Revisit: WPG@MTL 2023-07-01

[TecnoGenius]

WPG hoses MTL 17-3 after a near 2-hour rain delay on a rainy wet field.

I rewatched it for the 3rd time.  And I'm left thinking that most of the GC loss answers were pre-revealed to us here... if only we had listened.  And since it's the off-season and nothing is happening, I'm dropping some thoughts here.

- MTL was clearly trying to guess (and doing a good job) as to who our hot hand receiver was going to be, both gamewise and playwise.  Then they'd cheat 1-2 extra coverage to that guy.  They quickly guessed Schoen, especially after he burnt them early, and after that he was blanketed and ineffective.  Just like they did to Lawler in the GC... always blanketed.  In both games we should have stopped aiming their way until the heat was off many series later; but we didn't and Buck/Zach tried to force it.

- Maas/Cavillo were clearly favoring Mack (and remember this was only week 4 and no one knew he was a superstar yet) and just like the GC we didn't take it too seriously.  We weren't cheating over double/triple coverage like MTL was doing to us.  It was usually one on ones with no safety help.  Luckily Mack botched quite a few in this game, including the game-sealing TD dropsie heading to the turf that Swarm came up with (which never should have been called a TD, turf-hit or not), and a catch-fumble in the 4th.  We could have learned from this game that blanketing Mack would have neutered their O: the & co WRs would still get some plays but no way they win the GC if we did took away Mack.

- Cavillo/Maas seem to like to play lip service to the run just enough to make you have to change to respect it.  But they don't really mean it.  It's a ploy.  Just like in the GC.  We tend to not relax too much on the run stop, but maybe we did a bit when Stanback got the (what felt like) 842 yard TD run in the GC.  Then Hall snapped to attention and went in full run-stop (cover 0) mode which was precisely what MTL wanted as they proceed to switch to 99% pass.  Aggravating.  Should have just stayed in tepid run-stop mode that was working the whole game.

- The infamous Cody hitch-screen and center flat passes were very much present in this game.  And just like the GC we clearly had problems with them.  Both games they were getting 7-10+ yards per screen, which is really pathetic to let a team do to you over and over again.  It's clear MTL studied this game and used the ammo in the GC.  Do we not study games and come to similar conclusions?  We see them hitch-screen all over us here and watch the film before the GC and just say "ah heck we won't change a thing!"?  Why didn't we have massive anti-screen D schemes drawn up?  Aggravating.

- Maas went for it late in the 4th on 3rd down and he threw it like 40Y.  And this isn't the first time.  He's a gambler: go big or go home guy.  So in the GC, knowing this, why are we defending the sticks when we know Maas will throw it deep on 3rd?  That GC 3rd down conversion is basically the whole GC loss, and we only had one guy not very prepared (Parker?) lost in space trying to defend an unanticipated mid/deep 3rd down gamble.

- Even though we won this game and it looked like we were mostly in control, there were a lot of TOs that went our way (though I think we did cough up 2 of our own?), and a lot of good plays we barely won, the game could have been much closer, or lost.  If 2-3 more of those plays go MTL's way, they likely win, as our O was doing bupkis in the 2nd half.  That's what happened in the GC: Maas found a way to make those 2-3 more plays and we found a way to not.  Strangely enough, the overall game had the same feel of us being a bit conservative trying not to lose, and MTL just trying to stay in the game and not do anything outside their capabilities.


Cody:

I want to add in a couple of thoughts about Cody.  I'm his biggest non-fan, yes.  I'm hard on the guy.  But I've noticed two things that I hadn't before that I think are the key to him pulling off one of the biggest GC upsets in a decade:

1. The more pressure, the better he plays.  He doesn't do great in normal games, or normal times of games, but when a game is close near the end, or it's a huge game, he morphs into something different.  I can spot this because I'm the same way (well, the second part anyway!).  Not to make this about me (so I'll be brief), but: I'm in IT and if a whole system is down and CEOs are screaming at me about the thousands being lost every second, I find a still place of focus immediately and easily, and problem solve better than ever, whilst colleagues around are wetting their diapers.  Same as Cody.

Think back to the 2 WDFs we played against him... the "post-is-90%-air" doink.  He wasn't folding like a cheap suit like he should have for a guy with very few starts under his belt.  He was taking it to us until the end.  Cody gets a feel for the game and stays calm and focused and is much less likely to get happy feet when he's protected to a reasonable degree.  He may even do this a bit better than Zach, because ...

2. Cody doesn't care about his health.  No, I'm not talking about the obliques nonsense.  I'm talking about how Cody will keep spinning and trudging and running out of any pressure and D that gets near, or hands on, him.  And he's fast at making the choice to run, a bit like Strev.  It's like a switch and then his legs are going, and he won't stop until you stop him or yards are gained, and he doesn't care what beefy LB or FS is about to steamroll him.

Sure, he's not pretty about it, he's almost comical in his running style.  But it's effective and he has a touch of the Mike Reilly slipperiness.  And he's just fast enough to surprise many chasers or anglers.  He's like the small dog that doesn't know he's small.  No one told him.  He runs as if in his mind he's Rourke or Tre Ford (10 years younger and actually athletic!).  He doesn't care: he thinks he can do it.  And he doesn't care if he gets hurt.

This may be because, and I've always thought this, Cody isn't the most inflated ball in the cart.  I think his IQ (football or otherwise) is limited.  And before you get mad at me, just compare him with the more cerebral QBs like Ray or even Zach.  But his pairing with Maas was maybe the best thing to ever happen to him, because (2023) Maas keeps it simple and they keep the playbook within his capabilities (mental and physical).  And Maas seems to understand this better than anyone.  The team with like 5 staple play calls beat the team with one of the biggest playbooks...

So I'll give a tepid nod to Cody, and even Maas; they pulled off a minor miracle by thinking harder and planning harder, and in the end playing harder, than The Canadian Mafia.  Hopefully we'll learn from our mistakes so we don't get the wrong kind of threepeat...