outs the entire game. The defence is responsible to get the opponent off the field regardless of whether the offence struggles. That reduces the TOP even if the offence continues to give it back.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 05:02:48 PMAs I said, the defence did not play well against the good teams. Look at the points against for those match ups. The cumulative effort is less relevant than the ability to play well against top opponents.

Even when the offence struggles, it doesn't mean the defence shouldn't be forcing 2 and outs the entire game. The defence is responsible to get the opponent off the field regardless of whether the offence struggles. That reduces the TOP even if the offence continues to give it back.

I don't agree with the narrative the D was poor full stop last year.  Check the stats, near the top in some areas.  Yes we got beat by the best but those teams also stopped our O and kept the D on the field longer.  No defense can withstand the level of suck we had on O.  We didn't have a D problem last year, we had an O problem.  A gassed D that has been on the field way too much can't force 2 and outs.  Asking for the world their.

People needed someone to whip this year with Thomas gone.  Right now they whipping the D and Younger.  Not completely warranted imo.

I stay cautiously optimistic and patient.  You can do your thing and that ok.  Lots of change this year, change takes time to settle in.

Game 2, patience, deep breath.  Everything might be ok.  Know more after a handful of games.

I judge a defense over years, you seam to be hyper focused on the short term or cherry picking games to suit a narrative that isn't based on strong factual backing. 

The goal is to not let the other team score pts.  The Bomber D did that well last year and the numbers don't lie.

Went thru last year's losses with the game score and Brady's running yds.  Games Strev. played in are noted.

Week 5 Stamps 37 to 16 13-61 yds.
Week 7 Stamps 41 to 20 15-68 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 8 Argos 31 to 17 13-82 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 10 Stamps 28 to 27 12-68 yds.
Week 13 Sask. 34 to 30 5-24 yds.
Week 14 Sask  21 to 13 20-83 yds. (Strev 1/2 game)
Week 15 Ti-Cats 32 to 21 15-116 yds. (Strev full game)
Week 19 Elks 25 to 20 12-117 yds.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 02:47:16 PMAgain. I'm not talking about 2 games this season. It goes back into all of 2025 and before. Against good QB's we struggle against the pass and against good RB's we have issues.

Yes, the slow start *may* be forgivable (though still detrimental), but having the exact same problems we've had for YEARS is less so.

The flat ALWAYS having at least one side/middle wide open for a QB escape and free 2nd down conversion is disturbing.  It's been that way since at least the '23 GC when we let Cody regain most of 2nd & 17.  We still have not addressed this.  It's so bad even needs-a-walker BLM ran 10Y for a 1st down last game.

Giving up many pass explosions a game is another thing.  Every game.  We had completely solved that in '19 and '21 under Hall.  He used to say that was job #1.  Now: "nah, just take 60Y completions on us, it's fine brah."

Being garbage against the run is probably the one that hurts us the most.  Everything else stems from that.  And again, Hall had that solved back in the day.  We used to have the #1 run D.  Stove could shed any block and cream you.  Or Casey.  Heck, even Walker.  And our combined unit used to be stronger.

I'd be happy if we could solve even one of those problems and serious mitigate another.  I don't even need all 3.  But right now I'm not sure I can say we're even good at the other D aspects like short pass stop and takeaways!  It's like we suck at everything.  And it's all a continuation of the multi-year slide into the abyss.

Prove me wrong on Thursday.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 24, 2026, 01:00:44 PMThe game against the Elks could be a turning point but in which direction. Do we shut Rankin down or does he rush for another 150+ yards?

Try 200Y.  Pretty sure that's his avg so far this season.  He's a fantasy dream.  He gets 40-50 fantasy points every game when most backs are lucky to get 20 and many get 10.

If we limit Rankin to 150 combined I think that in itself would be a win, and we might win the game too.

I wonder what "best back in the league" Brady thinks about when he's watching Rankin do that?

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 25, 2026, 01:31:36 AMWent thru last year's losses with the game score and Brady's running yds.  Games Strev. played in are noted.

Week 5 Stamps 37 to 16 13-61 yds.
Week 7 Stamps 41 to 20 15-68 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 8 Argos 31 to 17 13-82 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 10 Stamps 28 to 27 12-68 yds.
Week 13 Sask. 34 to 30 5-24 yds.
Week 14 Sask  21 to 13 20-83 yds. (Strev 1/2 game)
Week 15 Ti-Cats 32 to 21 15-116 yds. (Strev full game)
Week 19 Elks 25 to 20 12-117 yds.

And in the biggest loss of the year, the playoff game, it was Montreal 42, Winnipeg 33 (and it was over at half really, 25-6 going into the locker rooms). Brady was 8-38.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 25, 2026, 02:11:18 AMAnd in the biggest loss of the year, the playoff game, it was Montreal 42, Winnipeg 33 (and it was over at half really, 25-6 going into the locker rooms).

Not the best comparison.  MTL severely outplayed us the entire game, all 4Q's.  Even the 3rd Q we won it was only because of fortuitous takeaways as MTL got sloppy.  As soon as they stopped the slop they once again threw on us at will.

Yes, we did still have a shot until Brady fumbled, though.  But the fact remains the O did half of what MTL O did all game.  And Brady was mostly neutered as well.  If we had won, I'd say it was luck and we didn't deserve to win.  I'd still take it though!  Sometimes you need luck like that.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 25, 2026, 01:31:36 AMWent thru last year's losses with the game score and Brady's running yds.  Games Strev. played in are noted.

Week 5 Stamps 37 to 16 13-61 yds.
Week 7 Stamps 41 to 20 15-68 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 8 Argos 31 to 17 13-82 yds. (Strev 3/4 game)
Week 10 Stamps 28 to 27 12-68 yds.
Week 13 Sask. 34 to 30 5-24 yds.
Week 14 Sask  21 to 13 20-83 yds. (Strev 1/2 game)
Week 15 Ti-Cats 32 to 21 15-116 yds. (Strev full game)
Week 19 Elks 25 to 20 12-117 yds.

Thank you for doing the work.
What is your take home message from these stats?

Quote from: bunker on June 25, 2026, 02:34:06 AMThank you for doing the work.
What is your take home message from these stats?

Rough calculation was that we were outscored by 85 points in 8 games.

While it's true we didn't look bad in 2025 on defence on average, but that's deceiving. We we're 4-6 in our division. Clearly the west teams were better than the eastern teams where the worst 2 teams fell in the standings.

We got to play a few games that we won against back QB's.

Even when a team struggles on offence that doesn't mean the defence shouldn't be forcing the opponent into 2 and outs.

Quote from: Tecno on June 25, 2026, 02:15:15 AMNot the best comparison.  MTL severely outplayed us the entire game, all 4Q's.  Even the 3rd Q we won it was only because of fortuitous takeaways as MTL got sloppy.  As soon as they stopped the slop they once again threw on us at will.

Yes, we did still have a shot until Brady fumbled, though.  But the fact remains the O did half of what MTL O did all game.  And Brady was mostly neutered as well.  If we had won, I'd say it was luck and we didn't deserve to win.  I'd still take it though!  Sometimes you need luck like that.

Agree with all that.

Quote from: bunker on June 25, 2026, 02:34:06 AMThank you for doing the work.
What is your take home message from these stats?

Rough take, if Brady is not flowing freely, Zach can't always make up the difference with his arm. What distorts things is the number of losses Strev closed out, which diminishes his record of 4 and 1 significantly.  I can't think of a single time O'Shea gave up on winning and pulled a healthy Zach and put in Strev. to close out the game, so I suspect every one was injury related.

Quote from: Tecno on June 25, 2026, 02:15:15 AMNot the best comparison.  MTL severely outplayed us the entire game, all 4Q's.  Even the 3rd Q we won it was only because of fortuitous takeaways as MTL got sloppy.  As soon as they stopped the slop they once again threw on us at will.

Yes, we did still have a shot until Brady fumbled, though.  But the fact remains the O did half of what MTL O did all game.  And Brady was mostly neutered as well.  If we had won, I'd say it was luck and we didn't deserve to win.  I'd still take it though!  Sometimes you need luck like that.

The offence was asleep for most of the first half, it was like the tortoise allowing the hare an insurmountable lead before getting started!

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 25, 2026, 04:49:33 PMThe offence was asleep for most of the first half, it was like the tortoise allowing the hare an insurmountable lead before getting started!

We had the ball for nearly 10 minutes in the 1st Q. Fumbling in scoring range and missing an early FG were both major turning points and momentum changes. We had a chance to score 6 to 10 points but gave up 3 on the turnover return fumble.

I just re-watched the 1st Q but that's all I'm re-watching. I deleted the game from the PVR.

Generally I'm not impressed with Kramdi at safety. He's not making plays but that might be due to scheme and soft coverage.

Williams is getting better but he missed the tackle on that long run by Rankin. Why he was at the LOS is a puzzler.

I just saw it as Edm got a good lead, took their foot off the gas and coasted a while but when they needed a score they got one. Three down football has killed the Younger defense more times than I care to remember. You can say this play here or that play there but one thing is consistently happening and that is the Younger defense can't get stops when it matters. This a trend going back years.

I agree, this game didnt do anything to deter from the weaknesses pointed out in this thread.
If anything it reaffirmed concerns such as
Kramdl as a safety is a good lb
Wilson has lost more than a step
Jones should be mlb
The decision to go after aged vets ie Ceresna and Moxey vs younger quicker ie Carney  and Allen is not looking good

[

Quote from: Waffler on June 26, 2026, 01:47:07 PMI just saw it as Edm got a good lead, took their foot off the gas and coasted a while but when they needed a score they got one. Three down football has killed the Younger defense more times than I care to remember. You can say this play here or that play there but one thing is consistently happening and that is the Younger defense can't get stops when it matters. This a trend going back years.

And it's because the whole unit is reactionary instead of trying to dictate terms. The secondary gives up major cushion yards even when the game is on the line and there are no more yards to give up. Everything happens in front of them. Quarterbacks just have to get the ball out quick while everyone is back pedaling and they'll have a career night. Over and over, and now season after season. It is the worst implementation of a professional defense I have maybe ever seen. I'm fine getting beat if we're not good enough. It sucks to lose because the system we're playing is not professional grade. The system always sucked. It's now been schemed and exploited and Younger can't or won't do anything differently.

Time for O'Shea to earn his cheque and make a hard decision for once or we're going to be sorry we traded away our first round pick.

After three games we can honestly say the defence isn't good enough to win....They have had moments, they have made some good plays, but as a whole they are not good, our record proves this, the stats prove this, and the eye test proves this.

Three games in multiple explosion plays given up, too many rushing yards given up (463) 171-171-121....they are just bad this year and three games IMO provides enough data, statistics and results to conclude they are bad....approximately 17% of the season is behind us and we have a winning percentage of 33% and are trending towards a 6-12 record and 2777 yards surrendered rushing almost 70% higher than our 5 year average....while our passing yards surrendered are middle of the pack....

So yes we have enough evidence to now say our defence is bad and Youngers system or the players he has in it are not good, if fact if the trends continue could be approaching modern day recordlike bad against the run.....

Quote from: Pete on June 26, 2026, 02:37:41 PMI agree, this game didnt do anything to deter from the weaknesses pointed out in this thread.
If anything it reaffirmed concerns such as
Kramdl as a safety is a good lb
Wilson has lost more than a step
Jones should be mlb
The decision to go after aged vets ie Ceresna and Moxey vs younger quicker ie Carney  and Allen is not looking good

Good line!  Kramdi is certainly not playing the standard Safety role, more often than not he's down on the line or in the backfield trying to pre-emptively interrupt the play before it develops, while he leaves the baby sitter to cover his Safety duties. If Jake Kelly was on the field, I never once saw him.

Same with Tony Jones, he's constantly in the backfield trying to get his hands on the QB, Younger must be so in love with his athleticism he wants to use him as a speed rusher.

Kudos to Jaylen Smith who is now getting regular reps. at LB, although I haven't figured out who he's replacing. Could be Ayers as a sub has fallen a notch down on the LB ladder.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 26, 2026, 04:59:06 PM. If Jake Kelly was on the field, I never once saw him.

Same with Tony Jones, he's constantly in the backfield trying to get his hands on the QB, Younger must be so in love with his athleticism he wants to use him as a speed rusher.

I saw Kelly, Cause I was trying to watch him to see how he would do.

I saw several plays where he arrived at the ball carrier when the play was over to help up the tackler.

Also saw him approach the line to attempt a tackle on the ball carrier and Kelly just ran straight on by without even a whiff of a tackle. Like an adult v a kid.

Also saw him in the backfield defending nobody several times.

Admittedly it's  hard to tell on tv, but I can't see why he takes the field.

Past season they put him on the field, other team quickly scored two td, in his vicinity whereupon he was benched.

We'll never know why he's out there.

Kelly was constantly on the field. Saw him where you would expect to see the SAM play.

Kelly hasn't been great but honestly he's no worse than everyone not named Evan Holm or Major Williams and largely so long as the majority of the time we're just dropping into zones with 5 yard cushions he's a good as anyone else.

It's not like anyone is going after Kelly who keeps being the weakest link time and time again. Everyone is open, always. Just don't challenge Holm much, if you need a play isolate Nichols and the scouting is done for the week.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 26, 2026, 05:01:59 PMKudos to Jaylen Smith who is now getting regular reps. at LB, although I haven't figured out who he's replacing. Could be Ayers as a sub has fallen a notch down on the LB ladder.

Yes I noticed him on the field quite a bit. Couldn't really tell who he was replacing or how he did.

My bigger question is what's the deal with Shay? He has yet to record a DT and only has 1 ST.  I don't remember seeing him on defence at all in 3 games. Did we blow another early pick?

Quote from: Jesse on June 26, 2026, 05:17:01 PMKelly was constantly on the field. Saw him where you would expect to see the SAM play.

Keeping track of where Griffin, Kramdi and Jones line up on any given play is mind boggling, with so much positional movement on defence it's got to be unsettling for players new to Younger's system who count on these players to support their position.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 26, 2026, 05:50:31 PMKeeping track of where Griffin, Kramdi and Jones line up on any given play is mind boggling, with so much positional movement on defence it's got to be unsettling for players new to Younger's system who count on these players to support their position.

It's even worse trying to understand that on TV.

Younger needs to make some changes, maybe the new db Matt Jackson can go in to play safety. But that goes back to the old argument of replacing Ayers. Personally, I think it would be better than what we have going on now, but OShea is so stubborn he won't try anything new until we are desperate.

Quote from: Pete on June 26, 2026, 06:58:25 PMYounger needs to make some changes, maybe the new db Matt Jackson can go in to play safety. But that goes back to the old argument of replacing Ayers. Personally, I think it would be better than what we have going on now, but OShea is so stubborn he won't try anything new until we are desperate.

There's no evidence O'Shea is telling Younger what to do, I'd assume he gives him the ratio to work with but that's about it.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 26, 2026, 03:40:27 PM[
And it's because the whole unit is reactionary instead of trying to dictate terms. The secondary gives up major cushion yards even when the game is on the line and there are no more yards to give up. Everything happens in front of them. Quarterbacks just have to get the ball out quick while everyone is back pedaling and they'll have a career night. Over and over, and now season after season. It is the worst implementation of a professional defense I have maybe ever seen. I'm fine getting beat if we're not good enough. It sucks to lose because the system we're playing is not professional grade. The system always sucked. It's now been schemed and exploited and Younger can't or won't do anything differently.

Time for O'Shea to earn his cheque and make a hard decision for once or we're going to be sorry we traded away our first round pick.

Another poor showing for the most part.  However, I do not believe you are being factual or fair in your assessment of Younger's D.  It's taking it lumps right now but to make the claim you are here is way overstated on the negative.  The schemes are nowhere as bad as you are making them out to be.  Yes there are some issues with our schemes and players but lets don't go full doom and gloom here (yet).  The D had a good numbers last year in a lot of categories and it's not factual to say anything otherwise.  That all said I have more major concerns about a few areas of this ball club.  I also liked how we fought back.  Showed up a little late.

Our defense has been a pillar of strength for the club for a number of years but trending down.  You are making it out to be long term tire fire which it isn't.  Little smoke this year to be sure.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 26, 2026, 08:13:11 PMAnother poor showing for the most part.  However, I do not believe you are being factual or fair in your assessment of Younger's D.  It's taking it lumps right now but to make the claim you are here is way overstated on the negative.  The schemes are nowhere as bad as you are making them out to be.  Yes there are some issues with our schemes and players but lets don't go full doom and gloom here (yet).  The D had a good numbers last year in a lot of categories and it's not factual to say anything otherwise.  That all said I have more major concerns about a few areas of this ball club.  I also liked how we fought back.  Showed up a little late.

Our defense has been a pillar of strength for the club for a number of years but trending down.  You are making it out to be long term tire fire which it isn't.  Little smoke this year to be sure.

Sir Blue & Gold has made factual assessments as many of us have said the same thing.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 26, 2026, 08:18:17 PMSir Blue & Gold has made factual assessments as many of us have said the same thing.

He made some good points there but "this" is non factual imo and just one person's take or opinion
"Over and over, and now season after season. It is the worst implementation of a professional defense I have maybe ever seen."
"The system always sucked"
"the system we're playing is not professional grade"
Defensive stats don't lie and prove the above wrong.

We have a problem this year 100%, to state that its a systemic problem is incorrect imo.

Just because a number of people agree on something doesn't make it fact.

There was a strongly opinioned group that wanted management, MOS and Hall gone before our mini dynasty.  Just because they were in agreement and vocal didn't make them right.  They were quickly proved wrong.  Like I have said before this time around I'm cautiously optimistic.  We shall see how we can adjust and rebound.

My biggest worry is our OL and Ceresna (health both).  Fix that and I'll be more optimistic. 

Giving up 100 yard drives is a massive red flag.  Hopefully we can stop the bleeding in that regard.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 26, 2026, 08:30:30 PMHe made some good points there but "this" is non factual imo and just one person's take or opinion
"Over and over, and now season after season. It is the worst implementation of a professional defense I have maybe ever seen."
"The system always sucked"

Defensive stats don't lie and prove the above wrong.

We have a problem this year 100%, to state that its a systemic problem is incorrect imo.

Just because a number of people agree on something doesn't make it fact.

There was a strongly opinioned group that wanted management, MOS and Hall gone before our mini dynasty.  Just because they were in agreement and vocal didn't make them right.  They were quickly proved wrong.  Like I have said before this time around I'm cautiously optimistic.  We shall see how we can adjust and rebound.

My biggest worry is our OL and Ceresna (health both).  Fix that and I'll be more optimistic. 

Giving up 100 yard drives is a massive red flag.  Hopefully we can stop the bleeding in that regard.

We have the same problem as last year it's just that the results are even worse.

The scheme was always flawed. It's the same system.

The problem with simultaneously being sunshine and roses while also being unable to explain on any fundamental level why things are better than the results have always been will forever be your challenge.

You make a ton of blanket statements about things being a strength but you can't tell anyone why you think so. It's so because it's so and that's my opinion man, no personal shots.

Right?

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 26, 2026, 08:43:35 PMWe have the same problem as last year it's just that the results are even worse.

The scheme was always flawed. It's the same system.

The problem with simultaneously being sunshine and roses while also being unable to explain on any fundamental level why things are better than the results have always been will forever be your challenge.

You make a ton of blanket statements about things being a strength but you can't tell anyone why you think so. It's so because it's so and that's my opinion man, no personal shots.

Right?

The facts are the defence had good numbers last year in many categories.  The result are worse yes this year but the D wasn't as bad as your suggest last year.  The stats back that up.  I won't post them here, the CFL page and Google does that for me.  I have highlighted some of these facts previously.

I don't see a systematic problem with our schemes, you do, which are two polar opposite opinions.  Neither of us are likely right, truth usually lies at the middle of two strong positions.

Some including me, believe last year we had a offensive problem and D wasn't the issue.

To early to know this year what we are but early indications are that the D needs work but the offense should be ok (hope!).  I see some struggles on the OL and would like more runs called.

You and others simply paint me as a one dimensional ray of sunshine on here which isn't correct.  I have clearly stated my opinion on the club which has included detailed concerns in many areas.  Yes I have shown my support for the club for a long time but I provide a variety of positions all the time.

I talk about of D as a strength as it has been for almost a decade.  We had an incredible run which I have admitted is in decline as of late.  The success the had at its peak makes even an average D look bad.  The stats, records, scores all support that view point.  I see our D under Hall as some of the best I have ever seen.  I believe Younger has continued with good performing d for a couple of seasons with a challenging one thus far this year.

I have a different posting style than you, seeing, considering or even listening to another person's viewpoint will be forever a problem of yours.

My post was about you overstating the negative about the schemes, Younger and the performance of the D going back a few years.  I am not sunshine and roses about the current state of the club.  We are in a hole but I still have hope but see an uphill challenge.  I have repeatedly provided the areas of concern for the club.

Hope isn't a popular opinion right now but doesn't make it invalid.  I was much less popular on here pre mini dynasty and I'll stay the course just like I did back then.  Until the current regime changes or we tank, this organization has my trust.  Not really confident but I haven't given up on them (yet).

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 26, 2026, 08:56:44 PMThe facts is the defence had good numbers last year in many categories.  The result are worse yet but the D wasn't as bad as your suggest last year.  The stats back that up.

I don't see a systematic problem with out schemes, you do, which are two polar opposite opinions.

Some including me, believe last year we had a offensive problem and D wasn't the issue.

To early to know this year what we are but early indications are that the D needs work but the offense should be ok.  I see some struggles on the OL and would like more runs called.

You and others simply paint me as a one dimensional ray of sunshine on here which isn't correct.  I have clearly stated my opinion on the club which has included detailed concerns in many areas.

I talk about of D as a strength as it has been for almost a decade.  We had an incredible run which I have admitted is in decline.

I have a different posting style than you, seeing, considering or even listening to another person's viewpoint will be forever a problem of yours.

Every year that Younger has had this defense under his control it's been worse than the prior year. Every year.

The fact that you must admit we've finally got a problem is positive proof that it's a downright disaster.

If you knew where to look you'd see that the exact problems we have this year are bigger more obvious ones from last year and they started the year before that down the stretch and into the Grey Cup loss.

Don't think it gets any more proof positive than that, PJ.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 26, 2026, 09:01:06 PMEvery year that Younger has had this defense under his control it's been worse than the prior year. Every year.

The fact that you must admit we've finally got a problem is positive proof that it's a downright disaster.

If you knew where to look you'd see that the exact problems we have this year are bigger more obvious ones from last year and they started the year before that down the stretch and into the Grey Cup loss.

Don't think it gets any more proof positive than that, PJ.

Its not a disasater, that's your opinion fueled by your dislike of our defensive brain trust and schemes.

My position on this club remains the same, there is no change in my view point, been saying the same stuff all year. 

You are ignoring the stats and won't admit that the defence was decent last year which is backed up by facts.

Your posts on here at times have the tone that you know more, know better than others, which is evident here.  I know where to look. I see ball club with good coaches and management with around average depth that is under performing. I see promise still.  I am more patient than you are.

I am willing to wait a few more games before I write the club off.

I enjoyed the ball game yesterday, regrettable result.  Weird but entertaining game. 

I didn't see major problems on D last year other than an under welming DL.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 26, 2026, 08:56:44 PMThe facts are the defence had good numbers last year in many categories.  The result are worse yes this year but the D wasn't as bad as your suggest last year.  The stats back that up.  I won't post them here, the CFL page and Google does that for me.  I have highlighted some of these facts previously.

I don't see a systematic problem with our schemes, you do, which are two polar opposite opinions.  Neither of us are likely right, truth usually lies at the middle of two strong positions.

Some including me, believe last year we had a offensive problem and D wasn't the issue.

To early to know this year what we are but early indications are that the D needs work but the offense should be ok (hope!).  I see some struggles on the OL and would like more runs called.

You and others simply paint me as a one dimensional ray of sunshine on here which isn't correct.  I have clearly stated my opinion on the club which has included detailed concerns in many areas.  Yes I have shown my support for the club for a long time but I provide a variety of positions all the time.

I talk about of D as a strength as it has been for almost a decade.  We had an incredible run which I have admitted is in decline as of late.  The success the had at its peak makes even an average D look bad.  The stats, records, scores all support that view point.  I see our D under Hall as some of the best I have ever seen.  I believe Younger has continued with good performing d for a couple of seasons with a challenging one thus far this year.

I have a different posting style than you, seeing, considering or even listening to another person's viewpoint will be forever a problem of yours.

My post was about you overstating the negative about the schemes, Younger and the performance of the D going back a few years.  I am not sunshine and roses about the current state of the club.  We are in a hole but I still have hope but see an uphill challenge.  I have repeatedly provided the areas of concern for the club.

Hope isn't a popular opinion right now but doesn't make it invalid.  I was much less popular on here pre mini dynasty and I'll stay the course just like I did back then.  Until the current regime changes or we tank, this organization has my trust.  Not really confident but I haven't given up on them (yet).

You don't understand the concept of systemic issues. Having a good result across a season is a deceptive stat. It's been point out that we may have good results against bad teams but have constantly poor results against good teams within our own division.

The last drive by the Elks was something we've seen before. We had a slight lead and can't force the opponent off the field. They march downfield at will against essentially a prevent defence soft coverage.

We could list specific examples last year and during JY's tenure. You are unwilling to accept what you are seeing in front of you.

Decent gave us a 4th place finish. Dominant defences prevent long drives against better than average teams.  Beating Ottawa and the bottom 3 teams but losing to the top teams is what happened. You may want to look at the 2025 schedule, points and yardage analysis. Or you could re-watch the games at least once after the original airing as many of us do each season.

An underwhelming DL as you pointed out, gave good QB's time to find open receivers and / or escape the pocket etc. That's exactly the same as yesterday. Not enough pressure throughout the game and particularly with the game on the line.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 26, 2026, 09:33:46 PMYou don't understand the concept of systemic issues. Having a good result across a season is a deceptive stat. It's been point out that we may have good results against bad teams but have constantly poor results against good teams within our own division.

The last drive by the Elks was something we've seen before. We had a slight lead and can't force the opponent off the field. They march downfield at will against essentially a prevent defence soft coverage.

We could list specific examples last year and during JY's tenure. You are unwilling to accept what you are seeing in front of you.

Non factual opinion without merit"You don't understand the concept of systemic issues" ,"You are unwilling to accept what you are seeing in front of you."


The stats on Youngers D last year shown it was a good defense as whole.  We have already discussed this at great lengths and I provided my details and counter arguments.  We are discussing the same thing over and over and the same result will come, we don't agree.  We can leave it there.  I look at things with a wider lense than you do.  We have previously covered the topics you mention.  Not rehashing it.

I call it like I see it, I don't run with the herd.

I have defended Younger and his schemes.  The current club is a story that continues to unfold.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 26, 2026, 09:38:49 PMNon factual opinion without merit"You don't understand the concept of systemic issues" ,"You are unwilling to accept what you are seeing in front of you."


The stats on Youngers D last year shown it was a good defense as whole.  We have already discussed this at great lengths and I provided my details and counter arguments.  We are discussing the same thing over and over and the same result will come, we don't agree.  We can leave it there.  I look at things with a wider lense than you do.  We have previously covered the topics you mention.  Not rehashing it.

I call it like I see it, I don't run with the herd.

There you go again, saying good as a whole which I suggested was partially true. It's like Jeckel and Hyde. good one week against a bad team and then bad against a good team might create the illusion of good as a whole. That's just math.

If 1 team only scores 10 point and 1 other teams scores 30 point, it averages 20 points per game. That's a nice average but still a problem when it's a pattern against good teams. Whether that's points, yardage or TOP. It's all context.

It's not about 2026 so far which we've said. We saw discussions all of last year about weak DL, lack of pressure and soft coverage. You're just coming up with a Trumpian " alternative facts "

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 26, 2026, 09:48:48 PMThere you go again, saying good as a whole which I suggested was partially true. It's like Jeckel and Hyde. good one week against a bad team and then bad against a good team might create the illusion of good as a whole. That's just math.

If 1 team only scores 10 point and 1 other teams scores 30 point, it averages 20 points per game. That's a nice average but still a problem when it's a pattern against good teams. Whether that's points, yardage or TOP. It's all context.

It's not about 2026 so far which we've said. We saw discussions all of last year about weak DL, lack of pressure and soft coverage. You're just coming up with a Trumpian " alternative facts "

I haven't brought up any alternative facts

Please don't take personal shots (Trump)

Yes the D was good a whole last year, supported  by many statistical categories

Consistency of this club has been an issue yes over the last few seasons.

I don't see value or merit in continuing this debate.  We don't agree, have different takes and views.

it is absolutely pointless arguing with him, You're right by the way, but he only sees the positive/good, nothing in his world is bad or needs changing, is all good , all the time.

Quote from: dd on June 26, 2026, 10:00:00 PMit is absolutely pointless arguing with him, You're right by the way, but he only sees the positive/good, nothing in his world is bad or needs changing, is all good , all the time.

Non factual opinion with no value to a football discussion

I have posted what think is right and wrong with the club, offered that I think needed to change for coaching and players

I have detailed and discussed the things the club should change routinely over the years

Painting someone else as one colour the way you have is as easy out to claiming you are right

We all have a variety of opinions to post and that's the value of this place.  Debate and counting each other is a good way to understand all sides of a story.  There is nobody that is right or wrong all the time.  Just our own opinions with a lot of personal bias.

There are many like me that tend to be more positive, lots of neutral and some that are more negative.  That balance makes a healthy online community and improves the balance of the content and convos

Full disclosure I'm a fairly negative person in general but have been positive on the last decade of Bomber ball as I really believe in this clubs overall direction, leadership, culture etc.

That belief if being tested but I still have hope.

The D isn't as bad as some folks are making it out to be. In last night's game, they eliminated Rankin in the second half. They kept the Elks to 3 total points in 3 trips inside the 10 including forcing a fumble. Jefferson had his best game in the last couple of years. They also kept the Elks to 1 TD drive in the second half to give us a chance to win.

Meanwhile, the offence and special teams fumbled the ball 6 times, missed 2 FG's, Collaros took a month's worth of hits & the cobbled-together O-line stunk the joint out.

Quote from: TBURGESS on June 26, 2026, 10:19:56 PMThe D isn't as bad as some folks are making it out to be. In last night's game, they eliminated Rankin in the second half. They kept the Elks to 3 total points in 3 trips inside the 10 including forcing a fumble. Jefferson had his best game in the last couple of years. They also kept the Elks to 1 TD drive in the second half to give us a chance to win.

Meanwhile, the offence and special teams fumbled the ball 6 times, missed 2 FG's, Collaros took a month's worth of hits & the cobbled-together O-line stunk the joint out.

A factual and on point summary imo

Thanks for the post, well said

Jefferson was absolutely incredible.  Seen him get home on a 3 man front.  He was hungry.  Amazing to see him play at that level at his age.

The hits on Zach were and are my biggest worry.  That can't continue.

Quote from: TBURGESS on June 26, 2026, 10:19:56 PMThe D isn't as bad as some folks are making it out to be. In last night's game, they eliminated Rankin in the second half. They kept the Elks to 3 total points in 3 trips inside the 10 including forcing a fumble. Jefferson had his best game in the last couple of years. They also kept the Elks to 1 TD drive in the second half to give us a chance to win.

Meanwhile, the offence and special teams fumbled the ball 6 times, missed 2 FG's, Collaros took a month's worth of hits & the cobbled-together O-line stunk the joint out.

The bar is very low if we give up over 100 on the ground to Rankin, 2 100 yard scoring drives and an outright faceplant with three minutes left and we're calling that 'not bad'.

You're right that it wasn't a good day for the offense or Castillo but the defense wasn't good enough to win all by themselves too.

you only have to compare Elks defensive approach in the last drive to ours. The Elks were very aggressive in blitzing and coverage, putting pressure on our offense while we tried to just keep everyone everyone in front of us.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 26, 2026, 11:01:08 PMThe bar is very low if we give up over 100 on the ground to Rankin, 2 100 yard scoring drives and an outright faceplant with three minutes left and we're calling that 'not bad'.

You're right that it wasn't a good day for the offense or Castillo but the defense wasn't good enough to win all by themselves too.

We gave up more than 90 of those yards in the first half, which is terrible, but at least we fixed the problem at halftime.

No part of the game should be expected to be good enough to win it all by themselves. 

Quote from: dd on June 26, 2026, 10:00:00 PMit is absolutely pointless arguing with him, You're right by the way, but he only sees the positive/good, nothing in his world is bad or needs changing, is all good , all the time.

Yeah, he's from another planet.

Compared to the Riders: Bombers were -13 points for and + 15 points against
Compared to the Als: Bombers were +14 on offence and - 6 points against.

Those " facts " suggest the Bombers were equal to the Riders and the Als but we know they were not. Not in games won or overall performance during the season. The other facts are that we lost more games and we lost the playoff game when they advanced to the Grey Cup.

Points against are a fact but the context is important.

In the game against the Elks: the Elks had a 2nd 100+ yard drive and turned over the ball on downs at the 1 yard line. Would someone argue that was good defence because they didn't score? That's the bend but don't break hope the opponent will make a mistake.

At times, we've made a defensive play by forcing an error. While that's good, letting them march 70 - 100 yards before they or we cause an error is the context. The Elks drive I mentioned we could argue that we rushed Fajardo into an early throw. OTOH if the receiver didn't bobble the ball it would have been a TD.

It's very fine line. Like I said, context.

One last points, we gave up 424 points in 2025.

Against the Elks we gave up 23 points. Based on 18 games at that rate =414 points which is slightly less last year.  So  low points scored doesn't dictate that the defence played well. Obviously we aren't going to give up exactly 23 points a game this year, but it points out the fallacy that we ranked well in points against in 2025 suggests we had a good defence.

The 2025 stats were skewed because the offense turned the ball over so many times. But last night, they punted the ball and had Edmonton on their own 10 yard line and then their own 2.5 yard line, only to see them march the full length of the field for a TD. Good defense?? Hardly. We're up by 1 with the game on the line, think the defense will hold them and force them to punt, think again, they march down and score to win the game. This defense won't win us any games, they're soft in coverage and have a non existent pass rush, even with the addition of Ceresna.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 26, 2026, 11:46:50 PMYeah, he's from another planet.

Compared to the Riders: Bombers were -13 points for and + 15 points against
Compared to the Als: Bombers were +14 on offence and - 6 points against.

Those " facts " suggest the Bombers were equal to the Riders and the Als but we know they were not. Not in games won or overall performance during the season. The other facts are that we lost more games and we lost the playoff game when they advanced to the Grey Cup.

Points against are a fact but the context is important.

In the game against the Elks: the Elks had a 2nd 100+ yard drive and turned over the ball on downs at the 1 yard line. Would someone argue that was good defence because they didn't score? That's the bend but don't break hope the opponent will make a mistake.

At times, we've made a defensive play by forcing an error. While that's good, letting them march 70 - 100 yards before they or we cause an error is the context. The Elks drive I mentioned we could argue that we rushed Fajardo into an early throw. OTOH if the receiver didn't bobble the ball it would have been a TD.

It's very fine line. Like I said, context.

One last points, we gave up 424 points in 2025.

Against the Elks we gave up 23 points. Based on 18 games at that rate =414 points which is slightly less last year.  So  low points scored doesn't dictate that the defence played well. Obviously we aren't going to give up exactly 23 points a game this year, but it points out the fallacy that we ranked well in points against in 2025 suggests we had a good defence.

It's not a hard concept.

It's in the forum rules.

Keep the personal attacks out of your posts please.

Quote from: Pete on June 26, 2026, 11:05:32 PMyou only have to compare Elks defensive approach in the last drive to ours. The Elks were very aggressive in blitzing and coverage, putting pressure on our offense while we tried to just keep everyone everyone in front of us.

Yep. Or the hits going on in the Toronto / Rider game right now. Both defenses playing traditional attacking football on defense. What. A. Concept.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 26, 2026, 11:01:08 PMThe bar is very low if we give up over 100 on the ground to Rankin, 2 100 yard scoring drives and an outright faceplant with three minutes left and we're calling that 'not bad'.

Most of what you said is correct, but yes, every team would be overjoyed to give up 100 to Rankin because the dude got 250 and many TDs in each of the other games.  In fact, other teams may look at what we did as the template to defeat Rankin too.

Now, the more important question is: did we limit Rankin by sacrificing anything else?  Or was our scheme perfectly suited to stop him?  Because if we didn't do anything special, then that's +1 strength for Younger's scheme.  And from what I saw, we didn't seem worse on D than usual -- we gave up all the short pass game as usual, but we still limited the deep and held the other runs.  Even our hitch screen D wasn't too horrific.

So now if we can just stop the short pass... our D might have a shot at even beating SSK.  Assuming our O gets their heads out of their shorts.

Quote from: TBURGESS on June 26, 2026, 10:19:56 PMThey also kept the Elks to 1 TD drive in the second half to give us a chance to win.

This is true, and while the H1 100Y drives were inexcusable, we may have to be a bit forgiving with the final one because I'm sure the ToP was lopsided.  Our D was on the field almost the entire H1 and was probably bushed by the end of the game.

The infinite turnovers meant the D never got any rest.

Oh ya, and no one's mentioned the shambles 2 & out to start the game when we won the toss and took the ball.  Talk about a buzzkill.  If the O is going to stink it up on the scripted "should succeed" first drive, just defer when we win the toss.

Quote from: markf on June 26, 2026, 05:06:32 PMI saw Kelly, Cause I was trying to watch him to see how he would do.

We'll never know why he's out there.

But I've noticed that we're not noticing Kelly in game 2 & 3... as in, he's not the one getting torched.  So that means we have fixed something.  I lamented Kelly being left 1 on 1 in game 1 (and all of last season) and teams would just throw to him for easy TDs.  Ya, that's all cleaned up in the last 2 games.

I think they solved the scheme and made sure Kelly was only ever a "roving 2nd FS", or zone support, or something.  In fact, the fact you guys just said you noticed Kelly where SAM would be hints at this.  He's no longer the deepest guy in zone who is forced to cover the go.  And this is a good thing.  Maybe him being isolated on top RECs before was effectively a bust & big mistake by one of the vets... and not Kelly's fault at all.

In sum, we may already have seen an improvement of the use of Kelly -- and more like what the "successful" scheme is supposed to look like.  Now... to actually have him make some plays so he can get a stat...

Quote from: Pete on June 26, 2026, 02:37:41 PMWilson has lost more than a step

Pretty sure Kyrie had one of his best games in a while vs EDM.  Wasn't he a big part of why Rankin was limited?  We'll see on rewatch.  Might be life in the old dog yet.

Quote from: Pete on June 26, 2026, 02:37:41 PMThe decision to go after aged vets ie Ceresna and Moxey vs younger quicker ie Carney  and Allen is not looking good

Moxey also had a much better night.  In hip pockets mostly on deep stuff.  Not taking those huge uncontested burns he did in prior weeks.  Looked very vet on some plays.  The stuff in front of him isn't his fault, he's forced to play off 10Y by JY.

Ceresna: jury still out.  If he's dinged up and out for many games now, ya that's going to hurt.  But it's better than him playing hurt and doing nothing, if that's what the case was.

Quote from: Waffler on June 26, 2026, 01:47:07 PMI just saw it as Edm got a good lead, took their foot off the gas and coasted a while but when they needed a score they got one.

Post of the game.  This is precisely what happened.  EDM didn't suddenly get mediocre at halftime, and our D didn't suddenly get good.  They went into "prevent O" because they bet we'd just fumble again and/or struggle to produce more than 1 first down.  When they saw we got the go-ahead, they just turned the switch back on and it was like we didn't even exist once again.

Sad.  Worst part is seeing Cody all self-satisfied after scoring that TD.  It's like catharsis for him, after all his green playoff defeats to blue.

Quote from: Tecno on June 27, 2026, 09:24:51 AMThis is true, and while the H1 100Y drives were inexcusable, we may have to be a bit forgiving with the final one because I'm sure the ToP was lopsided.  Our D was on the field almost the entire H1 and was probably bushed by the end of the game.

The infinite turnovers meant the D never got any rest.

Oh ya, and no one's mentioned the shambles 2 & out to start the game when we won the toss and took the ball.  Talk about a buzzkill.  If the O is going to stink it up on the scripted "should succeed" first drive, just defer when we win the toss.

TOP was essentially 50/50 and if you want to talk about being tired, Edmonton was on a short week with one practice and we were coming off a bye.

When you put pressure on the other person, they can show cracks in performance. Let them alone and have time, and let them perform and they do better. So put pressure on them, then they can error. It's like anyone in doing a task. Unfortunately, younger, must have been effected by this non aggressive approach. So he doesn't want to pressure, anyone.? Seems to be the wrong approach for a guy coaching a defensive group, who would seem to prosper by giving their opponent less time to excell.

Fans are not going to continue to attend and watch any team be walked over. There is nothing to cheer about. This has been a picturing identification of him. Every other team, has brought in young aggressive people. 

We don't seem to be enthused in bringing in people that can out play others. Ceresna? White.?  Are they only here, because three old teams knew they were done?

Our O line looks awesome?  Zach will have a short season.  Time to re-jig managements view on who to pay? The Philosophy on Defence again seems to be well, pathetic. Who wants to play archaic schemes that have not really worked for over a year now?

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 27, 2026, 01:13:41 AMIt's not a hard concept.

It's in the forum rules.

Keep the personal attacks out of your posts please.

Neither is understanding the difference between good defence and bad defence over an extended period.  You need to support your arguments better and quit complaining about your perception of personal attacks. You can block or ignore but you may end up with only conversations with yourself.

Make better arguments if you want to engage with posters.

Other defensive considerations besides points allowed:

1. Sacks
2. Hits
3. Hurries
4. Knockdowns
5. Ints
6. TFL
7. Turnovers
8. Plays allowed
9. TOP
10. Impact of weather
11. Impact / noise of fans for at home games.

Quote from: Tecno on June 27, 2026, 09:24:51 AMThis is true, and while the H1 100Y drives were inexcusable, we may have to be a bit forgiving with the final one because I'm sure the ToP was lopsided.  Our D was on the field almost the entire H1 and was probably bushed by the end of the game.

The infinite turnovers meant the D never got any rest.

Oh ya, and no one's mentioned the shambles 2 & out to start the game when we won the toss and took the ball.  Talk about a buzzkill.  If the O is going to stink it up on the scripted "should succeed" first drive, just defer when we win the toss.

We've used the tired excuse before when TOP was lopsided. It's the defence that caused that in the 1st place, so it can't be used as excuse. The TOP was close overall and might have actually been on our side by the end of the game.

A defence can give ups 2 quick plays for 100 yards. Or they can give up 12 plays for 100 yards. You can see which takes more TOP. The 2nd example is what we see in bend but don't break defensive strategies.

At one point Fajardo was 12 of 14 and finished with 71% completion rate. I think they may have ran slightly more plays than us. We ran more plays longer / quicker than 20 yards than they did.

So I only support the tired because of TOP in some games but not in this example. Late, longer game winning drives against our defence is not new or a surprise.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 27, 2026, 12:55:02 PMNeither is understanding the difference between good defence and bad defence over an extended period.  You need to support your arguments better and quit complaining about your perception of personal attacks. You can block or ignore but you may end up with only conversations with yourself.

Make better arguments if you want to engage with posters.

Other defensive considerations besides points allowed:

1. Sacks
2. Hits
3. Hurries
4. Knockdowns
5. Ints
6. TFL
7. Turnovers
8. Plays allowed
9. TOP
10. Impact of weather
11. Impact / noise of fans for at home games.

We haven't had  bad defence over a long period.  Multiple statistical categories back that up as mentioned previously.  I have brought that up previously, not re-hashing it now.

The forum rules clearly state that personal attacks are not allowed, I have repeatedly asked you to stop.

My arguments are well supported you simply discount those.  The most important stat is points allowed imo.  Those facts don't lie but you cherry pick bad games to somehow claim the entire season of data means nothing. I did agree with you that consistency has been an issue.

My arguments are fine, they just don't align with the herds opinion so they are not popular and countered often.  This is exactly how the forum was pre mini dynasty.  It's just how it is when the club struggles. 

There are other posters that have backed the opinion that the D wasn't as bad as you suggest last year and have suggested that it wasn't our biggest problem.

I haven't said that our current D is good, I have provided my areas of concern and suggested how we improve.  I have defended Younger, said it's too early to panic and suggested patience before we make our determination of how good we are.  I have deferred my judgement of the current D till 1/4 to 1/2 way.  On paper pre season I thought our D looked fine but thought we would need time for the new faces to settle in.  Never liked how we moved Kramdi.

There is a difference between not liking our schemes previously and accepting that they have been effective in the past.

I will keep countering and debating on here.  I will not block you because you provide good content and insights. You might not like how I post but its well within the rules and I value the diversity of posting styles and welcome all opinions on here.

All I ask is that you stop making it personal.  We won't agree on this but we can at least be civil about it.  Let's move on from this debate.  We both have made good points but are not in agreement and that's ok.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 27, 2026, 01:46:26 PMWe haven't had  bad defence over a long period.  Multiple statistical categories back that up as mentioned previously.  I have brought that up previously, not re-hashing it now.

The forum rules clearly state that personal attacks are not allowed, I have repeatedly asked you to stop.

My arguments we well supported you simply discount those.  The most important stat is points allowed.  Those facts don't lie but you cherry pick bad games to somehow claim the entire season of data means nothing.

My arguments are fine, they just don't align with the herds opinion so they are not popular and countered often.  This is exactly how the forum was pre mini dynasty.  It's just how it is when the club struggles. 

There are other posters that have backed the opinion that the D wasn't as bad as you suggest last year and have suggested that it wasn't our biggest problem.

I haven't said that our current D is good, I have provided my areas of concern and suggested how we improve.  I have defended Younger, said it's too early to panic and suggested patience before we make our determination of how good we are.  I have deferred my judgement of the current D till 1/4 to 1/2 way.  On paper pre season I thought our D looked fine but thought we would need time for the new faces to settle in.  Never liked how we moved Kramdi.

There is a difference between not liking our schemes previously and accepting that they have been effective in the past.

I will keep countering and debating on here.  I will not block you because you provide good content and insights. You might not like how I post but its well within the rules and I value the diversity of posting styles and welcome all opinions on here.

All I ask is that you stop making it personal.  We won't agree on this but we can at least be civil about it.  Let's move on from this debate.  We both have made good points but are not in agreement and that's ok.

What multiple statistics? You seem to lean on the points against. I listed other categories. Feel free to show where we ranked in some or all of those.

Only a few are panicing but we do recognize a pattern which simply would be stated as a bend but don't break scheme. That has a lot of cons and that's where we see the issues.

It's not something new that has just come up. This has been discussed at length going back to at least the 2024 system and before JY became the DC. It was a complaint against the Hall system as well.

Interesting. Looking at the current standings, it's quite possible that by the end of the weekend, the Bomber may rank 3rd in points allowed over 3 games. I don't think many of us would agree we're the 3rd best defence in the league.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 27, 2026, 02:11:13 PMWhat multiple statistics? You seem to lean on the points against. I listed other categories. Feel free to show where we ranked in some or all of those.

Only a few are panicing but we do recognize a pattern which simply would be stated as a bend but don't break scheme. That has a lot of cons and that's where we see the issues.

It's not something new that has just come up. This has been discussed at length going back to at least the 2024 system and before JY became the DC. It was a complaint against the Hall system as well.

Not fact checked  (googled).  I thought we were top 3 in some of these (memory poor).

"The Winnipeg Blue Bombers allowed an average of 346.2 total yards of net offense per game during the 2025 CFL regular season, ranking as the third-best defense in the league.The defensive yards allowed can be broken down into the following categories:Passing Yards Allowed: 252.1 yards per game (2nd in the CFL)Rushing Yards Allowed: 94.1 yards per game (1st in the CFL)Points Allowed: 19.9 points per game (league low)Full league statistics and detailed weekly player metrics are available to review via the CFL Stats portal and the 2025 CFL Season Statistics PDF."

Yes we bend don't break at times.  I found that effective under Hall.  Some never liked it.

Yes only some are panicking correct.

The list of stats you brought up are great ones, no time or energy to do the homework.

Pros and cons with any scheme.  In the past the pros > cons.

This year jury is out imo.

I appreciate the tone of your last reply.

This is where some of the stars diverge from reality and where you need to rely on a total understanding of defense for context.

We absolutely weren't the third best defense in the league last year. We were physically easy to play against, we really struggled against the top teams, generated few turnovers (largely because the pressure and sacks aren't there) and over time the unit has drifted from reason why we win, to 'lets hope they do just enough'.

Last year wasn't good enough, ultimately. And this year we've opened at a pace worse than last year.

It's not hard to do the math.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 27, 2026, 03:10:13 PMThis is where some of the stars diverge from reality and where you need to rely on a total understanding of defense for context.

We absolutely weren't the third best defense in the league last year. We were physically easy to play against, we really struggled against the top teams, generated few turnovers (largely because the pressure and sacks aren't there) and over time the unit has drifted from reason why we win, to 'lets hope they do just enough'.

Last year wasn't good enough, ultimately. And this year we've opened at a pace worse than last year.

It's not hard to do the math.

Good point about the physical aspect of defence. We make swarming tackles eventually but we are less punishing than many other teams.

An example of what we don't have is the LB hit on Oliveria that caused the fumble. He was smoked.

Yeah our tackling and physicality needs to improve, many have talked about that for a bit.  Edm was more hungry in this regard.  We were able to calm that down a bit at times.

We are 17% through the season, next week we will will essentially be 22% or a quarter of the way through, factoring in we already had one bye we can essentially say after next weeks game we will be 25% through this season.

I think most on here will agree that after next week we will have seen enough of the season to fairly judge this years version of our defence.

All we can say is as of today using any metric we want the 2026 defence is not good.

Younger's defences are lame to say it nicely.. we need someone with more teeth in here.

Anybody heard what O'Shea has to say about the defence? He must have been asked by someone in the media. If they haven't, they're not doing their job. People are talking about it a lot. Not just here, but out and about too. I haven't heard or read anything. I'd like to know what he has to say about it.

I think our current scheme was built (under Hall) to force teams to dink & dunk, under the assumption they can't dink & dunk 8-13 plays straight to get a TD.  It's the Stubler (and Thorpe-ish) philosophy.

And I think at one time this worked.  All the years Hall had success are proof.  Why?  Because teams didn't really dink & dunk (well, except us under Lapo!).  OC's and QB's get impatient and greedy.  Most aren't prepared to proffer an O as horrifically boring as SSK 2025.

But then teams found out WPG has no defence (pun intended) against a short game.  And then they mastered it.  And it was made worse by the fact that whilst Hall would stiffen the bend near the GL... Younger doesn't.

Look at this season so far.  HAM, while capable of the deep game, pretty much beat us on the ground and with quick, controlled passes.  EDM was nothing except dink & dunk -- they are emulating the '25 SSK O in their bid to win the W (smart move!).  But... CGY was playing a normal O, targeting all over the place and VAJ liking to take the deep shots.  And lo and behold we beat that.  Because I think we are built to beat that.

As such I think our D will do (relatively) well against BC, CGY, TOR, MTL.  And we'll do poorly against SSK, EDM, HAM -- and maybe OTT!  If we could just solve the short-pass dilemma while keeping our fancy coverage scheme, THEN we could be great against even SSK.  But then, solving that short-pass SSK game is what every team is trying to do right now.

Quote from: Tecno on June 28, 2026, 07:58:09 AMI think our current scheme was built (under Hall) to force teams to dink & dunk, under the assumption they can't dink & dunk 8-13 plays straight to get a TD.  It's the Stubler (and Thorpe-ish) philosophy.

And I think at one time this worked.  All the years Hall had success are proof.  Why?  Because teams didn't really dink & dunk (well, except us under Lapo!).  OC's and QB's get impatient and greedy.  Most aren't prepared to proffer an O as horrifically boring as SSK 2025.

But then teams found out WPG has no defence (pun intended) against a short game.  And then they mastered it.  And it was made worse by the fact that whilst Hall would stiffen the bend near the GL... Younger doesn't.

Look at this season so far.  HAM, while capable of the deep game, pretty much beat us on the ground and with quick, controlled passes.  EDM was nothing except dink & dunk -- they are emulating the '25 SSK O in their bid to win the W (smart move!).  But... CGY was playing a normal O, targeting all over the place and VAJ liking to take the deep shots.  And lo and behold we beat that.  Because I think we are built to beat that.

As such I think our D will do (relatively) well against BC, CGY, TOR, MTL.  And we'll do poorly against SSK, EDM, HAM -- and maybe OTT!  If we could just solve the short-pass dilemma while keeping our fancy coverage scheme, THEN we could be great against even SSK.  But then, solving that short-pass SSK game is what every team is trying to do right now.

Agree. Against the scrambler qb's we have a chance, bur the quick hitter qbs have figured it out, and its easy.

Bomber D philosophy is let the other team make an error instead of actively causing chaos to make errors.

"Theres no way they will dink and dunk 15 plays 100 yards"..... uhhh yes there is apparently.

Im no defensive mastermind,  but to shore up the quick hit passes maybe line up less than 10 yards off your receiver is a good start.

Quote from: bomb squad on June 28, 2026, 07:19:48 AMAnybody heard what O'Shea has to say about the defence? He must have been asked by someone in the media. If they haven't, they're not doing their job. People are talking about it a lot. Not just here, but out and about too. I haven't heard or read anything. I'd like to know what he has to say about it.

He definitely doesn't give much away but he said, very quickly, in the post game interview that they changed their defensive front calls in the second half (which did help). I read that to be, they got out of Younger's really bad collapse and contain style of front and let the guys go make plays. I believe this is the second time they've course corrected that strategy in three games. They also did so in game one at the half against Calgary.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 28, 2026, 03:18:29 PMHe definitely doesn't give much away but he said, very quickly, in the post game interview that they changed their defensive front calls in the second half (which did help). I read that to be, they got out of Younger's really bad collapse and contain style of front and let the guys go make plays. I believe this is the second time they've course corrected that strategy in three games. They also did so in game one at the half against Calgary.

If they have film on the other team and know how they play (pocket vs scramble), wouldn't they plan for it ahead of time instead of bringing in their set system already? Don't just copy and paste your same defense, that seems illogical.. to me anyhow.  But hey, I'm just an observer and pay to watch, not get paid to do it.

Maybe it's time Hall and Younger BOTH go if that's the way they do it and don't want to plan accordingly.  Just my opinion at this moment.

Quote from: Tecno on June 28, 2026, 07:58:09 AMI think our current scheme was built (under Hall) to force teams to dink & dunk, under the assumption they can't dink & dunk 8-13 plays straight to get a TD.  It's the Stubler (and Thorpe-ish) philosophy.

And I think at one time this worked.  All the years Hall had success are proof.  Why?  Because teams didn't really dink & dunk (well, except us under Lapo!).  OC's and QB's get impatient and greedy.  Most aren't prepared to proffer an O as horrifically boring as SSK 2025.

But then teams found out WPG has no defence (pun intended) against a short game.  And then they mastered it.  And it was made worse by the fact that whilst Hall would stiffen the bend near the GL... Younger doesn't.

Look at this season so far.  HAM, while capable of the deep game, pretty much beat us on the ground and with quick, controlled passes.  EDM was nothing except dink & dunk -- they are emulating the '25 SSK O in their bid to win the W (smart move!).  But... CGY was playing a normal O, targeting all over the place and VAJ liking to take the deep shots.  And lo and behold we beat that.  Because I think we are built to beat that.

As such I think our D will do (relatively) well against BC, CGY, TOR, MTL.  And we'll do poorly against SSK, EDM, HAM -- and maybe OTT!  If we could just solve the short-pass dilemma while keeping our fancy coverage scheme, THEN we could be great against even SSK.  But then, solving that short-pass SSK game is what every team is trying to do right now.

The goal of Richie Hall's defence was always to eliminate the big explosion plays, keep containment and slow down the scoring enough to allow the offence to eventually outscore the opponent, Younger has carried on with this plan. 

The difference is back when Hall was DC, only Wpg. took the running game super seriously, now every team in the West and a few in the East have developed strong running games to compliment their passing attacks. 

Sask. finally conquered their nemesis and showed the rest of the league how to integrate the run effectively with the dink and dunk offence of old (AH?), giving them an added layer of complexity that makes it hard for defences to focus primarily on pass coverage when a solo missile can be launched from a different base. No surprise RB's are doing much better now after years of struggling to gain even 4 yds. The most talented QB's are eating this up as they have defences stretched thin in every direction which allows holes to open up and more one on one situations to develop further down field. 

Looks like the switch has been flipped and we'll see offence dominate defence for the next few years until the next big alteration flips the switch back.

As a whole defenses around the league has deteriorated All qbs are looking like allstars as more teams have invested in olinemen,
 Its the ability to create turnovers that makes a big difference, something we need to get better at

Interesting comments elsewhere about the defence. Suggesting it's not so much about points given up since we didn't give up excessive amount of points.

It's more about the how and when those points are given up. Ultimately points given up late that are the deciding factor is what counts.

We don't create turnovers or generate pressure which are huge issues.

Quote from: RebusRankin on June 29, 2026, 04:40:14 PMWe don't create turnovers or generate pressure which are huge issues.

Exactly. That's another measurement for a defence besides just points given up.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 29, 2026, 04:48:14 PMExactly. That's another measurement for a defence besides just points given up.

They did a decent job of keeping the Elks out of the endzone, if they wouldn't have taken an offside penalty on the goal line they may have prevented another TD in Q2.

The number of pts given up is a key metric for any defence in any league

Yes there are others but some are not giving that metric enough credit to try to show that our defense wasn't decent last year, which is was

I will evaluate this club between 1/4 and 1/2 way through

D has more issues than positives thus far but I have some hope

Agree the Os>Ds across the board at the moment

Some good debate here all

Tough match up this week

Agree gotta generate turnovers and protect the 🐖

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 29, 2026, 06:59:28 PMThe number of pts given up is a key metric for any defence in any league

Yes there are others but some are not giving that metric enough credit to try to show that our defense wasn't decent last year, which is was

I will evaluate this club between 1/4 and 1/2 way through

D has more issues than positives thus far but I have some hope

Agree the Os>Ds across the board at the moment

Some good debate here all

Tough match up this week

Agree gotta generate turnovers and protect the 🐖

The key metric is winning when you have the lead and the ball. The rest is window dressing.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 29, 2026, 08:28:59 PMThe key metric is winning when you have the lead and the ball. The rest is window dressing.

I would expand that to if your team has the lead can you stop the other team from scoring and winning the game. When push comes to shove with the game on the line, do you rise up and make plays that stop the other team from scoring or do you lay off and play soft zone and let them match the field and win the game. We all know what the answer is. I have zero faith in our defense in holding a lead and winning the game for us. Never. They fold everytime. They wait for the other team to make a mistake and self destruct.good teams don't make mistakes and you're going to have to make some plays to stop them. Our defense isn't that defense 

Quote from: dd on June 29, 2026, 09:46:44 PMI would expand that to if your team has the lead can you stop the other team from scoring and winning the game. When push comes to shove with the game on the line, do you rise up and make plays that stop the other team from scoring or do you lay off and play soft zone and let them match the field and win the game. We all know what the answer is. I have zero faith in our defense in holding a lead and winning the game for us. Never. They fold everytime. They wait for the other team to make a mistake and self destruct.good teams don't make mistakes and you're going to have to make some plays to stop them. Our defense isn't that defense 

Unfortunate but true. We saw games lost in the dying minutes because the defence couldn't get that stop. You know what they say about prevent defences.

37+41+28=106 or 35.3 per game in three games versus Calgary.

34+21=55 or 27.5 ppg in the Banjo Bowl or LDG.

42 points allowed in the ESF to Montreal.

We played well on D against Montreal's 4th string QB and their back-up in the season finale. 23 points or 11.5 in those two games. We allowed 16 against the Rider's B team at season's end. So that's 39 points in 3 games or 13 ppg. They held Masoli to 14 early in the season.

My point, this defensive system struggled against good teams last year too.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 29, 2026, 11:07:57 PMUnfortunate but true. We saw games lost in the dying minutes because the defence couldn't get that stop. You know what they say about prevent defences.

Disagree, they lost the game when they gave the ball back to the Elks with 3:20 left on the clock clinging to a 1 pt. lead. After the punt the Elks began that drive on their own 53 yd. line, every team other than maybe Ottawa would have turned around and put enough points on the board to win the game in that situation.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 29, 2026, 08:28:59 PMThe key metric is winning when you have the lead and the ball. The rest is window dressing.

please let us know how many times that occurred last year

I don't agree that is more important than having one of the best total pts allowed

You could have a season when you only win couple times with the lead and the ball and have the worst record in the league and the worst defense

There are few situations when you would have one of the best total pts allowed and not have a good to great D, the average of pts allowed over an entire season tells you things

wee bit of cherry picking of the stats there imo

ah well, we won't agree on this one

the rest isn't window dressing, like I mentioned the other stats of yards given up also indicate a pretty good D last year, can't just ignore all those stat to try to support you narrative that our D wasn't good last year

as others have suggested we had an O problem last year, not a D problem, the O made a good D look bad on some nights as they were never off the field

yes our team as whole wasn't good enough to beat the good teams that is true, I believe with a better OC and O we would have won a few of those and our D's stats would have been even better

All this doesn't really matter as right now our D isn't great and we need to fix this quickly, if you thought our D was bad last year, I am not sure what you are calling it this year LOL

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 30, 2026, 01:05:21 AMplease let us know how many times that occurred last year

I don't agree that is more important than having one of the best total pts allowed

You could have a season when you only win couple times with the lead and the ball and have the worst record in the league and the worst defense

There are few situations when you would have one of the best total pts allowed and not have a good to great D, the average of pts allowed over an entire season tells you things

wee bit of cherry picking of the stats there imo

ah well, we won't agree on this one

the rest isn't window dressing, like I mentioned the other stats of yards given up also indicate a pretty good D last year, can't just ignore all those stat to try to support you narrative that our D wasn't good last year

as others have suggested we had an O problem last year, not a D problem, the O made a good D look bad on some nights as they were never off the field

yes our team as whole wasn't good enough to beat the good teams that is true, I believe with a better OC and O we would have won a few of those and our D's stats would have been even better

All this doesn't really matter as right now our D isn't great and we need to fix this quickly, if you thought our D was bad last year, I am not sure what you are calling it this year LOL

There have been many examples of this problem. Interesting you think points given up is more important than winning as a key metric.

Most recent example is the game against the Elks.

It's true that a short pass play wouldn't have been automatically successful. It's more of a statistical probability. We needed a TD to win. What do you think the Elks would be most like to cover with little time left.

If you can't answer that without bias then I don't know what to say. Did the receiver in the deep shot look open?

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 30, 2026, 12:57:01 AMDisagree, they lost the game when they gave the ball back to the Elks with 3:20 left on the clock clinging to a 1 pt. lead. After the punt the Elks began that drive on their own 53 yd. line, every team other than maybe Ottawa would have turned around and put enough points on the board to win the game in that situation.

You bet.  TSN nailed it in the OTT game (I think) where they pointed out the O's are owning the D's across the league right now.  Scores are mega-high.  D's give up explosions and TDs.

Given that environment, if we wanted to win in the last couple of drives, we needed to MAKE SURE we drove the field and hopefully got a TD, but at minimum a FG.  Because most decent teams are capable of having at least 50/50 chance they can drive the field and score -- especially when it's the last 2 mins and they are in 3-down mode.  And many/most of our close losses in the last 3 seasons (some in GC's/ESF!) were because the O stunk up the joint and gave the ball back to let the other team win.

As such, I would seriously consider having the braintrust think about going in 3 down mode (before the drive starts!) in that situation.  I know it sounds nuts, but develop a gameplan that can get 8 yards on 2 downs and get a 90% plan for getting the final 2 on 3rd down -- whether perfecting some Brady runs or finally figuring out a sure 2Y short pass.  Maybe Perkins passing or handing off to Brady could do it -- like a Strev type option package.

Gut reaction will be "that's crazy talk", but we had a much better chance of winning if we were doing a 3-down dink & dunk for 3.5 mins to go vs giving the ball up when our D has NOTHING AT ALL to stop a dink & dunk strategy.  Or just give them the TD for free with 2 mins left so THEN we have time to dink & dunk the field ourselves.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 29, 2026, 11:07:57 PMUnfortunate but true. We saw games lost in the dying minutes because the defence couldn't get that stop. You know what they say about prevent defences.

Ironically, we didn't change anything for EDM's final drive.  We didn't go any more "prevent" than normal.  It's just our whole D scheme is a form of pseudo-prevent D!

Now, you could argue we often go "prevent O"... and that's more of a problem.

We could only dream of being up so big that our D can go full "prevent", lol.  That hasn't happened in a loooong time.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 01:24:05 AMThere have been many examples of this problem. Interesting you think points given up is more important than winning as a key metric.

Most recent example is the game against the Elks.

It's true that a short pass play wouldn't have been automatically successful. It's more of a statistical probability. We needed a TD to win. What do you think the Elks would be most like to cover with little time left.

If you can't answer that without bias then I don't know what to say. Did the receiver in the deep shot look open?

Never said that the overall record or winning was more important than low pts per game given up by the D, nice try there.

The missed deep shot was disappointing, we took what they gave us.  Yes short game might have worked, never will know.  Not really following you on this one.

Quote from: Tecno on June 30, 2026, 02:21:09 AMIronically, we didn't change anything for EDM's final drive.  We didn't go any more "prevent" than normal.  It's just our whole D scheme is a form of pseudo-prevent D!

Now, you could argue we often go "prevent O"... and that's more of a problem.

We could only dream of being up so big that our D can go full "prevent", lol.  That hasn't happened in a loooong time.

Except we threw a bomb instead of grinding it out.

Quote from: Blueforlife on June 30, 2026, 02:48:52 AMNever said that the overall record or winning was more important than low pts per game given up by the D, nice try there.

The missed deep shot was disappointing, we took what they gave us.  Yes short game might have worked, never will know.  Not really following you on this one.

The point is that we've often had leads and the ball with little time left and still lost. It's a combination of often too conservative offence and being forced to punt.

That said, with the game on the line we seem prone to soft defence and allowing the opponent to score when we need to force them to punt.

The Elks game was a variant of that. Bad play selection on the deep route followed by soft defence. Elks completed a 2nd and 15 IIRC. 2nd and long is our weakness and we've seen it in other games.

You'll have to think back and refresh your memory even about the Grey Cup losses against back up QB's that ran around the edge to continue late scoring drives.

This was 2023 Grey Cup info as one example. Note in particular the 3rd and 5 conversation for 31 yards.

With the game on the line, Cody Fajardo and Tyson Philpot delivered the Montreal Alouettes a most unlikely Grey Cup title.

Fajardo's 19-yard touchdown pass to Philpot with 15 seconds remaining rallied Montreal to a thrilling 28-24 victory over the Winnipeg Blue Bombers on Sunday in Hamilton. It earned the Alouettes their first CFL title since 2010 and followed an uncertain off-season that saw the franchise taken over by the league in February, then sold a month later to businessman Pierre Karl Peladeau.

Fajardo's toss capped a stellar seven-play, 83-yard march. It included a clutch 31-yard completion to Cole Spieker on third-and-five before a Tim Hortons Field sellout of 28,808 as Montreal ended its season with eight straight wins.

This was the 2022 Grey Cup loss. Note the 2nd and 15 conversion.


Smith wasn't Toronto's only unsung hero. Backup quarterback Chad Kelly engineered the five-play, 36-yard drive Ouellette capped. Kelly, the nephew of former NFL star Jim Kelly, replaced veteran McLeod Bethel-Thompson, who suffered a dislocated right thumb.

Kelly delivered a crucial 20-yard run on second-and-15 to the Winnipeg 15-yard line that kept the drive going. The march was set up by Javon Leake's 44-yard punt return to the Bombers' 31 with 6:07 remaining.

It's just indications of finding ways to lose instead of win late in games. Ottawa and Crum winning comes to mind.

Check the 2025 Bomber games in the schedule that shows results. Look at the play by play in the August 9th against the Stamps where we lose on a late drive. final score 28-27. There were a few games like that last year.

2/3 games this year we've needed our defense to get a stop to put us in a very good position to win. Both times they got walked down the field. Sorry, no excuses

If the football database stats are to be believed....our run defence is far and away the worst league wide...in fact the disparity is so high that after three weeks the next closet to us is Ott. and they have surrendered 105 less yards along the ground 463-358....

We give up an average of 154.3yrds a game along the ground, for context to show just how bad this is T.O which after three weeks has the best defence against the run based on stats has surrendered 177 yards in total in all three games...yes less than 23 yards given up in all three of there games more then we average per game.....

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 01:11:53 PMThe point is that we've often had leads and the ball with little time left and still lost. It's a combination of often too conservative offence and being forced to punt.

That said, with the game on the line we seem prone to soft defence and allowing the opponent to score when we need to force them to punt.

The Elks game was a variant of that. Bad play selection on the deep route followed by soft defence. Elks completed a 2nd and 15 IIRC. 2nd and long is our weakness and we've seen it in other games.

You'll have to think back and refresh your memory even about the Grey Cup losses against back up QB's that ran around the edge to continue late scoring drives.

This was 2023 Grey Cup info as one example. Note in particular the 3rd and 5 conversation for 31 yards.

With the game on the line, Cody Fajardo and Tyson Philpot delivered the Montreal Alouettes a most unlikely Grey Cup title.

Fajardo's 19-yard touchdown pass to Philpot with 15 seconds remaining rallied Montreal to a thrilling 28-24 victory over the Winnipeg Blue Bombers on Sunday in Hamilton. It earned the Alouettes their first CFL title since 2010 and followed an uncertain off-season that saw the franchise taken over by the league in February, then sold a month later to businessman Pierre Karl Peladeau.

Fajardo's toss capped a stellar seven-play, 83-yard march. It included a clutch 31-yard completion to Cole Spieker on third-and-five before a Tim Hortons Field sellout of 28,808 as Montreal ended its season with eight straight wins.

This was the 2022 Grey Cup loss. Note the 2nd and 15 conversion.


Smith wasn't Toronto's only unsung hero. Backup quarterback Chad Kelly engineered the five-play, 36-yard drive Ouellette capped. Kelly, the nephew of former NFL star Jim Kelly, replaced veteran McLeod Bethel-Thompson, who suffered a dislocated right thumb.

Kelly delivered a crucial 20-yard run on second-and-15 to the Winnipeg 15-yard line that kept the drive going. The march was set up by Javon Leake's 44-yard punt return to the Bombers' 31 with 6:07 remaining.

It's just indications of finding ways to lose instead of win late in games. Ottawa and Crum winning comes to mind.

Check the 2025 Bomber games in the schedule that shows results. Look at the play by play in the August 9th against the Stamps where we lose on a late drive. final score 28-27. There were a few games like that last year.

Back before 2019 they often lost or won on late game FG's with Medlock, especially in Calgary it was always a battle to see who kicked the last FG.

Quote from: 3rdand1.5 on June 30, 2026, 03:44:12 PMIf the football database stats are to be believed....our run defence is far and away the worst league wide...in fact the disparity is so high that after three weeks the next closet to us is Ott. and they have surrendered 105 less yards along the ground 463-358....

We give up an average of 154.3yrds a game along the ground, for context to show just how bad this is T.O which after three weeks has the best defence against the run based on stats has surrendered 177 yards in total in all three games...yes less than 23 yards given up in all three of there games more then we average per game.....

It's unquestionably terrible. You not only have to be bad executionally to hit those kind of numbers you also have to have the whole wrong mentality. Run defense is technical but it's also a culture/mindset challenge. We have both problems through three games. We are excellent at backing up at the snap and backing up some more after that, though.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on June 30, 2026, 04:34:27 PMIt's unquestionably terrible. You not only have to be bad executionally to hit those kind of numbers you also have to have the whole wrong mentality. Run defense is technical but it's also a culture/mindset challenge. We have both problems through three games. We are excellent at backing up and the snap and backing up some more after that, though.

Agreed. It's one thing to have that happen against Rankin but against rookie RB Rountree in Hamilton is less acceptable. He had 23 carries and BLM only attempted 24 passes for a 79% completion. We need to show an improvement this week.

"Wrapping up" instead of "blowing up" is something these DB/LB's have to embrace more.

Watching the last game for the first time, and too many times DB's flew past a ball carrier, sometimes barely deflecting thier path.

Kramdi got one good one.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 04:42:45 PMAgreed. It's one thing to have that happen against Rankin but against rookie RB Rountree in Hamilton is less acceptable. He had 23 carries and BLM only attempted 24 passes for a 79% completion. We need to show an improvement this week.

Roundtree is a CFL rookie, but he kicked around the NFL circuit from 2021-24 not much playing but lots of practice I suppose, he dropped his playing weight over 30 lbs before he showed up in Hamilton this spring.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 30, 2026, 05:42:06 PMRoundtree is a CFL rookie, but he kicked around the NFL circuit from 2021-24 not much playing but lots of practice I suppose, he dropped his playing weight over 30 lbs before he showed up in Hamilton this spring.

We get lots of import rookies like that but struggle in the CFL. I don't know if he's the next Rankin that succeeds or just one of many that see a quick exit.

Regardless, IMO it was a failure of our defence more than his skill set. I guess we'll see if we shut him down or how other teams do against him.

Lions held him to 62 yards on 18 carries and their defence didn't look very good overall. However, their front 7 looked better creating pressure on VA and limiting running game.

Quote from: theaardvark on June 30, 2026, 04:45:31 PM"Wrapping up" instead of "blowing up" is something these DB/LB's have to embrace more.

Watching the last game for the first time, and too many times DB's flew past a ball carrier, sometimes barely deflecting thier path.

Kramdi got one good one.

Kramdi at safety seems like a waste of his skills,  way better at the LB position.

I seen him multiple times doing the "blitz" where he runs to line of scrimmage and just stops and jumps around.

Quote from: Sway on June 30, 2026, 07:27:29 PMKramdi at safety seems like a waste of his skills,  way better at the LB position.

I seen him multiple times doing the "blitz" where he runs to line of scrimmage and just stops and jumps around.

He's absolutely useless out there...looks lost, has yet to break up a pass and is always late to make a tackle. He doesn't have the skill to be safety, put him back at SAM , simplify things for him and let him cover

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 01:11:53 PMThe point is that we've often had leads and the ball with little time left and still lost. It's a combination of often too conservative offence and being forced to punt.

That said, with the game on the line we seem prone to soft defence and allowing the opponent to score when we need to force them to punt.

The Elks game was a variant of that. Bad play selection on the deep route followed by soft defence. Elks completed a 2nd and 15 IIRC. 2nd and long is our weakness and we've seen it in other games.

You'll have to think back and refresh your memory even about the Grey Cup losses against back up QB's that ran around the edge to continue late scoring drives.

This was 2023 Grey Cup info as one example. Note in particular the 3rd and 5 conversation for 31 yards.

With the game on the line, Cody Fajardo and Tyson Philpot delivered the Montreal Alouettes a most unlikely Grey Cup title.

Fajardo's 19-yard touchdown pass to Philpot with 15 seconds remaining rallied Montreal to a thrilling 28-24 victory over the Winnipeg Blue Bombers on Sunday in Hamilton. It earned the Alouettes their first CFL title since 2010 and followed an uncertain off-season that saw the franchise taken over by the league in February, then sold a month later to businessman Pierre Karl Peladeau.

Fajardo's toss capped a stellar seven-play, 83-yard march. It included a clutch 31-yard completion to Cole Spieker on third-and-five before a Tim Hortons Field sellout of 28,808 as Montreal ended its season with eight straight wins.

This was the 2022 Grey Cup loss. Note the 2nd and 15 conversion.


Smith wasn't Toronto's only unsung hero. Backup quarterback Chad Kelly engineered the five-play, 36-yard drive Ouellette capped. Kelly, the nephew of former NFL star Jim Kelly, replaced veteran McLeod Bethel-Thompson, who suffered a dislocated right thumb.

Kelly delivered a crucial 20-yard run on second-and-15 to the Winnipeg 15-yard line that kept the drive going. The march was set up by Javon Leake's 44-yard punt return to the Bombers' 31 with 6:07 remaining.

It's just indications of finding ways to lose instead of win late in games. Ottawa and Crum winning comes to mind.

Check the 2025 Bomber games in the schedule that shows results. Look at the play by play in the August 9th against the Stamps where we lose on a late drive. final score 28-27. There were a few games like that last year.

The difference maker between good and great team, make some good points.

Quote from: dd on June 30, 2026, 10:59:59 PMHe's absolutely useless out there...looks lost, has yet to break up a pass and is always late to make a tackle. He doesn't have the skill to be safety, put him back at SAM , simplify things for him and let him cover

Problem Griffin is the better SAM.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 30, 2026, 11:58:34 PMProblem Griffin is the better SAM.

You still have to play your best Canadians where they play best. If that's not safety, then it's irrelevant that Griffin is better. That's the nature of the ratio.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 01:06:36 AMYou still have to play your best Canadians where they play best. If that's not safety, then it's irrelevant that Griffin is better. That's the nature of the ratio.

Smith is beginning to assume a bigger role at WIL, he was also getting looks at Safety in the pre-season games.  They only need 2 of Lawson, Gatkuoth, Kramdi and Smith on the field at the same time.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 01:06:36 AMYou still have to play your best Canadians where they play best. If that's not safety, then it's irrelevant that Griffin is better. That's the nature of the ratio.

Exactly. Bring in an import to play safety. I can't believe there's no one out there that got cut from an NFL team that wants to play football and play a very pivotable role in our defense.

Maybe the biggest test of the season for a team that is on the ropes but time to strike like a snake in the grass

All about the OL imo.  If they can cook, O will feast.

I definitely don't like the idea of choosing our second best SAM just because they're Canadian.

The issue isn't that we need to move Kramdi back to SAM if he's lost the job. The issue is improving our safety play and if Kramdi isn't a fit there either then you cut or PR him or move him to specials.

Having said that, I'm not convinced the safety play is really that bad. I think it's an incredibly hard position in Younger's defense and no one has really had any success there really. Allen maybe flashed most but even his success was modest. Parker and Kramdi look the same. Alexander under Hall was the last good one we've had.

Quote from: dd on July 01, 2026, 01:32:26 AMExactly. Bring in an import to play safety. I can't believe there's no one out there that got cut from an NFL team that wants to play football and play a very pivotable role in our defense.

Allen is the man but we don't know how seriously he's injured.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on July 01, 2026, 01:47:56 AMI definitely don't like the idea of choosing our second best SAM just because they're Canadian.

The issue isn't that we need to move Kramdi back to SAM if he's lost the job. The issue is improving our safety play and if Kramdi isn't a fit there either then you cut or PR him or move him to specials.

Having said that, I'm not convinced the safety play is really that bad. I think it's an incredibly hard position in Younger's defense and no one has really had any success there really. Allen maybe flashed most but even his success was modest. Parker and Kramdi look the same. Alexander under Hall was the last good one we've had.

yeah the problem is that Youngers defense relies on hoping the other team makes a mistake rather than creating them. An aggressive safety would help though

Quote from: Pete on July 01, 2026, 02:59:49 AMyeah the problem is that Youngers defense relies on hoping the other team makes a mistake rather than creating them. An aggressive safety would help though

Is it possible for the safety to play aggressively based on what Younger wants him to do? Because it seems like it's not on most plays. I think we'd be surprised how much better our defense would look with an approach that was more aggressive overall. From the defensive line to the linebackers and secondary all. That's not on the players though.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on July 01, 2026, 03:37:24 AMIs it possible for the safety to play aggressively based on what Younger wants him to do?

No, probably not.  Because our cover 1 and cover 2 mixed zone or match require the FS('s) to be in a certain position.

It's so rare we let our FS be free, like Dequoy often was, and Katsatonis is.

I'm not sure we'll ever have a FS we just tell "we trust you, just go to where the you think the ball is going on passing downs", and one who has track-star level speed.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 01:06:36 AMYou still have to play your best Canadians where they play best. If that's not safety, then it's irrelevant that Griffin is better. That's the nature of the ratio.

I'm being swayed by the Kramdi-at-FS-isn't-working-out crowd.  I gave him more rope.  But he's produced nothing in 3 games.  I can't name more than 1 thing a game he's done.

Griffin is doing better at SAM than Kramdi used to.  Not stupendously better.  But "better enough".  So I don't see how you sit him or change him back to a DI.

So, assuming we can withstand the loss of Kramdi's on-field direction, shift him to PR or LB backup (STer role) as soon as Allen is back, or (preferably!) we have someone else even better.  With 8 starting NATs, we can do this.

The QB of the D will then be Kyrie, who will have to direct everything from MLB.  That means we can't easily sit Kyrie, moving forward.

It's not that Kramdi is bad at SAM, or horrific at FS, it's that he's just not as good as the other options, and we have the ratio room.  And Griffin is already here.  And if we don't demote him, it'll be proof his "QB of the D" role is considered indispensable.

Here's an idea.  Move Kramdi to Kelly's spot.  PR Kelly.  And put a real FS at FS -- when we have one that is.

Quote from: kkc60 on June 30, 2026, 02:11:40 PM2/3 games this year we've needed our defense to get a stop to put us in a very good position to win. Both times they got walked down the field. Sorry, no excuses

Except in nearly every single game with this situation FOR YEARS, the O has had 1 or more series before the opponent drives the field, where we could tack on more points so our D doesn't have to make the stop to win.  The O goes 2 & out (or similar) and just hands the ball back.

It cuts both ways.  If we know our D can't stop most drives, especially in 3 down territory, then we should use a strategy that doesn't require them to.  We should pioneer a 3-down game we can use in this situation when there's 4-5 mins on the clock.  Ignore the 2-downs-to-get-9 strategy (avg 4.5 a snap), and switch to 3-downs-to-get-10 (avg 3.3 a snap).  EDM can do it.  SSK can do it.  Let's do it too.  Certainly we can find a way to get Brady 3.3 on most runs, and perfect some form of SSK's short game, but make it even shorter to get 3.3.  And the beauty is, with lots of time on the clock the D won't just play prevent taking all the deep shots away -- meaning Zach can take one if the opportunity arises.

Yes, it's crazy, but so is the O going 2&out and expecting this D to not allow the opponent to march the field and kill the clock.  BE BOLD.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 01:04:46 PMExcept we threw a bomb instead of grinding it out.

Quote from: Blue In BC on June 30, 2026, 01:11:53 PMThe point is that we've often had leads and the ball with little time left and still lost. It's a combination of often too conservative offence and being forced to punt.

Contradiction.  You can't complain about both.  The bomb in question was on the 2nd last drive -- not the last one.  The last one was uber-conservative (too much so), partly dictated by the prevent D -- but we've seen top teams/QB like Alexander complete mid passes against prevent; why can't we?

And again, do you really think a short curl to Cobb would have helped at all?  Do you really think that crazy EDM pressure wasn't going to get another sack against the porous OL?  Do you really think the OL & Brady could succeed on a delayed RB draw?  Pffft.

The deep 50/50 shot had as much chance to succeed as anything else we do.  Nay, I posit better!  Until we get some "sure thing" short plays like all the good teams have, might as well have your iffy shot net you 25, not 3.

To answer part of your question one of the ways you break down deep zones is by buying time at the quarterback position. Alexander does it by being a superior athlete for the time being. Collaros used to do it too.

It's really hard to make on-time plays into the teeth of a defense like that when there's almost no time on the clock.

I know O'Shea wouldn't (there's very real player management he needs to navigate there), but with little time on the clock and needing a full TD Elgersma probably gives you better odds in that scenario. Both from an arm strength position and with his feet to extend and break down the defense.

Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on July 01, 2026, 01:47:56 AMI definitely don't like the idea of choosing our second best SAM just because they're Canadian.

The issue isn't that we need to move Kramdi back to SAM if he's lost the job. The issue is improving our safety play and if Kramdi isn't a fit there either then you cut or PR him or move him to specials.

Having said that, I'm not convinced the safety play is really that bad. I think it's an incredibly hard position in Younger's defense and no one has really had any success there really. Allen maybe flashed most but even his success was modest. Parker and Kramdi look the same. Alexander under Hall was the last good one we've had.

Big salary and big signing bonus IIRC. He won't be released or put on PR. It's still the nature of the ratio whether we like it or not. You think we couldn't replace Cobb or Corcoran with an import if it wasn't for the ratio.

Some would argue Vanterpool is better than Wallace. Eli is not an allstar.

So where does that leave us?

How about the 25 snap cheat code? Ceresna clearly isn't capable of playing 25 anyhow, so make him the dna.

That plus the fact we are 8 right now means we can start singer and an import fs!

Quote from: Tecno on July 01, 2026, 01:11:46 PMHow about the 25 snap cheat code? Ceresna clearly isn't capable of playing 25 anyhow, so make him the dna.

That plus the fact we are 8 right now means we can start singer and an import fs!

You make it sound so simple. To some degree it is. We could easily start Singer this week. He's been here all of TC and shown some talent. OTOH, he might still be the # 4 or # 5 receiver and not see the ball that often.

The FS is a different issue. We have some recent additions and Texada. I'm not sure any of them are a fit at safety. Id choose Texada just on the basis of being here through TC and having good speed.

It's also an either or question or of adding a receiver or another DB. It can't be both.

If we have a FS, then does Kramdi move back to SAM and what happens with Griffin? The argument is that he's the better SAM ( I'm not disagreeing ) but then he becomes a rotational player.

Benching Kramdi with a salary of $180K is not probable.

Kramdi at $180k is grotequely overpaid. At that money, you have to be an impact player, which clearly he is not.

Quote from: Tecno on July 01, 2026, 06:22:09 AMI'm being swayed by the Kramdi-at-FS-isn't-working-out crowd.  I gave him more rope.  But he's produced nothing in 3 games.  I can't name more than 1 thing a game he's done.

Griffin is doing better at SAM than Kramdi used to.  Not stupendously better.  But "better enough".  So I don't see how you sit him or change him back to a DI.

So, assuming we can withstand the loss of Kramdi's on-field direction, shift him to PR or LB backup (STer role) as soon as Allen is back, or (preferably!) we have someone else even better.  With 8 starting NATs, we can do this.

The QB of the D will then be Kyrie, who will have to direct everything from MLB.  That means we can't easily sit Kyrie, moving forward.

It's not that Kramdi is bad at SAM, or horrific at FS, it's that he's just not as good as the other options, and we have the ratio room.  And Griffin is already here.  And if we don't demote him, it'll be proof his "QB of the D" role is considered indispensable.

Here's an idea.  Move Kramdi to Kelly's spot.  PR Kelly.  And put a real FS at FS -- when we have one that is.

I don't think Kyrie would work as the QB of the defence, mainly because he gets subbed out almost every series so he's often not even on the field plus he's not a great communicator.  Solutions could be to force Tony Jones into that role over time, train Conner Shay, or find a MLB that already comes with the ability to communicate well.  Maybe Younger saw this issue coming and brought in JSK to help out?

As for Kramdi, make him focus on the Safety role and stop using him to blitz QB's or bring down running backs, Griffin, Ayers, Smith and Woodbey are all faster and physically better suited for that task. If he can't make a positive impact at the Safety spot like Parker couldn't, they might have to look at trading him, potentially for a highly intelligent MLB like Adam Konar who is currently waiting behind Sankey in BC.

Quote from: Tecno on July 01, 2026, 06:41:01 AMContradiction.  You can't complain about both.  The bomb in question was on the 2nd last drive -- not the last one.  The last one was uber-conservative (too much so), partly dictated by the prevent D -- but we've seen top teams/QB like Alexander complete mid passes against prevent; why can't we?

And again, do you really think a short curl to Cobb would have helped at all?  Do you really think that crazy EDM pressure wasn't going to get another sack against the porous OL?  Do you really think the OL & Brady could succeed on a delayed RB draw?  Pffft.

The deep 50/50 shot had as much chance to succeed as anything else we do.  Nay, I posit better!  Until we get some "sure thing" short plays like all the good teams have, might as well have your iffy shot net you 25, not 3.

Yes you can complain about both. Just because the offence stutters doesn't mean the defence should allow an opponent to march down field.

Yes 2nd last drive but yes the need was to maintain ball control and eat up the clock. We punt and the Elks march downfield and score which is the complaint.

The odds of completing a short pass almost always has a better statistical chance of success. It's what the Elks did to us the entire game. The Elks getting a sack or pressure increases by the time taken to develop a longer pass.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 05:17:14 PMI don't think Kyrie would work as the QB of the defence, mainly because he gets subbed out almost every series so he's often not even on the field plus he's not a great communicator.  Solutions could be to force Tony Jones into that role over time, train Conner Shay, or find a MLB that already comes with the ability to communicate well.  Maybe Younger saw this issue coming and brought in JSK to help out?

As for Kramdi, make him focus on the Safety role and stop using him to blitz QB's or bring down running backs, Griffin, Ayers, Smith and Woodbey are all faster and physically better suited for that task. If he can't make a positive impact at the Safety spot like Parker couldn't, they might have to look at trading him, potentially for a highly intelligent MLB like Adam Konar who is currently waiting behind Sankey in BC.

Woodbey is injured, Ayers has not proven effective on defence. Smith has just started to get reps.

Interesting thought about trading Kramdi. Is he a better SAM than any other team has at the moment? I'm not sure that is true but it's a decent argument/question.

It takes a need from another team that has an asset we want in trade. It also has to take into account the SMS hit.

The only that might be obvious is if we get smoked on defence this week, then something has to change. I'm not opposed to making a trade but that's a tough thing to accomplish finding the right combination of gain versus trade.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 05:44:16 PMWoodbey is injured, Ayers has not proven effective on defence. Smith has just started to get reps.

Longer term none of these excuses matter, all 4 are extremely good athletes that they need to hang onto and develop further.  You have to watch for Ayers as he doesn't play that much behind Griffin but last game he made at least 2 outstanding plays on defence.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 06:00:51 PMLonger term none of these excuses matter, all 4 are extremely good athletes that they need to hang onto and develop further.  You have to watch for Ayers as he doesn't play that much behind Griffin but last game he made at least 2 outstanding plays on defence.

I saw Ayers make one good play. I'll take your word he made a 2nd good play. That said, he's a 3rd year player and does not appear to be moving up the depth chart to start.

He's only had 4 DT's in 2025 and only 2 so far in 2026. That's 6 DT's in 21 games.  You don't hang onto a defensive player with that record. He's a forced rotational player due to injury to Woodbey in particular and rookie DE's.

Nobody has responded to WHY Shay is not getting reps. Is he a wasted 1st round pick?

When you consider we could have got Fortin, Beauchemin or Findlay it wasn't a great pick. The problem is we've seen so little of Shay in regular reps its hard to judge. Right now it ranks as low as the Bennet draft in 2023

Quote from: Pete on July 01, 2026, 09:26:44 PMWhen you consider we could have got Fortin, Beauchemin or Findlay it wasn't a great pick. The problem is we've seen so little of Shay in regular reps its hard to judge. Right now it ranks as low as the Bennet draft in 2023

Smith was drafted later than Shay so it's really a puzzle. We aren't getting great play out of MLB so I think it's time to get him some reps. Maybe somebody that goes to practice can see something that helps explain?

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 11:21:19 PMSmith was drafted later than Shay so it's really a puzzle. We aren't getting great play out of MLB so I think it's time to get him some reps. Maybe somebody that goes to practice can see something that helps explain?

Only thing I noticed about Shay in pre-season he over shot his tackles a couple of times like Bighill occasionally did, getting an extended arm on the ball carrier but not able to bring them down. 

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 06:00:51 PMLonger term none of these excuses matter, all 4 are extremely good athletes that they need to hang onto and develop further.  You have to watch for Ayers as he doesn't play that much behind Griffin but last game he made at least 2 outstanding plays on defence.

Just as I was going to say.  Ayers was in a good spot and doing good things enough times that I was like "who's #49 again?  Ayers -- wow!".  Just one game though... but he was impacting things a few times, and he was probably out there not much more than a few times.  He seems to be trying to work himself into more than just a STer (finally!) so he can keep his job.

With the D as it is, I bet no one feels 100% confident their job is safe -- even knowing Mafia almost never cuts anyone.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 05:37:10 PMYes you can complain about both. Just because the offence stutters doesn't mean the defence should allow an opponent to march down field.

Yes 2nd last drive but yes the need was to maintain ball control and eat up the clock. We punt and the Elks march downfield and score which is the complaint.

Not sure we're arguing the same thing.  In my post you can see me quoting your two points, one basically says we were too aggressive, the other bemoans us being too conservative.  Both were about O.  That's the contradiction I'm pointing out.  Sounded like a cake & eat it too moment.  Maybe you were trying to say something else...

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 05:37:10 PMThe odds of completing a short pass almost always has a better statistical chance of success

... when your team isn't named The WPG Blue Bombers.  I have less faith in our short curl/slant/screen than I do in the mid zone sit.  In fact, I would guess our zone sit got us more total yards than all short passes combined in the last game.  That's the opposite of the good quick-game teams like SSK.

So yes, you're 100% right given a normal functioning O.  We aren't normal.  We aren't functioning.  We've had a garbage short pass game since at least 2022.  I can dig up my posts whinging about it from back then.  And no one has fixed it.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 05:17:14 PMI don't think Kyrie would work as the QB of the defence, mainly because he gets subbed out almost every series so he's often not even on the field plus he's not a great communicator.

Great point about subbing out.  Though it may not be as much as you think.  I think he gets normal, regular spells like Willie & Ceresna; and maybe out for special long passing down sets.

But I see no indication he's not good at communicating.  I've been watching pre-snap direction intently in these last 2 games and he's directing things as much as Kramdi.  (Yes, maybe he sucks at it, hard to tell!)

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 05:17:14 PMSolutions could be to force Tony Jones into that role over time, train Conner Shay, or find a MLB that already comes with the ability to communicate well.  Maybe Younger saw this issue coming and brought in JSK to help out?

You nailed it.  JSK was precisely that.  So perfect for our D needs!  Such a shame.  JSK would almost certainly have taken over Ayers' role, and maybe eventually edged out Kyrie as starter.

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 01, 2026, 05:17:14 PMthey might have to look at trading him, potentially for a highly intelligent MLB like Adam Konar who is currently waiting behind Sankey in BC.

That wouldn't help us at all.  Kyrie & Jones aren't going anywhere, and both are good enough, Griffin looks set... so the need is FS.  If you can find a genius one to obtain, by all means go for it.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 01, 2026, 02:55:45 PMIt's also an either or question or of adding a receiver or another DB. It can't be both.

I totally can be both.  You didn't see my bit about the 25-snaps.  Ceresna has never taken much more than that since coming here, from what I can see.  Ceresna becomes DNA, takes 25-snaps, and one of the spare NAT DL is charted as "starter".  That has us effectively starting 6 NATs, which is 100% legal for 25-snaps.

Think of using Ceresna like HAM used White for like 3 seasons and are using Kenny now.

Of course, that means we lose the free 2RDP.  And it means MOS/Younger's brains have to hurt a little bit more tracking all of this.  But desperate times call for desperate measures.  I'm not saying we SHOULD do this, but we COULD -- IF we had a quality brainy IMP FS we wanted to field.

Quote from: Tecno on July 02, 2026, 06:28:17 AMI totally can be both.  You didn't see my bit about the 25-snaps.  Ceresna has never taken much more than that since coming here, from what I can see.  Ceresna becomes DNA, takes 25-snaps, and one of the spare NAT DL is charted as "starter".  That has us effectively starting 6 NATs, which is 100% legal for 25-snaps.

Think of using Ceresna like HAM used White for like 3 seasons and are using Kenny now.

Of course, that means we lose the free 2RDP.  And it means MOS/Younger's brains have to hurt a little bit more tracking all of this.  But desperate times call for desperate measures.  I'm not saying we SHOULD do this, but we COULD -- IF we had a quality brainy IMP FS we wanted to field.

The number of imports is limited whether you use that rule or not.

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 02, 2026, 01:32:25 PMThe number of imports is limited whether you use that rule or not.

Yes, but the "starter" part of it is the hard part.  The "IMPs on AR" part is easier.  For example, we don't need to dress all 4 of Reese & Jenkins & Fletcher & Ayers.  If we could nab a BA37-level FS who happens to be IMP, we can have him dress and start quite easily.  And to get Singer on you yank another guy and do the 25-snap thing on Ceresna.

It's totally doable if we want to.  Not saying we should... but clearly we need to do something.

(And why can't our chart ever label the DI(DA)'s as every other team does?  It's part of the league rules... argh)